Surprise: Climate Change Is Really About Inequality

I’ve said time and time again that “climate change” is really just part of the vast Progressive (nice fascist) movement,  using a supposed scientific issue as cover to push their Big Government policies of control and taxation. Here’s more evidence

To address climate change, we need to start with global inequality

Issues of First Nations sovereignty and self-determination are continually being papered on the halls of Canadian consciousness.  The more our artists, activists, journalists, scholars, students, and First Nations’ communities work to pull back the veil on our county’s colonial legacy, the more nuanced that legacy appears. In fact, the further back the veil slides, the more our nation’s pedigree seems bound up with what the scientific, and some religious, communities tell us is the most pressing issue of our time: climate change.

For many of us, climate change is our gravest concern. To quote UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, climate change is “the defining challenge of our era.” But when you look past the carefully chosen quotations, the sound bites lifted by the mainstream media, and the distortions that big green groups serve up to the public — if you direct your attention to the front lines of the climate movement — you will see that activists are really rallying about inequality.

Interestingly, the same people who are the primary believers in “climate change” also tend to be the least charitable with their own money.

Anyhow, like Naomi Klein and a few other honest Warmists, Sean Allingham, the writer, is exposing what’s really going in, and what these people really stand for.

Read: Surprise: Climate Change Is Really About Inequality »

If All You See…

…is a cat, and understand that cats are bad for climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on feminists and “Frozen”

Read: If All You See… »

Warmist: Let’s Kill Santa To Save The Planet From “Climate Change”

Most Warmists will approve, at least internally. And only for Other People, because they want their gifts. Here’s Tony Thomas at Quadrant

Shooting Santa to Save the World

If you ever doubted that warmism endorses a preening, totalitarian disdain for the lives and rights of others, take up a copy of “Climate Change” by graphic novelist Philippe Squarzoni, who imagines how virtuous it would be to go berserk with an assault rifle in a shopping mall. And yes, he’s not joking

A top scientist of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Dr Jean Jouzel, is lauding a comic publication which has the heroine gunning down three Santa Clauses in a supermarket with a military assault rifle. The realistically-drawn massacre in Climate Changed by Philippe Squarzoni (Abrams, New York 2014) is meant to symbolise the need to reduce consumerism and CO2 emissions.

The book was written a year before the Nairobi Westgate shopping mall massacre in September, 2013, in which gunmen killed or wounded 240 people in the name of Islam. But the fictional massacre in the cause of reducing CO2 emissions is retained in this year’s English translation.

The book, 480 pages and 1.2kg, is in the ‘graphic novel’ genre, now a serious literary form. The book won the Jury Prize at the Lyon Graphic Novel Festival in 2012. (A graphic novel, Maus, by New Yorker cartoonist Art Spigelman,  won a Pulitzer in 1992).

Thomas highlights a portion where a woman shows up a shopping center, takes an assault rifle, and guns down three Santa suited men in gruesome graphic panels.

Their suits are riddled with bullets and gore continues to spout. The bland caption for this bloody mayhem reads: “On the demand side, it’s up to individuals, households, and local communities to evaluate their own needs themselves, with an eye to conservation.”

The final frame shows shows Camille and author Squarzoni standing over the corpse of one Santa, Camille still training her rifle on him. The caption reads: “Making conservation a positive factor in the future would require a huge change in political direction.”

Make sure to read the entire post for full context, but, let me make one observation: is the graphic novel not part of consumerism, which Warmists want to do away with (for Other People), much like Naomi Klein’s latest climate change screed, Al Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth”, and so much emanating from Warmists?

Read: Warmist: Let’s Kill Santa To Save The Planet From “Climate Change” »

Good Grief: Toast Is Now Bad For “Climate Change”

Did you wake up this morning and make a couple slices of toast before heading off for working, sending the kids off to school, getting ready for some golf, etc? Did you purchase a sandwich that was toasted, or make a toasted sandwich? How many slices of toast have you made this year alone? Do you own a toaster? If you do, well, then, you are causing “extreme weather”. That hurricane that hit Bermuda? Your fault

The (Environmental) Case Against Toast

Far more important than the white or wheat decision, is whether or not you heat your bread.

Let me tell you a story about data dreams and how they are squashed and how you learn something about the complexity of the world along the way.

When we started this project, I wanted to create an infographic that would show you all the inputs into a particular product—say, a hamburger—and then display all of the environmental outputs, like CO2 emissions and land use. And then, you’d be able to tinker with that hamburger and say, “What if I got this kind of beef?” or “What if I have a whole wheat bun?” or “What does cheese do?” and on down the line. (snip)

And that’s when I found an excellent paper in the International Journal of Lifecycle Assessment byNamy Espinoza-Orias,Heinz Stichnothe, andAdisa Azapagic, which laid outthe carbon footprint for bread, white and wheat, toasted and non-toasted. That paper formed the research basis for the infographic above (although with the changes noted below).

Wait, there’s actually a paper researching the carbon footprint of bread? Good grief.

The paper demonstrates two really interesting things. One, there is a marginal environmental advantage to the wheat bread, but an even bigger boost comes fromnottoasting it. Apparently, given the relative inefficiency of toasting (which uses electric resistance heating), a major component of the carbon footprint of any given piece of bread is whether you heat it or not. So, what you see above are the extremes: toasted white bread (which is the most energy intensive) and non-toasted wheat bread (which is the least).

So, your toaster is Bad For “Climate Change”. Why do you want the Earth to get Hotcoldwetdry? You should immediately take your toaster to the local recycling center.

In fact, according to the paper….sorry, had to stop snickering….the entire process of making bread has a huge “carbon foot”. Therefore, if you believe in man-caused climate change, you should give eating bread of any type. Do it for the children.

Read: Good Grief: Toast Is Now Bad For “Climate Change” »

Coeur d’Alene, Idaho Gov’t Tells Ministers To Perform Gay Marriage Or Face Jail

Remember when we were told that things like this wouldn’t happen?

(Alliance Defending Freedom) Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed a federal lawsuit and a motion for a temporary restraining order Friday to stop officials in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, from forcing two ordained Christian ministers to perform wedding ceremonies for same-sex couples.

City officials told Donald Knapp that he and his wife Evelyn, both ordained ministers who run Hitching Post Wedding Chapel, are required to perform such ceremonies or face months in jail and/or thousands of dollars in fines. The city claims its “non-discrimination” ordinance requires the Knapps to perform same-sex wedding ceremonies now that the courts have overridden Idaho’s voter-approved constitutional amendment that affirmed marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

“The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco. “Many have denied that pastors would ever be forced to perform ceremonies that are completely at odds with their faith, but that’s what is happening here – and it’s happened this quickly. The city is on seriously flawed legal ground, and our lawsuit intends to ensure that this couple’s freedom to adhere to their own faith as pastors is protected just as the First Amendment intended.”

Forcing a religious leader to perform a marriage against his/her religious beliefs violates law, inlcuding Idaho’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, as well as the 1st Amendment of the US Bill of Rights. Oh, and just to be truly clear, here’s Section I, Article 4 of the Idaho Constitution

Guaranty of religious liberty. The exercise and enjoyment of religious faith and worship shall forever be guaranteed; and no person shall be denied any civil or political right, privilege, or capacity on account of his religious opinions; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, or excuse acts of licentiousness or justify polygamous or other pernicious practices, inconsistent with morality or the peace or safety of the state; nor to permit any person, organization, or association to directly or indirectly aid or abet, counsel or advise any person to commit the crime of bigamy or polygamy, or any other crime. No person shall be required to attend or support any ministry or place of worship, religious sect or denomination, or pay tithes against his consent; nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship. Bigamy and polygamy are forever prohibited in the state, and the legislature shall provide by law for the punishment of such crimes.

Hey, wait, why are bigamy and polygamy specifically banned? Shouldn’t people who love each other be allowed to marry? If you support gay marriage and say “no” to that question, why? Kinda makes you intolerant, eh?

Coeur d’Alene officials told the Knapps privately and also publicly stated that the couple would violate the city’s public accommodations statute once same-sex marriage became legal in Idaho if they declined to perform a same-sex ceremony at their chapel. On Friday, the Knapps respectfully declined such a ceremony and now face up to 180 days in jail and up to $1,000 in fines for each day they decline to perform that ceremony.

180 days? That’s more jail time than some liberal judges give child molesters.

Eugene Volokh makes an interesting point

I was very pleased to have the officiants I had for my wedding. But if I had instead asked a rabbi, and he told me that he didn’t want to preside over a wedding between my wife (who isn’t ethnically Jewish) and me, I can’t see how that sort of ethnic discrimination would create a harm that justifies trumping the rabbi’s religious freedom rights and free speech rights. Perhaps some might feel offended by such a statement of religious rejection, but I don’t think there can be a compelling government interest in shielding people from such rejections when it comes to the performance of ceremonies.

Would anyone expect an Imam to marry two Christians in a Christian ceremony? Or a pastor to marry two Muslims in a Muslim ceremony?

And when will they allow bigamists and polygamists to marry? Hey, come on, otherwise, it’s discrimination! You liberals can’t have it both ways.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Coeur d’Alene, Idaho Gov’t Tells Ministers To Perform Gay Marriage Or Face Jail »

If All You See…

…is corn that will be destroyed by too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Vox Popoli, with a post on Dems getting worried about the Checked Out President.

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Fiona Stephenson  Patriotic Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in America. Sun is shining, there’s a nip of Fall in the air, and football! This pinup is by Fiona Stephenson, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Raised on Hoecakes discusses stupidity from educators
  2. The Lonely Conservative notes that Obama’s mad at his own administrations incompetence. Again
  3. The Camp Of The Saints discusses Ebola and “depraved indifference”
  4. The Daley Gator has more stupidity from Moms Demand Action
  5. protein wisdom notes that Obama has everything under control
  6. Moonbattery has a scary message about Obama post-midterms
  7. Legal Insurrection notes that the Obama media has found someone else to Blame
  8. Lady Liberty 1885 notes Kay Hagan shipping jobs overseas
  9. Just One Minute says to gird your loins for one last race baiting push from Dems
  10. House of Eratosthenes covers Modern Feminism
  11. Flopping Aces notes the NY Times leaving out key info from a Michael Brown report
  12. Fire Andrea Mitchell notes that our military folks won’t get full protective clothing in Ebola ravaged areas
  13. A View From The Beach has more info on Fast And Furious, where another murderous gun was found
  14. Real Science notes the growth of the Arctic
  15. And last, but not least, Not A Lot Of People Know That facepalms over frost being blamed on global warming

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

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 »

Bummer: Obama’s DIminished Standing With Women Hurts Senate Dem Chances

Despite almost six years of pushing a “war on women” meme, despite patronizing them on a constant basis, despite giving and saying the government will give them free stuff, Obama isn’t doing so well with women, and this has Senate Democrat hopefuls worried

(Politico) Female voters powered President Barack Obama’s victory over Mitt Romney in 2012, as Democrats leaned heavily on social issues to rally single women and suburban moms to the polls.

But with two weeks until Election Day, the president’s diminished standing with women is quickly becoming one of the biggest liabilities facing Democrats as they struggle to hang onto the Senate majority.

In battleground states across the country, Obama is underwater with female voters — especially women unaffiliated with a political party — and it’s making it harder for Democrats to take advantage of the gender gap, according to public polling and Democratic strategists.

Already Democrats are taking a beating from men, who back Republicans over Democrats by double digits in most of the key Senate races. But to overcome that deficit, Democrats need to win over women voters by a wider margin in battleground states like Colorado, Iowa, Alaska, North Carolina and New Hampshire. That task that will be the primary focus of Democratic campaigns as they prepare an intensive voter turnout operation.

First, they must overcome the Obama factor. After defeating Mitt Romney by 11 points among women in 2012, the president has seen his approval rating drop sharply with females, particularly in the battleground states.

Are women wising up to Democrats? Certainly, they must understand just how bad Obama’s policies have been for them, particularly economically. It’s all nice and good to push the “pay gap”, among others, but like so many other memes Obama and the Democrats push, it has become extremely patronizing, showing a belief that women aren’t competent enough, are too delicate and fragile, are simply hot house flowers who need to be Taken Care Of by government. The rhetoric emanating from Obama and Democrats positions is unempowering for women. The economy under Obama has been less than good for women (well, most Americans).

Women still tend to do most of the shopping and cooking. They see the price rises. They see the buying power of their money decreasing. They have real world concerns. Yet, Obama and the Dems patronize them, and apparently think things like free contraception, sterilization, and abortion are the top issues for women

“He’s not doing as badly [with women] as he is among men, but it’s hardly anything to write home about,” said GOP pollster Whit Ayres. “Which is why many of these Democratic candidates are still struggling.”

It’s also why Democrats are campaigning heavily on women’s issues. Begich and outside Democratic groups have launched ads blasting Sullivan on abortion rights and for opposing funding for Planned Parenthood.

Begich, running against Republican Dan Sullivan in Alaska, says that Sullivan, and by extension, wants to control women. It’s that “Republicans want to bring back the 1950’s” meme. Yet, women are waking up the notion that it is Democrats who want to make Government women’s sugar daddies. Women are not so stupid that they’re falling for the talking point that the “GOP wants to take away their birth control”. They understand that the TP is simply veiled talk about abortion. They are realizing that Obama’s crazy “Life Of Julia“, a life spent under the thumb of Big Daddy Government, is bad for them and extremely patronizing. The Life Of Julia parodies start to make sense.

Democrats still tend to do better with women than Republicans, but the gap has closed quite a bit. And that is dangerous for Democrats. They certainly do not women wising up.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Bummer: Obama’s DIminished Standing With Women Hurts Senate Dem Chances »

Paper Debunks Acidification Scare

Warmists have been pushing the ocean acidification meme for years now, conveniently forgetting that life under the sea evolved and developed when the seas were much warmer. A new paper says “hold on a minute”

(The Hockey Schtick) A paper published today in Climate of the Past reconstructs water pH and temperature from a lake in central Japan over the past 280,000 years and clearly shows that pH increases [becomes more basic or alkaline] due to warmer temperatures, and vice-versa, becomes more acidic [or “acidified” if you prefer] due to cooling temperatures. This finding is the opposite of the false assumptions behind the “ocean acidification” scare, but is compatible with the basic chemistry of Henry’s Law and outgassing of CO2 from the oceans with warming. 

Thus, if global warming resumes after the “pause,” ocean temperatures will rise along with CO2 outgassing, which will make the oceans more basic, not acidic. You simply cannot have it both ways:

“Either the oceans are getting warmer and the CO2 concentration in seawater is decreasing, which means that ocean acidification from man-made CO2 from the atmosphere is nonsense. 

Or the oceans are getting cooler and the man-made CO2 from the atmosphere is dissolving in those cooler oceans and causing – insignificant – ocean acidification, which means that warming oceans and the associated sea level rises are nonsense. 

Take your pick – REAL SCIENCE says you can’t have both.”

THS ends with

These findings completely contradict the basis of the CAGW “acidification” scare and instead show that warming should make the oceans more alkaline, not “acidic.”

No worries. Warmists will hysterically ignore the findings, because this is not about science, but politics.

Read: Paper Debunks Acidification Scare »

If All You See…

…is a horrendous hockey rink, sucking up energy and producing lots of carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Bookworm Room, with a post on the CDC getting schooled on Ebola.

Read: If All You See… »

Pirate's Cove