Study: U.S. West Coast Warming Mostly Natural

By William Teach September 25, 2014 – 11:57 am

Let’s reiterate that the debate is primarily about causation: Warmists say it is mostly/solely caused by Mankind, especially our use of fossil fuels (which Warmists mostly refuse to give up themselves). Skeptics say the warming during the Modern Warm Period is mostly/solely natural. At that point we can get into the debate about Man’s contributions, such as true global changes, land use, urban heat island effect, etc. Warmists state that this warm period is utterly and completely different from previous warm periods because of industrialization, whining as they type on their corporate made laptop/tablet/smartphone as a they sip a corporate made latte made with beans shipped from another country, made in a corporate built building which has evil ice makers, which they picked up in their fossil fueled vehicles, while they sit on their corporate made couches in their homes which use lots of electricity. Anyhow, another dagger in the heart of the screeching about man mad global warming/climate change/climate disruption

West Coast warming linked to naturally occurring changes

Naturally occurring changes in winds, not human-caused climate change, are responsible for most of the warming on land and in the sea along the West Coast of North America over the last century, a study has found.

The analysis challenges assumptions that the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has been a significant driver of the increase in temperatures observed over many decades in the ocean and along the coastline from Alaska to California.

Changes in ocean circulation as a result of weaker winds were the main cause of about 1 degree Fahrenheit of warming in the northeast Pacific Ocean and nearby coastal land between 1900 and 2012, according to the analysis of ocean and air temperatures over that time. The study, conducted by researchers from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the University of Washington, was published Monday by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

These are changes that have been going on for billions of years. Little changes in natural forces can have large effects.

This latest research shows that similar changes in atmospheric and ocean circulation can drive trends that last a century or longer, overshadowing the effects of human-generated increase in greenhouse gases, the study’s authors said.

Of course, the LA Times had to reach out to a hyper-alarmist (and fossil fuels using hypocrite)

Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., who was not involved in the study, said its conclusions about long-term trends were probably overstated because the quality of data from the early 20th century was poor and unreliable. The results may also reflect the fact that the northeast Pacific is an area of the globe where past studies have shown the “signal” of climate change is low relative to the “noise” of natural variability.

Oh, OK, so now data from the early 20th century is meaningless. But, of course. Another excuse when Science shows Warmist idiocy is wrong.

Read: Study: U.S. West Coast Warming Mostly Natural »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

The Zombie Apocalypse Is Apparently Starting In Africa

By William Teach September 25, 2014 – 9:46 am

Slow news day, nothing of any real interest (I have plenty of “climate change” stuff in the hopper, though). Romney 2016 being for reals doesn’t really get me excited. Liberals attempting to position Obama’s war on ISIS being totally unlike anything Bush did is expected. No mention of Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize, of course. So, zombie apocalypse (FYI: I read quite a few zombie books, love them. Just finished the latest Zombie Fallout book) . The big pull at Memeorandum is from an All Africa article, but their server is apparently not resurrecting from all the traffic. Vox Popoli covers that one, here’s one from the UK Mirror

Ebola victims in African village ‘rise from the dead’ causing panic and fear among locals

Panic is spreading across an African community after reports that two Ebola victims have risen from the dead.

The victims, both females in their 40s and 60s, died of the deadly virus in separate communities in Nimba County, Liberia.

But according to reports in a local newspaper, the pair have reportedly been resurrected and are now walking among the living, causing panic and fear among locals.

Panic is spreading across an African community after reports that two Ebola victims have risen from the dead.

The victims, both females in their 40s and 60s, died of the deadly virus in separate communities in Nimba County, Liberia.

But according to reports in a local newspaper, the pair have reportedly been resurrected and are now walking among the living, causing panic and fear among locals.

OK, we’re doomed. Kinda makes you wonder about the wisdom of bringing Ebola patients to the U.S., eh? It’s like the start to a zombie book or movie.

Read: The Zombie Apocalypse Is Apparently Starting In Africa »

Posted in Like, Gnarly, Dude | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Semi-Retired, Mostly-Delusional President Looks To Implement 30 Day “Climate Change” Warning System

By William Teach September 25, 2014 – 8:59 am

When it comes to weather forecasting, most meteorologists will tell you that things start getting really dicey beyond 3-5 days. Ten day forecast? Good luck with that. Know what the forecast a few days ago was for Raleigh? Low 70’s and partly cloudy. Know what’s happening now? It’s 59 and rainy, with a special weather statement about the potential for heavy rain up to half an inch an hour.

Remember Hurricane Katrina? They were not sure where it would make landfall just 24 hours out. Same with most hurricanes and tropical systems. Remember that big El Nino that was supposed to occur this year? Didn’t happen (yet). How about the very cold winter and heavy snow? Most did not predict that. Some long term conditions are easier to predict than others, but, Obama has delved into Fantasy Land in his climate speech at the UN

(Breitbart) The NOAA will also begin developing “extreme-weather risk outlooks” for as long as 30 days in advance to help local communities to prepare for damaging weather and prevent “loss of life and property,” partnering with private companies to monitor and predict climate change.

“This effort includes a new partnership that will draw on the resources and expertise of our leading private sector companies and philanthropies to help vulnerable nations better prepare for weather-related disasters, and better plan for long-term threats like steadily rising seas,” Obama said during his speech at the United Nations Summit.

So far, the vast majority of Warmists “extreme weather” prognostications have failed. Especially when it comes to there being no statistically significant warming in almost 18 years.

As for Obama’s full speech at the UN, Ben Shapiro breaks it down, and ends by noting

America shares virtually nothing with the other member states at the UN. But President Obama shares a lot with them: a desire for America to take a secondary role in the world affairs, a desire for Israel to surrender in the face of its enemies, a desire for talk rather than action, a desire to demean the United States on the global stage.

Obama had a serious problem with discussing American exceptionalism.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Semi-Retired, Mostly-Delusional President Looks To Implement 30 Day “Climate Change” Warning System »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Barry Obama, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmist: Stop Planting Trees, You’re Making Global Warming Worse

By William Teach September 24, 2014 – 5:03 pm

Um, OK. Here’s Nadine Unger in the NY Times

To Save the Planet, Don’t Plant Trees

Deforestation accounts for about 20 percent of global emissions of carbon dioxide. The assumption is that planting trees and avoiding further deforestation provides a convenient carbon capture and storage facility on the land.

That is the conventional wisdom. But the conventional wisdom is wrong.

In reality, the cycling of carbon, energy and water between the land and the atmosphere is much more complex. Considering all the interactions, large-scale increases in forest cover can actually make global warming worse.

Of course, this is counterintuitive. We all learn in school how trees effortlessly perform the marvel of photosynthesis: They take up carbon dioxide from the air and make oxygen. This process provides us with life, food, water, shelter, fiber and soil. The earth’s forests generously mop up about a quarter of the world’s fossil-fuel carbon emissions every year.

So it’s understandable that we’d expect trees to save us from rising temperatures, but climate science tells a different story. Besides the amount of greenhouse gases in the air, another important switch on the planetary thermostat is how much of the sun’s energy is taken up by the earth’s surface, compared to how much is reflected back to space. The dark color of trees means that they absorb more of the sun’s energy and raise the planet’s surface temperature.

Climate scientists have calculated the effect of increasing forest cover on surface temperature. Their conclusion is that planting trees in the tropics would lead to cooling, but in colder regions, it would cause warming.

As Don Surber notes

She’s losing it. Temperatures have leveled off for 15 years. Having hung all their rationalization for seizing industry from capitalists on global warming, liberals are stuck with a planet that is not getting warmer. Or cooler. Or anything any time soon. They are stuck with it and they are lashing out.

Back to Miss Unger

In order to grow food, humans have changed about 50 percent of the earth’s surface area from native forests and grasslands to crops, pasture and wood harvest. Unfortunately, there is no scientific consensus on whether this land use has caused overall global warming or cooling. Since we don’t know that, we can’t reliably predict whether large-scale forestation would help to control the earth’s rising temperatures.

Interesting. She’s making a big call for land use as being a big cause of warming.

Read: Warmist: Stop Planting Trees, You’re Making Global Warming Worse »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach September 24, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful forest that should be turned into a palm oil plantation, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Raised On Hoecakes, with a post on sexual assault on campus.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Media Covers Celebs At Climate March, But What About The Other Attendees?

By William Teach September 24, 2014 – 12:07 pm

We’ve seen plenty of pictures of some of the nutballs at the recent climate march. We know that many Left side extremists, such as communist and socialist groups, CAIR, MoveOn, and Code Pink, among others, were not only in attendance, but official sponsors. What do they have to say?

(Daily Caller) It was a protest for the planet, or at least it was billed that way. Progressive activists marched under the “green” banner this week in New York City to call for “action” on climate change. But what was the “action” they were advocating?

White the media covered senators, actors, and celebrities at the event, they stayed away from the masses. That wasn’t an accident.

One idiot shows up at a tea party event with a Confederate flag and the media covers that person like they started the movement, but hundreds, if not thousands of violent, anti-capitalist, anti-American lunatics damn near riot in the streets and we get b-roll of Leonardo DiCaprio marching while holding a sign.

National Review’s Katherine Timpf took a cruise through the crowd, and returned with

One man wants to burn down the houses of those who won’t bow to his agenda saying “All these people have names and addresses. Like, every person fucking us over, we know where they live, and we could go there and burn their houses down. I mean, look, you wanna fucking ruin my environment and ruin my home, I’ll come to your home and ruin yours.”

Another man called President Barack Obama “a white cracker for president in black skin and he’s a piece of shit.”

Hmm, interesting racism on the part of a Warmist. Oh, right, I forgot, when it is someone on the Right, it is indicative of all on the Right. When it is someone on the Left, well, then, they’re just an outlier, and has no bearing on the rest.

Read: Media Covers Celebs At Climate March, But What About The Other Attendees? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Obama’s Super Deep Climate Plan

By William Teach September 24, 2014 – 9:30 am

So, nothing about Warmists, like Obama, doing anything themselves? And, leading? That’s your joke of the morning.

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/514531500977844225

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/514531849172172800

Read: Obama’s Super Deep Climate Plan »

Posted in Barry Obama, Climahypocrites | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Is Not Impressed With Obama’s Anti-ISIS Plan

By William Teach September 24, 2014 – 6:53 am

Uh oh, Obama’s lost the NY Times Editorial Board

Wrong Turn on Syria: No Convincing Plan

President Obama has put America at the center of a widening war by expanding into Syria airstrikes against the Islamic State, the Sunni extremist group known as ISIS and ISIL. He has done this without allowing the public debate that needs to take place before this nation enters another costly and potentially lengthy conflict in the Middle East.

He says he has justification for taking military action against the Islamic State and Khorasan, another militant group. But his assertions have not been tested or examined by the people’s representatives in Congress. How are Americans to know whether they have the information to make any judgment on the wisdom of his actions?

There isn’t a full picture — because Mr. Obama has not provided one — of how this bombing campaign will degrade the extremist groups without unleashing unforeseen consequences in a violent and volatile region. In the absence of public understanding or discussion and a coherent plan, the strikes in Syria were a bad decision.

Mr. Obama has failed to ask for or receive congressional authorization for such military action. The White House claims that Mr. Obama has all the authority he needs under the 2001 law approving the use of force in Afghanistan and the 2002 law permitting the use of force in Iraq, but he does not. He has given Congress notification of the military action in Iraq and Syria under the 1973 War Powers Resolution, but that is not a substitute for congressional authorization.

They make an interesting case. For my part, though, I more than approve him authorizing strikes against Islamic terrorists. Any Islamic terrorists

The military action early Tuesday was quite different from what Mr. Obama explained in a televised speech on Sept. 10. For months the administration has focused on the ISIS threat, yet these strikes also targeted Khorasan, a group the government says is linked to Al Qaeda and engaged in “active plotting that posed an imminent threat to the United States and potentially our allies.”

It is puzzling that Mr. Obama would address the nation on a terrorist threat and not mention the group that officials now say poses an imminent threat to the United States, which ISIS does not. They say they kept details about Khorasan secret so the group would not know it was being tracked. But past threats, including Osama bin Laden, were discussed openly even as they were tracked.

A NY Times front page article discusses these air strikes against Khorasan, and highlight a claim by the Obama admin that the group was planning a strike against the U.S. or some European nation. They also not that the vast majority of air strikes were performed by the United States military, with very little contribution from other countries.

Interestingly, the Times seems Very Concerned about whether ISIS/ISIL is a threat to the U.S. Didn’t liberals used to care about people in danger around the world? Because ISIS is killing opponents left and right.

As far as Congress goes, since when has the NY Times cared about Obama involving Congress? Obama doesn’t care about Congress. Did he actually go to Congress to act for some sort of war resolution? No. He did ask for support for helping Syrian rebels, which passed the Republican led House, as did the Democrat led Senate. In both cases, it was a narrow authorization, and they expected a broader debate once they were back in session (something else the Times complained about, because they apparently missed that Congress is not always in session. The members go home (supposedly) to converse with their constituents. And campaign. They were never meant to be full timers in D.C.)

Again, I approve of Obama striking the Islamic terrorists. How about you?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times Is Not Impressed With Obama’s Anti-ISIS Plan »

Posted in Barry Obama, War On Terrorism | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Insane Newpaper: Climate Change Will Make Alaska Like Florida

By William Teach September 23, 2014 – 6:10 pm

If you can believe it, this hyper alarmist bat guano insane article is not at Salon, Climate Progress, Grist, or any others

(NY Times) Forget most of California and the Southwest (drought, wildfires). Ditto for much of the East Coast and Southeast (heat waves, hurricanes, rising sea levels). Washington, D.C., for example, may well be a flood zone by 2100, according to an estimate released last week.

Instead, consider Anchorage. Or even, perhaps, Detroit.

“If you do not like it hot and do not want to be hit by a hurricane, the options of where to go are very limited,” said Camilo Mora, a geography professor at the University of Hawaii and lead author of a paper published in Nature last year predicting that unprecedented high temperatures will become the norm worldwide by 2047.

“The best place really is Alaska,” he added. “Alaska is going to be the next Florida by the end of the century.”

I’d usually insert a face palm gif here, but, wait, here’s the tweet from the NY Times

Too hot, too cold, Alaska like Florida, it all gets a double Picard

photo picard-face-palm_zps6efb11ab.gif

Read: Insane Newpaper: Climate Change Will Make Alaska Like Florida »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Beyond Moonbat, Global Warming | Comments Off on Insane Newpaper: Climate Change Will Make Alaska Like Florida | Trackback URL

Some Obamacare Recipients To See Tax Refunds Cut

By William Teach September 23, 2014 – 4:36 pm

Just another unanticipated consequence

(USA Today) A significant benefit of the Affordable Care Act is the opportunity to receive money-saving tax credits up front to cut the overall cost of health insurance, but now hundreds of thousands of consumers could owe back some of that money next April.

Those affected took advance payments of the premium tax credit for health insurance. Some married couples could owe $600 or $1,500 or $2,500 or even more. It might feel like a raw deal for some who are already suffocating under the escalating costs of health insurance.

“Health insurance is confusing enough, and now they’re adding the complexities of the Tax Code,” said Lorena Bencsik, a member of the Michigan Association of CPAs and owner of Prime Numbers in Ferndale.

When you file that 2014 tax return next year, the Internal Revenue Service will compare your actual income for the year with the amount you estimated when applying for exchange-based health insurance under the health insurance law.

Because Ocare recipients have to estimate their income, which can vary, in advance, to apply for Ocare, it can cause a problem when they go to file their taxes and the income is different. So, some people will have a bit of a shock when they file the following year. Happy Ocare, folks! Isn’t it awesome that our healthcare is now linked with our income and tax filing?

Read: Some Obamacare Recipients To See Tax Refunds Cut »

Posted in Healthcare | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove