If All You See…

By William Teach November 29, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil petroleum based Christmas tree, and Christmas is altogether bad for climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Victory Girls Blog, with post on the Black Friday “bargain” of the century.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Obama’s climate change envoy: fossil fuels will have to stay in the ground

By William Teach November 29, 2014 – 11:18 am

I wonder what all the limousine liberals would actually do. How would the get to UN IPCC meetings in far off vacation spots?

(UK Guardian) The world’s fossil fuels will “obviously” have to stay in the ground in order to solve global warming, Barack Obama’s climate change envoy said on Monday.

In the clearest sign to date the administration sees no long-range future for fossil fuel, the state department climate change envoy, Todd Stern, said the world would have no choice but to forgo developing reserves of oil, coal and gas.

The assertion, a week ahead of United Nations climate negotiations in Lima, will be seen as a further indication of Obama’s commitment to climate action, following an historic US-Chinese deal to curb emissions earlier this month.

I wonder if Todd plans on taking a sailing ship to Lima. Or perhaps he will bike? How will the rest of the attendees get to Lima? Stern actually made the comments while in Australia with Obama. BTW, how did they get to Australia? Will Stern tell Obama to cut back on the fossil fueled travel? Doubtful.

A global deal to fight climate change would necessarily require countries to abandon known reserves of oil, coal and gas, Stern told a forum at the Center for American Progress in Washington.

“It is going to have to be a solution that leaves a lot of fossil fuel assets in the ground,” he said. “We are not going to get rid of fossil fuel overnight but we are not going to solve climate change on the basis of all the fossil fuels that are in the ground are going to have to come out. That’s pretty obvious.”

Do you know what that means? Other Countries, particularly the so-called developing nations, are supposed to forgo the use of fossil fuels. Can’t have 1st world liberals inconvenienced,  you know.

Read: Obama’s climate change envoy: fossil fuels will have to stay in the ground »

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

Forget Data And Facts, Climate Change Debate Needs A More Personal Touch

By William Teach November 29, 2014 – 7:39 am

So says Warmist Wendy Harmer at the uber Warmist Sydney Morning Herald, who fails to note that the debate already has a personal touch, what with Warmists calling for re-education camps, jail, and death for those who refuse to believe in their little cult

Climate doesn’t have to be a dry argument

Data and graphs aren’t getting the climate change message across in Australia. It’s time for a more personal touch.

In other words, those pesky facts and data that destroy Climatist’s talking points and computer models should be ignored in favor of more spreading awareness. Ms. Harmer would like to see a gentler, kindler type of spreading awareness, though

So how to get climate change on the boil?

Marshall talked to filmmakers, teachers, behavioural scientists and advertisers to find out how make climate change something people care about and act upon. One mistake activists make, he says, is to continue to argue with climate change deniers who are the other minority group at the table. The majority look on with dismay, and then apathy.

Then there’s the “we’re all going to die” message that provokes anxiety and helplessness and leads to a group think of silence.

Instead, says Marshall, the narrative should be optimistic and enthusiastic about creating a cleaner, greener, more just world. Emphasising new, exciting technologies and being honest about what we’ll gain as well as lose in the end of the fossil fuel era. And, most importantly, it’s about telling human stories – like the one of the Mother’s Day carnations.

Marshall’s message has been hailed by climate change communicators as essential reading and they are sure to change gear and accentuate the positive and the personal.

She’s referring to “George Marshall in his much-lauded book published this August Don’t Even Think About It – Why Our Brains are Wired to Ignore Climate Change….”, which is all the rage in Warmist World, because it further allows them to ignore the reality of their failed cult.

But, hey, good luck with getting Warmists to be optimistic and enthusiastic (in a good way), because Progressive brains are wired to be nasty, vile people who aren’t truly interested in debate, discussion, nor civility. They want to personally ruin and destroy those who disagree with them politically. And they very much live in an inner city liberal bubble

Marskon countered that it was “laughable” that climate change was a hot topic. “In terms of mainstream Australia it’s definitely going off the boil,” she asserted. “People are worried about … our economy, about their own personal household budgets as well as university, what’s happening with Medicare, about the cost of living.”

Climate change may well be a conversation I was having at my house, she said, but it wasn’t being had “out in the suburbs and in the tabloid newspapers”.

After the show, a trusted friend said, “Sorry, Sharri was dead right”. “You’re a card-carrying greenie. You don’t get it,” added my (now, former) friend.

Climate change isn’t even a 1st World Problem, it’s a Liberal Bubble World Problem. Notice how the friend is now a former friend. Of course, we’re only able to assume that the friend is now a former friend due to the friend failing to have the same beliefs as Ms. Harmer.

Read: Forget Data And Facts, Climate Change Debate Needs A More Personal Touch »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post: Ferguson Is Totally Like The Old Deep South Or Something

By William Teach November 29, 2014 – 6:49 am

That’s right, Liberals, in this case, Colbert King, are still race-baiting and trying to gin up racial tension regarding Ferguson

Deep South justice in Ferguson

King goes on to tell a tale about something that happened back in 1925, where a dog that was attacking sheep was shot by a Black man working for the school, and the dog’s owner, a white man, showed up and killed the black man, and was let go by the jury. You’re welcome to read the whole thing. Then we get to

That was Mississippi in the 1920s — a time when white men were justified in taking the law into their own hands in matters involving black men. That white Okolona farmer was simply exercising his delegated, albeit unofficial, police powers. The incident gave meaning to the assertion of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney in Dred Scott that the black man has “no rights which the white man was bound to respect.”

Let’s not forget, if King wants to go down this almost 90 year old road, that the people in charge were Democrats.

The slaying in Ferguson, Mo., of an unarmed, 18-year-old African American, Michael Brown, by a white cop, Darren Wilson, who in turn gets away with it, strikes a raw nerve. It reminds many of the way in which authority is exercised, especially in communities where the central relationship between blacks and whites is the police.

It’s absolutely pointless to educate Liberals on the facts of the case. King fails to mention Brown’s own lawless actions, such as theft, assault, assault on a police officer, attempting to take the officer’s gun, etc. Liberals live in their own little bubble world on unreality.

In places like Ferguson, police represent white authority. Authority empowered to enter the community backed by the extralegal support of white sentiment. Authority whose word is taken against the word of an accused African American. Authority that not only arrests, but punishes, too.

Interesting, since, like most big cities, Democrats are in charge politically and set the policies. So, is King saying that Democrats are irresponsible for Black people?

Where else can you fire 12 shots at an unarmed teenager, at least six of which strike his body, and walk away?

Perhaps lawless Chicago, where people are being murdered left and right? Or Detroit, another liberal city.

King goes on to discuss a portion of Darren Wilson’s testimony before the grand jury in relation to a quote from 1940 about “The white policeman in the Negro community . . . feels himself in danger.”  Said testimony is supposed to be very, very damning according to King

Wilson: “It is an antipolice area for sure.”

Prosecutor: “And when you say antipolice, tell me more?

Wilson: “There’s a lot of gangs that reside or associate with that area. There’s a lot of violence in that area, there’s a lot of gun activity, drug activity, it is just not a very well-liked community. That community doesn’t like the police.”

Could it be that it is a terrible neighborhood, one which police have a right to be concerned over? To “feel himself in danger”? Apparently, it is the problem of the White officer, rather than the lawless, gang ridden, violent, drug dealing, gun shooting neighborhood. On which votes Democrat, by the way. According to King “We are in a bad place.” I agree. We are in a bad place when people stoke racial tensions with their own set of (false) facts and excuse the behavior of Michael Brown which led to his death. As someone in the comments wrote “Easy way to not be ” discriminated ” against by the police. Don’t rob a store or otherwise break the law. They will not mess with you anymore then they will white people.”

Also, don’t forget that this article is also subtly supposed to suggest that the Old South is still super racist, and, remember, Republicans mostly control it. Despite having a Democrat governor for Missouri and Democrats in charge of St Louis and Ferguson.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post: Ferguson Is Totally Like The Old Deep South Or Something »

Posted in Current Affairs, Liberal World | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Star Wars The Force Awakens Trailer

By William Teach November 28, 2014 – 9:20 pm

Looks interesting, but, I don’t want to get psyched up till I actually see it. The prequel had its good parts and bad parts. I loved Revenge Of The Sith, the sequences showing what the Jedi can do really were incredible. That said, had they added about 5 minutes of stuff to really put you in Anakin’s head like in the novel, it would have been understandable why he so easily turned to the Dark Side.

And it will be interesting to see how this fits in to the Star Wars universe. JJ Abrams can’t just reboot it like with Star Trek. There are an enormous amount of books and graphic comics (a good chunk of which I have read. Not the graphic comics and young adult stuff), for both adult and young adult, already written, and a huge chunk of them are from the time starting with the end of Return of the Jedi. Some literally start as soon as the 2nd Death Star was blown up (The Truce At Bakura). Not to mention all the reference books.

If this is happening soon after Jedi, there is already much documented, but nothing about any rising Sith. What I would actually love to see is to go back to the beginning of the Jedi and Sith. Maybe the original Sith Wars. Anyhow, we will see. Hopefully it will be focused more on people rather than cute CGI and stuff.

Geek over.

Read: Star Wars The Force Awakens Trailer »

Posted in Film | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Due To Ferguson, We Need To Do Away With Local Police

By William Teach November 28, 2014 – 3:32 pm

That’s right. Ferguson is so bad that we need to do away with local police, and move control elsewhere. Here’s Sunil Dutta at the Washington Post

We should get rid of local policing. Ferguson shows why the system just doesn’t work.

Public outrage over perceived police misconduct has led to violence again, after a grand jury on Monday chose not to indict officer Darren Wilson for the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo. Various law enforcement agencies responded to control protests and stem rioting, including local police, county and federal forces. Buildings and police cars were set ablaze, amid tear gas, looting and vandalism in parts of the city.

While the response in Ferguson has been extreme, calmer demonstrations against police brutality and misconduct have been occurring across the country. Protesters’ slogans and the media’s obsessive coverage largely have focused on demands to punish individual officers and police departments. But the real problem with law enforcement is far more systemic. Issues of unprofessional and inefficient policing are rooted in our decentralized approach to policing, allowing some local departments to get away with subpar officer training, shoddy practices and corruption. This fossilized and inefficient system needs to be thrown out. Instead, policing should be managed at the state level, which would provide for higher-quality law enforcement and more oversight.

It’s interesting how virtually every policy from Progressives means more and more power in the hands of more centralized government, eh? They love the idea of moving everything away from the local level, where government can be more responsive, be held accountable to a better degree, where people know their government officials. This is a Progressive’s wet dream. Except when it negatively impacts themselves, then they are upset.

And, of course, in Progressive World, higher level officials never ever can be unprofessional and inefficient.

Read: Surprise: Due To Ferguson, We Need To Do Away With Local Police »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Progressive Goals | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 28, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful, wonderful city with all it’s awesome art of diversity which is threatened by climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Gateway Pundit, with a post on girls brawling over cheap panties.

Read: If All You See… »

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

On Black Friday, Why Not Think About Hotcoldwetdry Gifts?

By William Teach November 28, 2014 – 10:10 am

So, now that Thanksgiving is over, Warmists turn their sights towards Christmas and making sure everything is super “sustainable”

Give a gift that sustains life on Earth

Before heading out to start your holiday shopping today, pause one moment to think about African elephants, polar bears and the Pacific walrus. They are among the world’s animals whose existence is threatened.

The Wolrd Wildlife Fund’s annual Living Planet Report warns us that human activity is outstripping the Earth’s resources, and has killed off 52 percent of the world’s mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and fish in just the last 40 years. Imagine how that pace will increase over the next four decades.

Compared to babies born today, those of us over 40 came into a world teeming with wildlife.

But thanks to over-fishing, over-hunting, deforestation, excessive carbon emissions and the inability to reduce global population growth, we have accelerated the loss of non-human life.

I was with them right up to “excessive carbon emissions”. And then they jumped to their over-population meme, which, of course, means providing contraception and abortions for minorities, meaning Black people, in third world nations.

Reducing our reliance on fossil fuels would also be a great Christmas gift to the natural world. Our insatiable thirst for oil has reached the Democratic Republic of Congo, where new technologies that permit deeper drilling have encouraged oil companies to explore for oil. The resulting loss of habitat for forest elephants, along with poaching for ivory, mean these great animals may well become extinct in our lifetime.

I wonder if the editorial board of The Olympian has given up their own reliance on fossil fuels.

Disappearing sea ice is also a problem for the Pacific walrus. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reports that 35,000 walrus have gone ashore in Alaska, where they are vulnerable to predators, because they normally safely rest on sea ice. In both cases, climate change resulting from overuse of fossil fuels is to blame.

Boy, that has been debunked so hard I’m surprised the editorial doesn’t grow from the computer screen like Pinocchio’s nose.

We can do that by using public transit more, and driving personal cars less. We can recycle, compost and support sustainable businesses. We can purchase fish certified by the Marine Stewardship Council, and lumber certified by the Timber Stewardship Council.

By “we”, they mean you.

I have to wonder how much the WWF paid them to write this editorial.

Read: On Black Friday, Why Not Think About Hotcoldwetdry Gifts? »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Hydro-electric Dams Now Deemed Bad For “Climate Change”

By William Teach November 28, 2014 – 7:48 am

Remember the good old days when Warmists said we should transition away from fossil fuels for energy and look towards solar, wind, geothermal and hydrothermal? Well, wind is known to have a negative impact on the environment. Solar power is not exactly great for the environment, either. Many environmental groups have protested the building of solar and wind projects because of the environmental damage.

When it comes to dams, hydro-electric or otherwise, hardcore environmentalists have long had a bugaboo over them, and even want existing ones torn down. Now we find out that they are super bad for “climate change”

Dams Emerge as Key Climate Change Suspects

Efforts by many countries to reduce their carbon footprint by building hydroelectric dams could be misbegotten should these facilities also prove to be a major source of greenhouse gas emissions.

While dams have long been believed to make a major contribution to reducing carbon emissions by enabling the generation of renewable energy in the form of hydropower, researchers now suspect they could be one of the world’s leading sources of greenhouse gas emissions.

The reservoirs created by dams generate copious amounts of methane as a result of the bacteria that thrive in their oxygen-deprived environments.

These microbes are essentially the same as those that occupy the intestinal tracts of bovine livestock and human landfills, emitting methane instead of carbon dioxide after consuming organic carbon to produce energy.

The study itself shows that the created lakes emit huge amounts of methane. Which, yes, is in itself a danger for AGW. It is interesting that almost every type of power generation pushed by Warmists has issues. Building dams can also significantly change the local environment. Some will see this as damage, others just as a change.

Read: Hydro-electric Dams Now Deemed Bad For “Climate Change” »

Posted in Energy, Environment, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Good Grief: “Ferguson Is Now A Symbol, Not A Place” Or Something

By William Teach November 28, 2014 – 6:57 am

When I first read that headline this morning on my tablet using the Washington Post app, minus the “good grief” and “or something”, I thought it would be bad when I started reading on the computer after grabbing the freshly made coffee. I really didn’t think it would be this bad. Or be an opinion piece in the Style section. Here’s Krissah Thompson

Six months ago, Ferguson, Mo., was the kind of nameless suburb visitors to the city of St. Louis passed through. That was before a white police officer shot an unarmed black teenager on a street this summer and months of daily protests transformed the unassuming city into a symbol.

Ferguson is now a word that evokes feelings.

Though it has been less than four months since Michael Brown was killed, the town seems to have entered the pantheon of places that stand as metaphors. Ferguson’s symbolism now sits alongside Selma’s significance in the civil rights movement, Columbine as a symbol of teenage rage and gun violence, and Kent State’s historic link to anti-war protests. Those are places that have adjusted — some more smoothly than others — to their emblematic meaning.

Do we really need to discuss how insanely stupid this is? Those on the right will immediately understand that this is double facepalm material, those on the left will be bobbing their head in agreement with the article, without realizing that their policies are responsible for the problems in Ferguson. Anyhow, what kind of “symbol” is Ferguson?

In Ferguson, dozens of buildings and vehicles burned Monday night after the announcement of the grand jury’s decision not to indict officer Darren Wilson in Brown’s killing. It is impossible to imagine that the town will ever be the same. And people who knew the Ferguson of old are grappling with the change.

It’s surely a symbol of people who feel that it was A-OK for Michael Brown to rob a store, assault the owner, get stoned, walk in the middle of the street, attack a police officer in his cruiser, attempt to take the officer’s gun, then attempt to attack the officer out of the car. And, because of these actions, they feel it is OK to burn their own neighborhoods, riot, loot, and otherwise get violent, all in Michael Brown’s name.

Actually, I guess that does make sense. Michael Brown had been a violent criminal immediately preceding his death, so the protesters are just following his lead. Nothing says “symbol” like looting a McDonalds and a couple of beauty parlors.

It is certainly a symbol of the media’s excess, their attempt to turn a criminal action by Michael Brown into a cause celebre about raaaaacism and police brutality. It’s also a symbol that some people are complete idiots, taking the side of a violent criminal. But, then, liberals have often seemed to take the side of criminals.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Good Grief: “Ferguson Is Now A Symbol, Not A Place” Or Something »

Posted in Beyond Moonbat, Current Affairs | Comments Off on Good Grief: “Ferguson Is Now A Symbol, Not A Place” Or Something | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove