…is scary fossil fuels created snow, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Capitalism Is Freedom, with a post on 5 weird trends that can tell you about the economy.
Read: If All You See… »
…is scary fossil fuels created snow, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Capitalism Is Freedom, with a post on 5 weird trends that can tell you about the economy.
Read: If All You See… »
That is if Other People do not immediately stop using fossil fuels and energy and anything that puts out CO2, especially those Black people in Africa
Global Warming: Earth could be 4 degrees higher by century’s end
The global temperature is likely to increase between 3.3 and 5.6 degrees Celsius by the end of this century, and if strong measures are not taken to curb global warming. This is the grim conclusion reached in a report by the Joint Program on Science and Policy of Global Change, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the US city of Cambridge.
Interesting, since the trend line from overwrought Warmists is just .63C per century
https://twitter.com/PeterGleick/status/533306236184186880
The forecast increase in temperature exceeds the threshold identified by the UN as the limit beyond which it will not be possible to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, which include extreme alterations of precipitation patterns and exacerbate socioeconomic pressures that supports humanity. “Our world is changing rapidly,†says John Reilly, co-director of the MIT Joint Program and coauthor of the report. “We need to know well the nature of the risks we face in order to prepare for them.â€
By “changing rapidly”, does Mr. Reilly mean 18+ years with no statistically significant warming?
The MIT team estimated that global energy use by 2050 will double, largely due to increased use in countries developing where an industry is growing fast and getting bigger population and more wealthy have more access to personal vehicles. Globally, clean energy sources achieved some important advances, but the use of energy will continue essentially been dominated by fossil fuels. As a result, there are fears that global emissions will double by the end of the century. To stay below the 2 ° C warming above the average temperature on Earth was just before the Industrial Revolution, global emissions would have to stop further increase in the near future or even now, the report concludes.
What they mean by this is that non-Whites in places like Africa and India need to be stopped from living the same lives as these rich White Warmists.
Read: Latest Warmist Scaremongering Is For A Possible 4C Temp Increase By 2100 »
Obamacare has been underwater in every Gallup poll since December, 2012 (and has been underwater in virtually every other poll taken by other pollsters). It has hit a new low as the new enrollment period starts
(Gallup) As the Affordable Care Act’s second open enrollment period begins, 37% of Americans say they approve of the law, one percentage point below the previous low in January. Fifty-six percent disapprove, the high in disapproval by one point.
Americans were slightly more positive than negative about the law around the time of the 2012 election, but they have consistently been more likely to disapprove than approve of the law in all surveys that have been conducted since then. Approval has been in the low 40% or high 30% range after a noticeable dip that occurred in early November 2013. This was shortly after millions of Americans received notices that their current policies were being canceled, which was at odds with President Barack Obama’s pledge that those who liked their plans could keep them. The president later said, by way of clarification, that Americans could keep their plans if those plans didn’t change after the ACA was passed.
Approval is only at 33% for Independents, and 8% for Republicans. Obviously, Democrats mostly approve of the law at 74%, and are so brainwashed most will still probably approve of Ocare after they have lost the plans they like, lost their employer sponsored plans, get downgraded to less than 30 hours a week, and/or lost their jobs due to costs.
Repeal is highly unlikely, given Obama’s veto power, but the law’s new low in approval — and new high in disapproval (56%) — could potentially have an impact on its future. The president himself has acknowledged he will consider modifications to the law, which could include repealing the tax on medical devices.
As long as Obama is president, repeal is unlikely. This creates a further problem in that by the time a Republican can take over the Presidency, the earliest being January 2017, this horrible law will have been imbedded for too long, so straight repeal will cause people problems. It will be incumbent on the GOP to make sure they have replace legislation ready to go which creates a smooth transition to a system that works much better.
As for repealing a few of the measures such as the tax on medical devices, while important, the underlying issues with the entire system remain.
Read: Gallup Poll: People Still Pretty Much Hate Obamacare »
I love the picture that accompanies this Yahoo News/Reuters article
#Yahoo_Astronomy White House turns climate change spotlight to U.S. cities, towns http://t.co/87x7iW80ES
— Science News (@topsciencenews) November 17, 2014
You’re welcome to read the article if you want. It’s pretty much about Team O integrating Hotcoldwetdry into everything the government does.
If you want more stupid, here you go (be careful clicking the link, either the article or the popup caused my Norton to stop a webroot attack)
#Terror at the Top of the #World: Is #Climate #Change #Leading to #More #Attacks by #Polar #Bears in … – http://t.co/yvjyxbA4D1
— Angry Summit (@AngrySummit) November 17, 2014
We look at a new investigation by the Pulitzer Prize-winning website, InsideClimate News, titled “Meltdown: Terror at the Top of the World.†It tells the story of seven American hikers who went on a wilderness adventure into polar bear country in Canada’s Arctic tundra — and faced a harrowing attack. But despite taking proper steps to protect themselves, a polar bear came to their camp in the middle of the night and pulled one of the hikers out of his tent. Scientists say that climate change is greatly impacting polar bear habitat, which may be the cause of increased polar bear attacks on humans.
Hmm, I’d say it wasn’t climate change, but that 7 idiots went into….polar bear country.
Read: Team Obama Is Really Concerned About Climate Change Snow Shoveling »
(Note: here’s for you, John, since you asked in a comment)
Is 2014 the “hottest year ever!!!!!!”? Paul Homewood takes a look at the real data in comparison to what NASA and NOAA are pushing. Here’s from the Warmists and how they are positioning it
![]()
Here’s the satellite data
![]()
UAH also shows similar data to RSS.
Besides, even if 2014 was the hottest on record, it still wouldn’t prove anthropogenic causation.
…is a perfect day to stroll the beach before the sand melts into glass from too much CO2, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on Obama denying he misled on Ocare.
Read: If All You See… »
The Washington Post Editorial Board is Very Upset about the GOP retaking the Senate and wonders if this is game over for the climate
GOP victory: Game over for the climate?
JUST BEFORE Republicans scored a big midterm-election victory two weeks ago, the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a report that underscored the severity of the risk global warming poses and the level of certainty scientists have about their warnings. Then, shortly following the GOP’s win, President Obama concluded a historic agreement with China on climate change, undercutting Republican arguments that cutting emissions here would be useless because China wouldn’t sacrifice along with the United States.
Of course, China won’t actually be cutting emissions. As for being game over, the climate always changes. Hence the Pause.
Despite all of this, since the election Republican leaders have continued to indulge in hysterical “war on coal†rhetoric, and they attacked the climate breakthrough in Beijing. They still appear determined to repeal the country’s climate policies rather than replacing those policies with cheaper and more effective options, such as the market-based carbon-pricing programs that authentic conservatives would favor.
Say what? Authentic conservatives are supposed to be in favor of a government driven program that sets the price of “carbon”? There are no conservatives that would approve of that. But, hey, what are the market based prices? The Washington Post noted last year that the European market is collapsing. It’s trading at junk bond status. The entire world carbon market has essentially collapsed. The government’s instituted the markets, and the market determined that they are garbage. Without the government propping them up, such as in California, they are almost valueless.
I’m not sure the WPEB is aware of what Conservatives believe. Heck, the true Classical Conservative, which is different from an American Conservative (we are closer to Classical Liberals), wants exactly zero government input, regulations, restrictions, control, etc, over economic action. Government is supposed to stay out of the way. American Conservatives want The Government involved as little as possible.
Read: Washington Post: You Authentic Conservatives Should Approve Of Market Based Carbon Pricing »
The NY Times Editorial Board is also concerned about the temporary nature of the jobs created to build the pipeline
Playing Politics With Tar Sands Oil
Just when President Obama marches forward on the issue of climate change, Congress scuttles backward.
Last week in Beijing, America and China agreed to significant joint reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Over the weekend, at the G-20 meeting in Brisbane, Australia, Mr. Obama pledged a $3 billion contribution to the Green Climate Fund, a multilateral effort to help vulnerable countries develop clean energy sources and adapt to the impacts of global warming.
And Congress? On Friday, the House voted to order the administration to approve the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline that would run from the tar sands of Alberta to refineries on the gulf coast — a huge undertaking that can only add to the climate problem. The Senate may well do the same this week.
In fact, the pipeline will be better for the environment and “climate change”, because the other option is to ship it on trains and/or tankers, which would release more greenhouse gases and risks crashes.
It is important to understand what these votes are. They are not votes for permanent construction jobs, since most of the construction jobs would evaporate the minute the pipeline was finished. They are not votes for energy independence, since the United States is in the midst of a robust oil boom of its own.
Does anyone remember the NY Times complaining about the temporary nature of the jobs from Obama’s almost a trillion dollar Stimulus? Where are all those jobs now?
They are almost entirely acts of political theater, designed in the House to favor the extractive industries, and in the Senate to prop up the troubled runoff election campaign of Mary Landrieu, a Democrat and co-sponsor of the Senate bill who is desperate to claim credit for getting the pipeline approved. The maneuvering in the Senate is occurring with the tacit endorsement of Harry Reid, the Democratic leader, who has said he personally opposes the pipeline but seems willing to allow this vote to go forward.
It is of particular interest that the NYTEB is taking the side of Obama over Senate Democrats in this fight, particularly since Obama cannot be re-elected. And over the American People, who have supported building the Keystone XL pipeline in every single poll taken. There are more than enough other pipelines being constructed right now that have not gotten noticed like Keystone XL, but they haven’t been turned into the political issues by far left Progressive demagogues. Study after study after study have approved of the pipeline.
The White House has hinted, though not flatly promised, that Mr. Obama will veto any bill that passes. He should. This decision is his to make, not Congress’s, and the State Department review process that will inform that decision is not yet complete.
The State Department was the one doing most of the studies that approved of the pipeline. It is interesting that “the decision is his to make” when it comes to approving Keystone XL, when he is making all sorts of decisions that aren’t his, but Congresses, such as on illegal immigration. It is well within Congresses power to legislatively approve the building of a pipeline that crosses from Canada and through multiple states.
Read: NY Times: Passing Keystone XL To Protect Mary Landrieu Is A Big Mistake »