If All You See…

By William Teach April 2, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrendous rising sea that might swamp the land in a couple hundred years, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on Salon setting new standards of idiocy.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Noose Found On Leftist Duke University Campus

By William Teach April 2, 2015 – 9:59 am

How soon till we learn that this is a #RaceHoax?

(WRAL) Messages of inclusion and diversity once again flowed from a Triangle school on Wednesday after a noose was found hanging from a tree at Duke University.

The incident is the latest in a series of race-related incidents on college campuses nationwide that have catapulted race and higher education into the national conversation.

Hundreds silently marched from Duke’s West Campus to the school’s Bryan Center plaza, then held a forum in front of Duke Chapel after the noose was found hanging on a tree at the plaza earlier that morning.

There are three possibilities: first, it’s a hoax, designed to elicit the exact response that was seen at Duke U Wednesday. It is not out of the realm of reality to think that this may be a hoax.

Second, what was the date yesterday? That’s right, this may have simply been a monumentally stupid prank, something that is not out of the realm of possibility on a college campus, especially with alcohol flowing.

Third, yes, it could be real. If so, let’s consider that Duke U is a typical Leftist campus full of Leftists, in a city (Durham, NC) that is overwhelmingly Leftist, residing in a county (Durham county) that is also overwhelmingly Leftist.

Incidents away from Duke, including the killings of black men by police officers in Ferguson, Mo. and New York City, along with racist chants from fraternity members at the University of Oklahoma that went viral, have increased racial tensions on campus, Sunder said afterwards.

Interesting. Neither killing was actually about race, except in the minds of some people and the media. Though, the death of Eric Garner was entirely avoidable, and showed poor judgement on the part of the police officers involved. Michael Brown has only himself to blame.

Changing perceptions on race must start on a more personalized level, Duke Provost Sally Kornbluth said.

“This is a macro aggression, and it’s the micro aggressions that happen every single day that matter,” she said. “Many of you may look at yourselves and say ‘I would never say anything racist, I would never do anything racist.’ But the truth of the matter is there’s no standard here. We’re all complicit if we hear these things, see these things and don’t say it.”

Funny how so many “racial” incidents keep happening on Leftist college campuses, eh?

https://twitter.com/geraldtripp/status/583580544471932928

If you check the #DukeNoose hashtag, as well as comments throughout multiple stories at WRAL and others, there are a lot of people who are wondering if this was either a hoax or an April Fools Day prank gone very, very wrong.

Read: Noose Found On Leftist Duke University Campus »

Posted in Current Affairs | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

White House: Skeptics Shouldn’t Have A Say In Any Climate Deal

By William Teach April 2, 2015 – 7:51 am

Leftists love to yammer on about “direct democracy” and involvement by all citizens. As long as those citizens toe the line

(Daily Caller) White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters Tuesday that senators who “deny” man-made global warming probably shouldn’t have any say over an international agreement to cut carbon dioxide emissions.

“Well these are individuals whom, many of whom at least, deny the fact that climate change even exists,” Earnest said when asked by a reporter. “So I’m not sure they would be in the best position to decide whether or not a climate change agreement is one that is worth entering into.”

So sit down, shut up, and just suck up the pain, Skeptics. Democracy? Pfft. There’s a reason Jonah Goldberg referred to Progressives as “nice fascists”. Earnest, and certainly Obama and the rest of the Cult of Climastrology, want neither citizens nor elected members of Congress to have a say, if they refuse to buy into the Cult of Climastrology.

“Well, again, I think it’s hard to take seriously from some members of Congress who deny the fact that climate change exists, that they should have some opportunity to render judgment about a climate change agreement.”

Of course, letting anyone in Congress, much less Skeptical Congress critters, have a say in this agreement is something Team Obama is planning to avoid, by making sure this is not a treaty. They plan on simply making an agreement then implementing it via Executive Orders.

It will be amusing when Liberals start whining about the cost of living increases caused by this plan.

Read: White House: Skeptics Shouldn’t Have A Say In Any Climate Deal »

Posted in Barry Obama, Democrats, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Leftists Respond To Indiana Pizza Place With Tolerance, Compassion, And Reasoned Debate

By William Teach April 2, 2015 – 7:27 am

If you believe the headline, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you

Indiana pizzeria closes after threats

A family-owned pizzeria in Indiana closed on Wednesday following backlash over its support of a controversial religious freedom law.

TMZ reported that Memories Pizza is suspending its business operations amid uproar over the state’s new Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Owner Kevin O’Connor said vitriol toward his restaurant was so intense it was closed until further notice. The eatery began receiving threatening phone calls and social media postings after revealing its support for the law earlier this week.

No one should have expected anything else. For all their talk about tolerance, reasoned debate, and being the Smartest People In The Room, Leftists typically devolve into over the top hyperbole, obscene vitriol, and threats. The next part of The Hill article is just as interesting

O’Connor and his family initially inspired public rage by declaring that they would not cater gay weddings on Tuesday. That announcement made Memories Pizza Indiana’s first business to refuse potential customers service for religious reasons under the new law.

Can you imagine the outrage if this was about a woman being raped? Hill writer Mark Hensch is blaming the victim for the death threats. Here’s a lovely Concord coach

https://twitter.com/GottaBstrong/status/583355863114612736

She ended up being suspended.

How did this whole thing come about? Apparently the reporter, Alyssa Marino with ABC 57, spent quite a bit of time trolling for a business, any business, who would answer the question as to whether they would cater a gay wedding. Memories Pizza, which has never been in a situation where they were asked to cater a gay wedding (or probably any wedding at all), is a mere 20 miles from South Bend.

So a hypothetical situation that has never occurred was enough for Marino to do a remote outside the business on the ABC 57 nightly newscast and make citizens who’ve never been accused of harming anyone the top story of the night.

The story went viral, as it obviously would, and Memories Pizza is now closed and the O’Connor family is receiving death threats. Crystal O’Connor told Marino, “We’re not discriminating against anyone, that’s just our belief and anyone has the right to believe in anything.” She was right on the first part, her and her family are learning, thanks to “journalists” like Alyssa Marino and Brian Dorman, that she was woefully wrong on the second part.

In today’s society, you are not allowed to have certain beliefs if they Offend someone, and any death threats are your own fault for daring to use your Free Speech Rights.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Leftists Respond To Indiana Pizza Place With Tolerance, Compassion, And Reasoned Debate »

Posted in Current Affairs, Liberal World, Unhinged Tools | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

Cult Of Climastrology Rather Upset That They’re Being Called A Religion

By William Teach April 1, 2015 – 2:15 pm

I actually agree. They should be upset. Because they aren’t a religion, they’re a cult. Here’s Warmist Rebecca Leber at the far left New Republic

Republicans Are Attacking Climate Change Science by Comparing It to Religion

Republicans struggle to find a convincing reason not to take action on climate change, so they tend to recycle excuses. In the 2014 election, one line in particular caught on—the two top Republican congressional leaders, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, insisted they were not qualified to discuss climate change science because they were not scientists. Since then, countless high-profile figures have called out this line, including President Barack Obama and Stephen Colbert.

Au contraire, we have plenty of reasons, chief among them being that anthropogenic global warming/climate change is a load of unscientific mule fritters.

Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum demonstrated the line in a speech on Thursday. Santorum, who uses his religion to justify policies such as discriminating against gay people and outlawing abortion in all circumstances, accused President Barack Obama of being motivated by the so-called religion of environmentalism. “[Obama] is against fossil fuels, for his own, in my mind, quasi-religious reasons, which is not a rationale,” Santorum said. “If someone would go forward and put forth a religious idea as to how we should regulate the environment, and it was based on a Christian or other types of religious (ideas), they would be condemned up and down.”

Similar remarks seem to be circulating within the GOP.

Again, they’re wrong, because it’s a cult

The climate-as-a-religion accusation is hardly a new invention. It continues to cycle in and out of political rhetoric. The late sci-fi writer Michael Crichton (Senator James Inhofe’s favorite climate change expert) elevated it in a 2003 speech the Wall Street Journal reprinted on March 15. He declared that “one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism.” Inhofe, who uses the Bible to refute climate change science, repeated these words in 2005 remarks on the Senate floor. He said, “Put simply, man-induced global warming is an article of religious faith.” Countless others have picked it up since then.

Well, yes, they have, because those who believe in AGW/Climate change act like cultists. Nothing dissuades them from their belief set.

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy gave a blunt answer to Republicans arguing this at a congressional hearing earlier in March. “Climate change is not a religion,” she said. “It is not a belief system. It’s a science fact.” Taking action to mitigate and adapt to global warming isn’t a faith-based task. It is a response to reality. Obama is responding to an issue that affects the businesses, the weather, infrastructure, agriculture, insurance market, GDP, medical care, and more. This isn’t about his personal “belief” about coal. Republicans can disagree with Democrats about the best solutions to pursue, but they can’t reasonably argue that not responding at all is an option.

We can’t argue with those who act in a manner more reminiscent of a hardcore cult member, as opposed to someone who is willing to look at the scientific facts. And they all act more like the leaders of hardcore cults, the type that live high on the hog while their followers are forced to live very simple lives.

Read: Cult Of Climastrology Rather Upset That They’re Being Called A Religion »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 1, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a desert created by too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on how long Americans have to work for the tax bill.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Good News: Study Says “Climate Change” May Not Cause Cold Snaps

By William Teach April 1, 2015 – 10:25 am

Of course, it fails to actually state what is causing the cold snaps

(Weather Channel) After a brutal winter that left parts of the country buried in record-breaking snow, many were looking for a culprit to blame.

According to a new study, climate change might be off the table as the reason when it comes to the unusually harsh winters we’ve seen in recent years.

A team of scientists from Swiss university ETH Zurich and the California Institute of Technology say that, contrary to previous scientific thought, climate change doesn’t cause cold snaps.

The study, published in the Journal of Climate, overturns the previous hypothesis that rising temperatures in the Arctic weaken the polar jet stream, which in turn leads to higher temperature variability and harsher winter seasons.

Rather, the scientists say, a warmer climate will mean a lower range of temperature fluctuation and increasingly rare cold snaps. The team used climate simulations and “theoretical arguments” to back their statements.

Huh. So, warming (despite an 18+ year Pause) isn’t causing cold. Go figure. But, hey, it will cause “a lower ranger of temp fluctuations” in the future and cold snaps will be rare. Per their “models”. Strange how the real world seems to always create contradictions. We even get “In theory there would no longer be any temperature variability.” So, Canada will have the same temps as Barbados.

Let’s be clear on one thing: this could happen. They could be correct. However, the debate is not about results, but causation.

Read: Good News: Study Says “Climate Change” May Not Cause Cold Snaps »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

White House Releases Its “Plan” For Forcing Others To Pay Higher Energy Prices For “Climate Change”

By William Teach April 1, 2015 – 7:17 am

Yesterday I mentioned that Team Obama was going to release a plan, which is less a plan than a rough outline

(White House) Building on the strong progress made under President Obama to curb the emissions that are driving climate change and lead on the international stage, today the United States submitted its target to cut net greenhouse gas emissions to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The submission, referred to as an Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC), is a formal statement of the U.S. target, announced in China last year, to reduce our emissions by 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2025, and to make best efforts to reduce by 28%.

There’s no such thing as “carbon pollution”. First, it is CO2. Second, it is a necessary trace gas necessary for life on Earth. Calling it “carbon pollution” means this is politics, not science.

Here are the intended targets

  • Clean Power Plan: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed guidelines for existing power plants in June 2014 that would reduce power sector emissions 30% below 2005 levels by 2030 while delivering $55-93 billion in annual net benefits from reducing carbon pollution and other harmful pollutants.
  • Standards for Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles: In February 2014, President Obama directed EPA and the Department of Transportation to issue the next phase of fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles by March 2016. These will build on the first-ever standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles (model years 2014 through 2018), proposed and finalized by this Administration.
  • Energy Efficiency Standards: The Department of Energy set a goal of reducing carbon pollution by 3 billion metric tons cumulatively by 2030 through energy conservation standards issued during this Administration. The Department of Energy has finalized multiple measures addressing buildings sector emissions including energy conservation standards for 29 categories of appliances and equipment as well as a building code determination for commercial buildings. These measures will also cut consumers’ annual electricity bills by billions of dollars.
  • Economy-Wide Measures to Reduce other Greenhouse Gases: EPA and other agencies are taking actions to cut methane emissions from landfills, coal mining, agriculture, and oil and gas systems through cost-effective voluntary actions and common-sense regulations and standards. At the same time, the State Department is working to slash global emissions of potent industrial greenhouse gases, called HFCs, through an amendment to the Montreal Protocol; EPA is cutting domestic HFC emissions through its Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program; and, the private sector has stepped up with commitments to cut global HFC emissions equivalent to 700 million metric tons through 2025.

That last one should give everyone pause: “economy-wide measures”. Every single one of these means a cost of living increase for Americans, and will burden the middle and lower classes, while barely impacting those rich 1%ers, like Obama, that the Democrats constantly demonize.

And for what?

(Barbwire)…Obama’s plan will only avert 0.001 degrees Celsius of global temperature rises a year, according to climate scientist Chip Knappenberger with the libertarian Cato Institute.

Knappenberger notes that Obama’s climate plan mirrors a scenario where the U.S. reduces carbon dioxide emissions 80 percent by 2050. Using this assumption, Knappenberger calculates that only about one-tenth of a degree of temperature rise will be averted by 2100. This breaks down to about a one-thousandth of a degree of averted temperature rise every year over the next century.

The cost? It’s not clear, but EPA regulations aimed at cutting carbon dioxide emissions from the energy sector is projected to cost as much as $8.8 billion a year based on agency figures. Other studies put the cost much higher — a NERA study found the costs would be $41 billion per year.

.0001 degrees C. All for a massive increase in the cost of living.

(Reuters) The Obama administration’s plan for U.N. climate change talks encountered swift opposition after its release Tuesday, with Republican leaders warning other countries to “proceed with caution” in negotiations with Washington because any deal could be later undone.

Everything Obama is doing makes it that much more important to get a Republican in the White House, even a super squishy one like Jeb Bush. Republican voters failed to show up with Romney, who had a chance to roll back many of Obama’s regulations and rules, particularly Obamacare. Obama seems to be on a scorched earth campaign. Time to roll it back.

Read: White House Releases Its “Plan” For Forcing Others To Pay Higher Energy Prices For “Climate Change” »

Posted in Barry Obama, Global Warming | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Arkansas Legislature Passes Religious Freedom Restoration Legislation

By William Teach April 1, 2015 – 7:01 am

This had made liberals very upset, because institutionalized, government approved bigotry against religions (well, any religion but Islam) is a Good Thing in their world

(NY Times) The Arkansas legislature on Tuesday passed its version of a bill described by proponents as a religious freedom law, even as Indiana’s political leaders struggled to gain control over a growing backlash that has led to calls to boycott the state because of criticism that its law could be a vehicle for discrimination against gay couples.

The Arkansas bill now goes to the state’s Republican governor, Asa Hutchinson, who expressed reservations about an earlier version but more recently said he would sign the measure if it “reaches my desk in similar form as to what has been passed in 20 other states.” But the bill already faces a significant corporate backlash, including from Doug McMillon, the chief executive of Walmart, the state’s largest corporation, who said Tuesday afternoon that Mr. Hutchinson should veto it.

Here’s where it gets funny

But the political context has changed widely since then. The law was spurred by an effort to protect Native Americans in danger of losing their jobs because of religious ceremonies that involved an illegal drug, peyote. Now the backdrop is often perceived to be the cultural division over same-sex marriage.

So, when it was protecting people using peyote in religious ceremonies, it was cool. Now, when it would protect those who are threatened by gay activists, who could easily go to another business for their wedding cakes and flowers and photos, it’s not cool. It’s always something with liberals.

Both states’ laws allow for larger corporations, if they are substantially owned by members with strong religious convictions, to claim that a ruling or mandate violates their religious faith, something reserved for individuals or family businesses in other versions of the law. Both allow religious parties to go to court to head off a “likely” state action that they fear will impinge on their beliefs, even if it has not yet happened.

The Arkansas act contains another difference in wording, several legal experts said, that could make it harder for the government to override a claim of religious exemption. The state, according to the Arkansas bill, must show that a law or requirement that someone is challenging is “essential” to the furtherance of a compelling governmental interest, a word that is absent from the federal law and those in other states, including Indiana.

This is apparently some sort of “too broad application” or something. You know what’s really broad?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….

Meanwhile, Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy is continuing his hissy fit

Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy (D) on Tuesday described Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) as a “bigot” and said that politicians have a responsibility to speak out against Indiana’s divisive religious freedom law.

Pence is “not a stupid man, but he’s done stupid things,” Malloy said during an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “And signing this law — and quite frankly promoting this law, knowing exactly what it was going to do — was an incredibly stupid thing for him to do.”

“When you see a bigot, you have to call them on it,” he said.

Which is an interesting position. Four UConn coaches won’t attend the Final Four in Indiana, where college basketball coaches have meetings

(CBS Sports) Ollie and Co. have opted out — and basically been forced to, because UConn is a state-backed institution and so the university is now prohibited from sending its employees to Indiana for business-related purposes. A travel This ban was put into effect on Monday by Connecticut governor Dannel Malloy. The ban prevents any state-funded business to be paid for, via flights or other transit, into Indiana.

Has Malloy read his own states’ Constitution? “The exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever be free to all persons in the state; provided, that the right hereby declared and established, shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or to justify practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of the state.” Has he read the federal Constitution? He is using his power as Governor to discriminate and violate both.

Furthermore

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/583084779731611648

That’s right. In case you missed it, Connecticut has a Religious Freedom Restoration Act, along with 19 other states. Twelve states have RFRA legislation pending, including Arkansas.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Arkansas Legislature Passes Religious Freedom Restoration Legislation »

Posted in 1st Amendment, Current Affairs | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Big Government Looks For Nanny State Solution To Cyber-Bullying

By William Teach March 31, 2015 – 5:21 pm

I think we can all agree that cyber-bullying is a Bad Thing, especially for children, and even young adults. Bullying is a sad, and unfortunate, fact of life since time immortal. Cyber-bullying has also become a sad and unfortunate fact of life. So, what to do about it?

Cyberbullying: Rutgers University Awarded Grant to Develop New Cyberbullying Detection Methods

The National Science Foundation (NSF) awarded a grant to Rutgers University to develop a system of “automatic detection” of cyberbullying. Rutgers University has received $117,102 in funding so far for its project. According to the grant, 40 percent of American teenagers have reported being the victims of cyberbullying.

“This is especially worrying as the multiple studies have reported that the victims of cyberbullying often deal with psychiatric and psychosomatic disorders,” the grant states. “Specifically, this research will advance the state of the art in cyberbullying detection beyond textual analysis by also giving due attention to the social relationships in which these bullying messages are exchanged. A higher accuracy at detection would allow for better mitigation of the cyberbullying phenomenon and may help improve the lives of thousands of victims who are cyberbullied each year.”

Learning more about it and the methods that occur in order to help kids is a Good Thing. Here’s where this starts running off the rails

The project will used text mining – searching for keywords – as well as other methods of analyzing the relationships between the adolescents who send and receive hurtful cyber messages. The grant language suggests that the researchers understand that research needs to go deeper and will hopefully be used to detect cyberbullying before it begins.

“By analyzing the social relationship graph between users and deriving features such as number of friends, network embeddedness, and relationship centrality, the project will validate (and potentially refine) multiple theories in social science literature and assimilate those findings to create better cyberbullying detectors,” the grant states. “The project will yield new, comprehensive models and algorithms that can be used for cyberbullying detection in automated settings.”

In other words, this will be a massive data mining initiative that delves deep into the lives of private citizens.

(Washington Free Beacon) Vivek K. Singh, Ph.D., an assistant professor in the School of Communication and Information at Rutgers University, is leading the project.

“I have worked on multiple projects including designing a novel media sharing application, detecting patterns in large scale Twitter feeds, and analyzing community behavior in social media to design mechanisms to ‘nudge’ people into suitable behaviors,” he writes on his website.

Suitable behaviors as defined by whom? How will they define it? What methods will they use to “nudge” behavior? And, how will this be applied as “mission creep” creeps in? I’m sure Liberals will be A-OK with all this, but, will you be good with it if, say, a Republican administration, decides to use these methods to go after liberals online? As the saying goes “be careful what you wish for: you may get it.”

Read: Big Government Looks For Nanny State Solution To Cyber-Bullying »

Posted in Web/Tech | 5 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove