We Must Totally Reclaim “Climate Change” Debate From Alarmists And Deniers Or Something

By William Teach March 12, 2015 – 5:01 pm

Obviously, all you Alarmists and Deniers are causing great stress to the debate, so there is a great need to get the debate back on track to…a total belief in anthropogenic Hotcoldwetdry. Here’s Mark Lynas at the UK Guardian (which has totally gone all in on being the Official Paper Of Record for the Cult of Climastrology)

We must reclaim the climate change debate from the political extremes
Alarmists and deniers need to climb out of their parallel trenches, engage with the developing world and work together to end the crisis

Climate change is real, caused almost entirely by humans, and presents a potentially existential threat to human civilisation. Solving climate change does not mean rolling back capitalism, suspending the free market or stopping economic growth.

With those two rather innocuous statements, I have just alienated most people on either side of the climate debate. Today, climate change is no longer just a scientific or an energy problem. Instead, one’s position on global warming has become a badge of political identity in a debate riven by ideological and tribal conflicts. This bodes ill for humanity’s chances of addressing the threat before it is too late. (snip)

This (the belief that all weather events are caused by Mankind) isn’t science; it is politics. The science – as articulated by the IPPC – says the warming of the climate system is “unequivocal”, that the last 30 years were probably the warmest for the last 1,500 years, and that it is “extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century”. (snip)

We should all be able to agree on this. But we can’t, because this scientific narrative seems to have been captured by one, rather extreme, end of the political spectrum.

Got that? You aren’t allowed to disagree with the Cult Of Climastrology (CoC), but, hey, also ignore the nutbags who hold the same beliefs. What Mr. Lynas is attempting to do is move the Cult back to sounding more mainstream with a disassociation of the more extreme elements of the CoC, like Naomi Klein, who has made the Big Mistake for the CoC of actually writing about what the true goals of the CoC are.

But to make any of this happen we will need to recapture the climate debate from the political extremes. We must then work to come up with inclusive proposals that can form the basis of a social consensus that must last decades if it is to have any meaningful effect on the climate change crisis that faces us.

For all you Skeptics, this means shutting the hell up and following along.

Read: We Must Totally Reclaim “Climate Change” Debate From Alarmists And Deniers Or Something »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 12, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible sea from the 1940’s that would soon rise hundreds of feet, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is A View From The Beach, with a post on climate change mummies.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Denying Hotcoldwetdry Is Like Gargling With Arsenic Or Something

By William Teach March 12, 2015 – 10:38 am

“Climate change” is a fascinating subject to follow and blog about, because there is always some nutter doing/saying/writing something nutty

(WND) Would you gargle with arsenic?

Or juggle nitroglycerin?

Or even poke a poisonous brown recluse spider?

Perhaps not.

But an editorial cartoon published Tuesday in Pennsylvania-based PennLive.com suggests such “idiotic behaviors” is the same as if you deny “human-caused climate change.”

The banner atop the cartoon says, “Four totally idiotic behaviors,” then has images of people gargling with arsenic, juggling nitroglycerin, poking a brown recluse and denying so-called man-made climate change.

The headline at PennLive reads: “Yes, climate change is real. Stop denying it: A PennLive editorial cartoon.”

Here’s what that looks like.

Meanwhile, PennLive uses gobs of CO2 emitting energy to publish their cartoon.

Read: Denying Hotcoldwetdry Is Like Gargling With Arsenic Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming, Unhinged Tools | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Chivalry Is “Benign Sexism”, Which Is Still Super Bad, Or Something

By William Teach March 12, 2015 – 8:38 am

Personally, I just called it “being polite” and treating a lady like a lady

Why chivalry may not always be what it seems: Men who hold doors open and smile may actually be sexist, study claims

If you’re the sort of gentleman who holds the door open for a lady – or the sort of woman who expects him to – then be warned.

Such acts of chivalry may actually be ‘benevolent sexism’ in disguise, according to researchers.

Experts say this type of sexism is harder to spot than the ‘hostile sexism’ we are more familiar with – because it often masquerades as gallantry. It is typified by paternal and protective behaviour, from encouraging smiles to holding doors open.

Could those who identify as hardcore feminists please wear some sort of badge or hat or something, that way I can identify them, the better to let the door go.

US researchers argue that while women may enjoy being showered with attention, benevolent sexism is ‘insidious’ and men who are guilty of it see women as incompetent beings who require their ‘cherished protection’.

Professor Judith Hall, of Northeastern University in Boston, said: ‘Benevolent sexism is like a wolf in sheep’s clothing that perpetuates support for gender inequality among women.

So, I should now hold the door for men, but not women? I’ll be sure to refer any upset lady to Prof Hall and her research team.

The rest of the article points out that being a benevolent sexist is Just As Bad as being a hostile sexist. You cannot win with these people.

They found men whose answers led to them being classed as benevolently sexist smiled more while playing the quiz game and chatting.

They were more patient while waiting for their female partners to answer the trivia questions and warmer, friendlier and chattier than those who were hostile sexists.

So, no smiling at women, no holding doors, let her freeze or get soaked, and treat her just like your best mates.

Read: Chivalry Is “Benign Sexism”, Which Is Still Super Bad, Or Something »

Posted in Barking Moonbats | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Mostly Peaceful Ferguson Protest Sees Two Officers Shot

By William Teach March 12, 2015 – 8:24 am

As The Other McCain points out, this is an entirely expected consequence after over half a year of anti-cop agitation

(St. Louis Today) Two police officers were hit by gunfire early Thursday outside the Ferguson police department.

The shots were fired just after midnight as police were confronting protesters who had gathered outside the police station.

St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar said one officer was with his department and the other was with the Webster Groves department. Both were being treated at Barnes-Jewish Hospital, where Belmar spoke, and were in serious condition.

The chief said at least three shots were fired. He described the injuries of both men as “very serious gunshot injuries.” Neither injury was considered life-threatening.

The protest was over the resignation of the police chief.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Mostly Peaceful Ferguson Protest Sees Two Officers Shot »

Posted in Current Affairs | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Inconceivable: Majority Believe That Federal Policies Encourage Illegal Immigration

By William Teach March 11, 2015 – 3:17 pm

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

(Rasmussen) Most voters continue to believe federal government policies encourage illegal immigration, but they still aren’t convinced states should go it alone in enforcing immigration laws.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters think the policies and practices of the federal government encourage people to enter the United States illegally, the highest level of cynicism since June 2012. Twenty-eight percent (28%) disagree, while 15% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Huh.

Still, 48% think relying on the federal government rather than states to enforce immigration laws is the best approach to dealing with illegal immigration. That’s down two points from last August but is in line with findings since February 2011. Forty-two percent (42%) think it’s better to allow individual states to act on their own. Ten percent (10%) are undecided. Support for state action was slightly higher in 2011.

I’d actually agree. The federal government should be the primary enforcement method, establishing specific rules, as dictated by the Constitution, working hard to protect the country and its citizens from those who are entering our country illegally. Unfortunately, Los Federales like to play games.

Most voters (61%) still favor strict government sanctions on employers who hire illegal immigrants. Twenty-four percent (24%) oppose such sanctions, while 15% are undecided. Support for these sanctions have run in the high 50s to low 60s for years, and Americans told us in a 2013 survey that employer sanctions are the most effective way to stop illegal immigration.

I’d very much agree, and have written so in the past on multiple occasions.

But 57% believe if a police officer pulls someone over for a traffic violation, the officer should automatically check to see if that person is in the country legally. Thirty-three percent (33%) disagree, and 10% are not sure. These findings also have stayed fairly steady for years, although support for these checks hit a high of 73% in March 2009.

I’d agree. Are you a legal citizen or here legally? No? Arrest, detain, deport.

Read: Inconceivable: Majority Believe That Federal Policies Encourage Illegal Immigration »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 11, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is horrible concrete used to create a brick wall which is bad for climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post on all the times Obama learned things from the news.

Read: If All You See… »

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

New Republic Cultist: Stop Calling The Cult Of Climastrology A Cult!

By William Teach March 11, 2015 – 10:24 am

The New Republic’s Rebecca Leber seems very upset

You Can’t “Believe” in Climate Change
It’s not a religion. It’s a scientific fact.

Lst week, Environmental Protection Agency chief Gina McCarthy made little impression on Republican senators at an Environment and Public Works hearing, where she said, “Climate change is not a religion. It is not a belief system. It’s a science fact.” She would have been better off aiming her remarks at a different audience—anyone who says he or she “believes” in climate change.

The phrase, “believe in climate change” returns almost a quarter-million Google results. As McCarthy said, science is neither a faith nor a religion, yet the term belief pervades media and politics. Why do advocates so consistently play along with the climate-change-denier narrative?

Conservatives have long drawn comparisons between climate change science and a fervent religion. A 2013 National Review column articulated the parallels thus: “Religion has ritual. Global-warming alarmism has recycling and Earth Day celebrations. Some religions persecute heretics. Some global-warming alarmists identify ‘denialists’ and liken them to Holocaust deniers.”

I agree, it’s not a religion: it’s a cult

Characteristics Associated with Cultic Groups – Revised (Janja Lalich, Ph.D. & Michael D. Langone, Ph.D.)

  • The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law. (in this case, there are multiple leaders)
  • Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
  • Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s). (spreading awareness, demonstrations, dressing as polar bears, etc)
  • The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel
  • The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary
  • The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.

There are many others, I obviously do not want to excerpt the entire article. And when they start yammering on about it being a “scientific fact” and are presented with contradictory evidence, they go loony. Cult.

Read: New Republic Cultist: Stop Calling The Cult Of Climastrology A Cult! »

Posted in Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Cult Of Climastrology Using Kids As Human Shields

By William Teach March 11, 2015 – 8:03 am

The CoC is doing a wonderful job of brainwashing and indoctrinating children on the subject of “climate change”, turning them into Good Little Comrades, and turning them into anxiety riddled messes.

(Daily Caller) Environmentalists are now using kids to “school” lawmakers on the science behind man-made global warming.

On Tuesday, six high schoolers from states “hard hit” by global warming will go to Capitol Hill to try and convince lawmakers skeptical of man-made global warming that it’s real and it’s impacting peoples’ lives today.

“What I know about climate change is that it’s real, it’s man-made and there’s scientific evidence to back it up,” Helen Winston, a high schooler from Nebraska, said in a video produced by the liberal campaign group Avaaz.

Levy, Thompson and Winston will target four Republican senators on their hill visits Tuesday within their respective states. Other high schoolers will target Republicans from North Carolina — a state that recently lost a Democratic Senate seat in the 2014 election.

Let’s see: Nebraska, Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina. How did these snowflakes travel to Washington, D.C.?

The push comes as Avaaz releases a new poll showing that 90 percent of 8th graders accept the theory that global warming is mostly man-made. The implication of the whole campaign is that high schoolers and 8th graders are more knowledgeable about climate science than their state’s own elected officials.

“As we release fossil fuels that have been trapped under our earth for millions and millions of years, we’re going to warm the planet, and that’s just from a 6th grade science level. It baffles me that these senators can’t grasp that,” high schooler Bailey Recktenwald of North Carolina told the blog Grist.

So, they’re taking fossil fueled trips to complain about fossil fuels? Obviously, they’re not only learning agitation, but also climahypocrisy. Nothing surprising there.

Read: Cult Of Climastrology Using Kids As Human Shields »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Eric Holder Also Used Secret Email Aliases

By William Teach March 11, 2015 – 7:46 am

Recently, Michelle Malkin compiled a list of all the email shenanigans from those within the Most Transparent Administration Evah!!!! She needs to add yet another, though, at least as far as we know, this isn’t as bad as Hillary Clinton’s problems

(Breitbart) Attorney General Eric Holder used secretive email accounts under aliases during his tenure at the Justice Department, raising fresh questions about the Obama administration’s compliance with federal records laws as former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reels from her own email scandal.

Holder has emailed under the nom de plume “Henry Yearwood” in the past, former Justice Department officials say. The Huffington Post reported Tuesday that Holder had used three aliases. The current is unknown.

Unlike Clinton, who used a personal email account and her own private email server, preventing government officials from possessing the emails for record-keeping purposes while she was in office, Holder’s email address is a government, usdoj.gov email address.

The DOJ states that the secret email account in no way interfere with Congressional oversight nor FOIA requests. As long as the requester knows what those email addresses are that no one knows. And, “the official told The Huffington Post. Holder has used the aliases to prevent spam and to keep his inbox from being overwhelmed by the public, not to avoid transparency..” Apparently, the federal government cannot afford a decent spam filter with their teeny tiny $3.8 trillion budget. And, how dare you pesky Citizens dare email the top cop! But, wait, it gets better!

(Politico) Only hours after Hillary Clinton answered questions at the U.N. about her use of a personal email address while at the State Department, the Justice Department revealed that Attorney General Eric Holder has used government multiple email aliases. Shortly afterward, an NBC affiliate, News-4, reported that former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel had used a personal email address in at least one correspondence.

In Hagel’s defense, it may, may, have been a mistake, since he does carry two Blackberrys, one for personal and one for government, and may, may, have made mistakes in using the wrong one. That said, that excuse is rather hard to believe, in light of all the other email shenanigans from Obama appointees.

Meanwhile, John F. Harris said Hillary was essentially saying “go to hell” to the media with her news conference. John Hideraker dives into what Hillary said and what she didn’t say.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Surprise: Eric Holder Also Used Secret Email Aliases »

Posted in Democrats | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove