Latest Pause Excuse: Earth Is Absorbing More CO2, Hence Less Warming Per Models

By William Teach May 19, 2015 – 10:37 am

Or, it could be that the Cult of Climastrology is mostly/solely wrong about “climate change”

Earth wins time as land and seas absorb more carbon
Climate change has intensified more slowly than scientists had expected because the continents and oceans are absorbing more atmospheric carbon dioxide.

Half of all the carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels remain in the atmosphere. The good news is that only half remain in the atmosphere, while the rest have been taken up by the living world and then absorbed into the land, and the ocean. That is, as carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have risen, so also has the planet’s capacity to soak up atmospheric carbon.

The implication is that what engineers call “positive feedback” – in which global warming triggers the release of yet more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere to accelerate yet further warming – doesn’t seem to be at work yet.

OK. So, what does this all mean?

The implication, too, is that the world’s governments still have time to launch determined programmes to sharply reduce fossil fuel use, and switch to wind, solar and other renewable energy sources before climate change disrupts the planet’s food security and exacts what could be a devastating toll on the biosphere.

Surprise! More Big Government!

Of course, it’s not surprising that plant life is taking up more CO2. They love that stuff like kids love cookies. But, really, this is simply Excusifying in a manner set up to say DOOOOOOOOM!!!!!!! in the future while calling for more Government.

Read: Latest Pause Excuse: Earth Is Absorbing More CO2, Hence Less Warming Per Models »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post Editorial Board Blames Fall Of Ramadi On Obama’s Weak Policy

By William Teach May 19, 2015 – 7:16 am

But, they attempt to soft-pedal the blame

The fall of Ramadi exposes Obama’s weak Islamic State strategy

IT HAS been apparent for some time that the United States lacks a strategy to fulfill President Obama’s pledge to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the Islamic State since it has no plan to root out the terrorists’ base in Syria. There was hope, though, that Mr. Obama’s half-measures might be enough to blunt the Islamic State’s advances in Iraq, leaving the Syria problem for the next U.S. president. With the stunning fall of Ramadi on Sunday, even that modest optimism is questionable.

Good news, though: Obama officially joined Twitter (despite that @WhiteHouse account, ya know) again. And played golf Saturday. Again. As for hope, from whom?

“ISIL is on the defensive, and ISIL is going to lose,” Mr. Obama declared on Feb. 11, using an acronym for the Islamic State. “We’ve seen reports of sinking morale among ISIL fighters as they realize the futility of their cause.” The Iraqi army’s capture of Tikrit the following month seemed to provide confirmation.

That hasn’t worked out too well, since the half measures, really, some airstrikes and a few targeted ground operations by special operations groups.

Beginning almost a year ago, the Islamic State carved out, across large swaths of Iraq and Syria, a terrorist state of sorts that Mr. Obama deemed intolerable. He said in September that it is a threat to “the broader Middle East,” including U.S. citizens and facilities, and “if left unchecked . . . could pose a growing threat beyond that region, including to the United States.” Yet he refuses to commit the Special Forces and military assistance that could meet that threat, portraying any alternative to his minimalist policy as being “dragged back into another prolonged ground war.” In fact, Sunni allies in the region will be reluctant to work with the United States until it has a Syria policy, and Sunni tribes in Iraq will not confront the Islamic State unless they believe the United States will stand by them. Every conflict will have ups and downs, as administration spokesmen said Monday. But it is Mr. Obama’s unwillingness to match means to strategy that threatens to prolong this war.

Mr. Obama doesn’t really care what happens in the rest of the world unless it helps his personal agenda. The continued rise of hardcore Islam doesn’t seem to bother him in the least. He prefers to whine about the Crusades, almost 1000 years ago, rather than acknowledge the danger from radical Islam as a whole, while giving lip service to the threat from ISIS/ISIL.

The question goes to “what is to be done?” Even some Republican presidential contenders do not want boots on the ground. I suspect that most of us do not want boots on the ground. Do we let the whole Middle East go? Which will then lead to IS exporting jihadis around the Western world even more? Notice that they are mostly leaving Egypt and Israel alone, choosing to currently operate in areas where they can fight, particularly Libya, Syria, and Iraq, and surely have links to the groups in other areas, such as Yemen and north-eastern Africa. They do not want Egypt nor Israel jumping in with both feet. Nor do they want a full response from Saudi Arabia. Will the U.S. be forced to fight later?

Read: Washington Post Editorial Board Blames Fall Of Ramadi On Obama’s Weak Policy »

Posted in Barry Obama, War On Terrorism | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Surprise: Obama Admin Knew Benghazi Attack Was Pre-Planned

By William Teach May 19, 2015 – 6:52 am

Hillary would say “at this point, what difference does it make?” It makes a big difference, when the President, his staff, and those who he appointed (Hillary Clinton) straight up lied to the American People. Worse, they came up with an Official Story, and went after a US citizens for making a (crummy) movie

(Judicial Watch) Judicial Watch announced today that it obtained more than 100 pages of previously classified “Secret” documents from the Department of Defense (DOD)and the Department of State revealing that DOD almost immediately reported that the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was committed by the al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood-linked “Brigades of the Captive Omar Abdul Rahman” (BCOAR), and had been planned at least 10 days in advance. Rahman is known as the Blind Sheikh, and is serving life in prison for his involvement in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and other terrorist acts.  The new documents also provide the first official confirmation that shows the U.S. government was aware of arms shipments from Benghazi to Syria.  The documents also include an August 2012 analysis warning of the rise of ISIS and the predicted failure of the Obama policy of regime change in Syria. (snip)

A Defense Department document from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), dated September 12, 2012, the day after the Benghazi attack, details that the attack on the compound had been carefully planned by the BOCAR terrorist group “to kill as many Americans as possible.”  The document was sent to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Obama White House National Security Council.  The heavily redacted Defense Department “information report” says that the attack on the Benghazi facility “was planned and executed by The Brigades of the Captive Omar Abdul Rahman (BCOAR).”  The group subscribes to “AQ ideologies:”

The attack was planned ten or more days prior on approximately 01 September 2012. The intention was to attack the consulate and to kill as many Americans as possible to seek revenge for U.S. killing of Aboyahiye ((ALALIBY)) in Pakistan and in memorial of the 11 September 2001 atacks on the World Trade Center buildings. (snip)

From a separate lawsuit, the State Department produced a document created the morning after the Benghazi attack by Hillary Clinton’s offices, and the Operations Center in the Office of the Executive Secretariat that was sent widely through the agency, including to Joseph McManus (then-Hillary Clinton’s executive assistant).  At 6:00 am, a few hours after the attack, the top office of the State Department sent a “spot report” on the “Attack on U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi” that makes no mention of videos or demonstrations:

Yet, they still sent Susan Rice out on the Sunday talk shows to proclaim that this was all about a video that no one had seen. Let’s not forget, there where all sorts of anti-American protests going on within the Muslim world on 9/11/12, including the attacks on our Egyptian embassy in Cairo. The video may been a subtext, but, it was not the reason for the attacks. The reason was to kill Americans on September 11th.

We also learn from the documents about the heavy transfer of weapons from Libyan stockpiles, flowing through eastern Libya, where Benghazi resides, along with an ever growing jihadi presence at the time, through the ports and to Syria.

Judicial Watch sums up

“These documents are jaw-dropping. No wonder we had to file more FOIA lawsuits and wait over two years for them.  If the American people had known the truth – that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and other top administration officials knew that the Benghazi attack was an al-Qaeda terrorist attack from the get-go – and yet lied and covered this fact up – Mitt Romney might very well be president. And why would the Obama administration continue to support the Muslim Brotherhood even after it knew it was tied to the Benghazi terrorist attack and to al Qaeda? These documents also point to connection between the collapse in Libya and the ISIS war – and confirm that the U.S. knew remarkable details about the transfer of arms from Benghazi to Syrian jihadists,” stated Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch president.  “These documents show that the Benghazi cover-up has continued for years and is only unraveling through our independent lawsuits. The Benghazi scandal just got a whole lot worse for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.”

However, the major media will refuse to cover this, except in a manner to protect Obama and Hillary.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Surprise: Obama Admin Knew Benghazi Attack Was Pre-Planned »

Posted in Barry Obama, Hillary Clinton, War On Terrorism | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, Did The Climate Models Really Fail 95% Of The Time?

By William Teach May 18, 2015 – 4:06 pm

Alex Sen Gupta has dove into the fact that 95% of the computer models have failed, taking yet another stab from the Cult of Climastrology to protect their models in order to keep pushing their politics. Interestingly, the reviewer is John Cook, he of the utterly failed and debunked 97% consensus paper. This comes in rebuttal to Maurice Newman, AC, Chair of the Prime Minister’s Business Advisory Council, writing in The Australian newspaper, May 8, 2015.

FactCheck: Are 95% of models linking human COâ‚‚ emissions and global warming in error?

…..

There is a saying in science that “all models are wrong, but some models are useful”. In simulating any complex system, any model will fail to reproduce all facets of the system perfectly.

Mathematical models may be imperfect but they are extremely helpful to predict the weather, design aeroplanes and even test new vaccines. They are essential to modern life. A major part of scientific research is not only developing models, but determining how they are best employed.

When asked for a data source to substantiate his 95% claim, Mr Newman referred The Conversation to research by a range of scientists including Professor Judith Curry from the Georgia Institute of Technology and Professor John Christy from the University of Alabama in Huntsville. Mr Newman said these researchers had identified errors in climate modelling.

True, not all models are perfect. That said, CoC members are asking Government to pass all sorts of laws, rules, regulations, and restrictions based on the models as released by “climate scientists” and their computers. We’re supposed to change out lives, our economies, our businesses, and give up lots and lots of Freedom based on these models.

What Mr Newman described as a “well-kept secret” has actually been the subject of numerous scientific papers

These papers show that the recent discrepancy between projections and recorded temperatures is very likely due to random fluctuations in the climate system. The “problem” is clearly seen in this graph showing that modelled surface temperatures have generally tracked above observed temperatures over recent years.

Two points: first, this shows that the models fail in hindsight. They had the data, plugged it in, and the models still failed.

Second, if random fluctuations in the climate system, ie, natural variation, are causing problems with the models, why can’t those same “random fluctuations” be responsible for most, if not all, of the warming during the Modern Warm Period?

Oh, and a third problem: there were no satellites during the majority of that time period. So, how are they getting that data and labeling them?

The article then jumps into all sorts of mea culpas, moving towards the latest CoC talking point

Rather than relying on surface temperature to keep track of global warming, it is far more reliable to look at total ocean heat content or its twin, ocean sea level (which reflects ocean heat content plus land ice melt).

These metrics are far less sensitive to random fluctuations as they don’t suffer from the complications of heat redistribution. Moreover, over 90% of the additional heat from anthropogenic warming goes into the ocean, with only a small fraction going to raising surface temperatures.

So, hey, ignore all the land and air measurements (should we ignore Michael Mann’s tree rings, too?), just look at ocean temps!!!!!!

Based on these more representative metrics, there is no “pause” in either the observations or in the climate models. Indeed, both indicate increasing rates of change over time.

So, isn’t this 100% saying that the models have been utter failures? Don’t forget, again, that Governments are being told to make policy based on those models. This also goes to the whole “the oceans ate my warming” meme.

However, long-term climate simulations do not and likely never will reproduce the timing of shorter-term random fluctuations, like the recent slowdown in surface temperatures. In the long run, this fluctuation, like many before, will just be noise on a gradually increasing temperature signal.

This is just another in a long line of excuses for the Pause, categorically stating that we’re DOOMED in the future. So, ignore that the models have failed now, because they are like, you know, totally going to be right in the future, you guys!

Read: Say, Did The Climate Models Really Fail 95% Of The Time? »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 18, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful green space that is turning into a desert from carbon pollution, you may just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on Obama’s DHS Blamestorming over approving amnesty applications.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

New Study “Links” Climate Change To Extreme Weather

By William Teach May 18, 2015 – 12:00 pm

Of course it does. Despite virtually every other study saying “nope!”, and even the UN IPCC hedging its bets, the Cult of Climastrology has continued to trot out talking points about extreme weather and climate change, hence the need for a “scientific” study

Droughts, Floods and Heatwaves: Blame It on Climate Change

As temperatures soar to record heights, blame it on global warming—but only about three-quarters of the time. And when the rain comes down by the bucketful, you can attribute one downpour in five to climate change.

Yet another team of research scientists has looked at the probabilities, and has linked extremes of weather with global warming.

Well, really, climatic changes are nothing new. They’ve always happened, and warming and cooling, heck, even Pauses, can cause weather to happen a differently. Certainly, the weather was much different during the Little Ice Age than it was during the Medieval Warm Period, and the current Modern Warm Period. But, of course

Extremes have always happened and are, by definition, rare events. So, for the last 30 years, climate scientists have carefully explained that no particular climate event could be identified as the consequence of a rise in global average temperatures driven by the release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels.

And that’s where it breaks down, linking the whole kit and kaboodle to fossil fuels.

If the temperatures go up to the 2°C that nations have agreed should be the limit, then the probability of precipitation extremes that could be blamed on global warming rises to 40 percent. They are less precise about heatwaves, but any rise could be sharp.

Of course, the problem here is that 95% of the computer models failed to predict the current Pause, a pause that is acknowledged by climate scientists (though, mostly not by rank and file members of the CoC). Could the temperature go up by 2°C? Yes, it could. Will it? Despite the scaremongering talking points, no one really knows. The global temperatures have only gone up 0.8°C since 1850. It’s going to have to accelerate for it to go up 1.2°C by the end of the 21st century.

Such studies are calculated to help provoke governments, states and water authorities into preparing for climate change, but it just may be that the western U.S. is already feeling the heat. California, in particular, has been in the grip of unprecedented drought, and researchers have already linked this to climate change.

Huh. So this is really about politics. Go figure.

Read: New Study “Links” Climate Change To Extreme Weather »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Doom: NASA Predicts Loss Of Larsen B Ice Shelf By 2020

By William Teach May 18, 2015 – 8:17 am

Will we be able to place this in the long list of failed Warmist/Enviroweenie prognostications? Will NASA post a “whoops! We were wrong” press release if it doesn’t come to pass? (note: the 2020 date is contained in the CNN headline, while the study says this will “likely” happen by the end of the decade)

(CNN) One of the last remaining sections of Antarctica’s Larsen B Ice Shelf is dramatically weakening, according to a new NASA study.

The study predicts that what remains of the once-prominent ice shelf, a thick floating platform of ice, most likely will “disintegrate completely” before the end of this decade

Ice shelves are extensions of glaciers and function as barriers. Their disappearance means glaciers potentially will diminish more quickly, as well, increasing the pace at which global sea levels rise.

Obviously, CNN and NASA are turning this into a “climate change” issue, with both dinking and dunking around the edges of Blamestorming, essentially portraying this in a manner to suggest, rather than the typical unhingedness from the Cult of Climastrology.

A team led by Ala Khazendar of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, found evidence of the ice shelf flowing faster and becoming more fragmented. The flow is creating large cracks in the ice shelf.

“These are warning signs that the remnant is disintegrating,” Khazendar said in a NASA press release. “Although it’s fascinating scientifically to have a front-row seat to watch the ice shelf becoming unstable and breaking up, it’s bad news for our planet.”

This is all blamed on a warming world, which, in reality land, is nothing new during the Holocene, but, of course, we are meant to assume that this is all caused by Mankind and “carbon pollution”. Strangely, neither the CNN nor NASA articles mention the active volcanoes underneath.

NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory glaciologist Eric Rignot, who co-authored the paper, said the research gives insight into how ice shelves closer to the South Pole will react with the warming climate.

“What is really surprising about Larsen B is how quickly the changes are taking place,” Khazendar said. “Change has been relentless.”

Soft-selling the DOOM!!!!!!! of “climate change”, without even once discussing the natural processes that have always occurred.

Read: Doom: NASA Predicts Loss Of Larsen B Ice Shelf By 2020 »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

Obama Changes Policy On Military Equipment To Police Departments

By William Teach May 18, 2015 – 7:54 am

This is actually a good idea, one which I suspect most can agree with

(AP) In a surprise announcement coming nine months after police in riot gear dispelled racially charged protests, President Barack Obama is banning the federal government from providing some military-style equipment to local departments and putting stricter controls on other weapons and gear distributed to law enforcement.

The announcement comes after the White House suggested last year that Obama would maintain programs that provide the type of military-style equipment used to respond to demonstrators last summer in Ferguson, Missouri, because of their broader contribution to public safety. But an interagency group found “substantial risk of misusing or overusing” items like tracked armored vehicles, high-powered firearms and camouflage could undermine trust in police. (snip)

In previewing the president’s trip, the White House said that effective immediately, the federal government will no longer fund or provide armored vehicles that run on a tracked system instead of wheels, weaponized aircraft or vehicles, firearms or ammunition of .50-caliber or higher, grenade launchers, bayonets or camouflage uniforms. The federal government also is exploring ways to recall prohibited equipment already distributed.

In addition, a longer list of equipment the federal government provides will come under tighter control, including wheeled armored vehicles like Humvees, manned aircraft, drones, specialized firearms, explosives, battering rams and riot batons, helmets and shields. Starting in October, police will have to get approval from their city council, mayor or some other local governing body to obtain it, provide a persuasive explanation of why it is needed and have more training and data collection on the use of the equipment.

IMO, in most cases, there is no need for the equipment in the 3rd paragraph to be in the hands of local and county police departments. As to the equipment in the 4th paragraph, some of that equipment is certainly needed, such as riot equipment and battering rams, thanks to, yup, policies and actions in Democrat cities by Democrats and their voting base. Much, if not all, of this is in response to Ferguson, and  goodly chunk of both Dems and Republicans were upset to see the militarized gear being used against citizens, even as those citizens were rioting. The use of the equipment didn’t actually change the outcome. When one of the armored vehicles showed up to the looting of the CVS in Baltimore (Democrat city), the looters ran off and started looting from the back side of the building.

Obama plans to visit Camden police headquarters before heading to a community center to meet with youth and law enforcement and give a speech. “I’ll highlight steps all cities can take to maintain trust between the brave law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line, and the communities they’re sworn to serve and protect,” Obama said in his weekly address out Saturday.

I wonder if he plans on telling those communities to stop being so criminal and violent? Let’s face it: the equipment and “community policing” policies are not needed in places like Fargo and Portland, as opposed to places like Ferguson and Baltimore.

(Politico) An effort to make relations between cops and communities less combative has become a central mission of President Barack Obama’s last two years in officee, and with Monday’s release of broader recommendations for “21st-Century Policing,” the White House is gearing up to temper the scenes of chaos in Ferguson and Baltimore with its plan for more dialogue and data. After Obama’s visit on Monday to the county police headquarters in Camden, New Jersey, — a role model of improved relations — his Cabinet will fan out across the country during the next few weeks to highlight other success stories, and Attorney General Loretta Lynch will start her own Community Policing tour in Cincinnati.

I’m wondering how Camden is a role model? They may have better relations, but, the national media for violent crime is 3.8, and NJ’s rate is 2.88, yet Camden sits at 25.66, with a 1 in 39 chance of being a victim of violent crime. Camden is over double the NJ rate for property crimes. Similarly, Fresno, California, was also said to be a success story for community policing by the Washington Post. While their violent crime rate is just above the national average (5.14), their property crime rate is a bit higher than Camden’s at 45.82. “Community policing” seems to be more of a feel good type policy as portrayed by the media, where everyone is Kumbayaing and playing basketball in the streets and stuff.

In reality, the police see community policing as identifying the problems in neighborhoods, and looking to stamp them out early. The enablers for the criminal communities, and the criminal communities themselves, see this as a way to get police to back off on arresting low level criminals, turning a blind eye to criminal activity. As one study noted “Friedmann (1992:2) noted that “community policing became a ‘buzz word’ that is taken for granted by professionals and scholars who used the term to replace other terms such as foot patrol, crime prevention, problem-oriented policing, community-oriented policing, police- community relations and more.”” Does it work? Some studies say yes, some say maybe.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Obama Changes Policy On Military Equipment To Police Departments »

Posted in Barry Obama | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 17, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is flooding due to too much carbon pollution from Other People, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Barking Moonbat EWS, with a post on White folks burden.

It’s girls in nature week.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach May 17, 2015 – 9:55 am

Happy Sunday! Another super fine day here in the great nation of America. The sun is shining, baseball is in full swing, summer is almost here. Not quite sure who did this pinup, which needed no patriotic addition.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Legal Insurrection discusses those Hillary Clinton speaking fees
  2. Right Wing News covers the “gender fluidity” idiocy
  3. American Power brings the cuteness with a baby eating an avocado
  4. Black & Right isn’t impressed with the ‘integrity of the league” yammering
  5. Chicks On The Right note that Los Federales really want kids to stop posting pictures of their school lunches
  6. Flopping Aces takes a look at who created ISIS
  7. House Of Eratosthenes discusses petty crooks
  8. Just One Minute covers “failed leadership”
  9. Lady Liberty 1885 notes a teacher forcing gay poems on kids
  10. Moonbattery features gays suing an airline because they were embarrassed (hint: visible sex toy)
  11. Pam Geller notes who is more likely to be a victim of a hate crime in the U.K.
  12. Patterico discusses Hillary’s free speech stance
  13. Public Secrets wonders if the EPA’s 1% CO2 cut is worth it economically
  14. Scared Monkeys covers a crime in NYC
  15. And last, but not least, White House Dossier notes that Obama failed to appoint a railroad chief

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page. While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. (BTW, since someone asked, the reason I leave links for the previous week up (or you might see a *) is because they are place holders for later in the day or for next weeks. Easier than rewriting all the time. Also, the listing order has to do with how they are added over time, not how good a post is. I just copy and paste from the previous week, then edit. If you see one of the *’s, go ahead and check out the blog anyhow, see if there is an update. I cannot update with my Android during the day.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Posted in Patriotic Pinup | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove