…is the game of baseball which will suffer mightily due to “climate change”, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Nice Deb, with a post on the freed Sudanese mother Miriam Ibraheem, and how she was treated by the US embassy.
Read: If All You See… »
Darned nature, just doing it’s own thing
Rules of thumb for climate change turned upside down
With a new analysis of land regions, ETH climate researcher are challenging the general climate change paradigm that dry regions are getting drier and wet regions are getting wetter. In some regions they are encountering divergent trends.
Based on models and observations, climate scientists have devised a simplified formula to describe one of the consequences of climate change: regions already marked by droughts will continue to dry out in the future climate. Regions that already have a moist climate will experience additional rainfall. In short: dry gets drier; wet gets wetter (DDWW).
However, this formula is less universally valid than previously assumed.
The hell you say!
The evaluation shows no obvious trend towards a drier or wetter climate across three-quarters of the land are. There are solid trends for the remaining quarter. However, only half of this surface area follows the DDWW principle, i.e. one-eighth of the total landmass, while the trends seem to contradict this rule over the other half.
Some regions which should have become wetter according to the simple DDWW formula have actually become drier in the past – this includes parts of the Amazon, Central America, tropical Africa and Asia. On the other hand, there are dry areas that have become wetter: parts of Patagonia, central Australia and the Midwestern United States.
In some areas it cooperates, in others, not so much. Sounds like mostly natural variability to me.
I do see one problem in the study, which should be noted. The “researchers compared data from between 1948 and 1968 and 1984 to 2004.” That is not a great comparison, since the former was a period of cooling and the latter was a period of warming. At least till 1998, but we have still have had elevated temperatures. At the end of the day, though, this highlights how climahysterics rely on computer models spitting out preconceived notions to uphold their far far left policies.
Read: Bummer: Nature Refuses To Cooperate With Dryer/Wetter Warmist Prognostication »
Trackback URL
Going all in
(USA Today) President Obama on Tuesday will announce an expansion of a $763 million U.S. plan to help West Africa nations fight the spread of the Ebola virus, officials said Monday night.(snip)
About 3,000 U.S. military personnel will be in West Africa to lead the project, officials said.
Interesting. 3000 for this, slightly over 450 to serve as advisors in the fight against ISIS, but no actual fighting troops
The virus does not threaten the United States, and will not if the right steps are taking, officials.
So, no imminent threat to the US, no threat at all. Come on, liberals, step up, tell us how we shouldn’t become involved in someone else’s fight, and should not be putting our people and troops in harms way. Should we be paying for this? Should we even become involved? It’s not our fight. These are the arguments the Left uses.
And, no, I have no problem with helping in the fight against Ebola. Perhaps we should be as serious when it comes to Islamic extremism.
The Obama administration seemingly has no problem with tens of thousands of illegal alien children crossing the border and letting them stay. They have no problem with the millions of illegal alien children already in the United States. They have no problem with the vast number of adult illegals already here, wanting to put them on a path to citizenship. They refuse to truly secure the border. One lady wanting to donate bone marrow? Problem
(Fox News Latino) An Atlanta woman is in desperate need of a bone marrow transplant and says the government is standing in the way of her life-saving donor.
Alicia Nino De Palma, 51, has leukemia and needs a bone marrow transplant to survive. Her sister is a full match, but she lives in Mexico and the United States has denied her visa.
In a letter to immigration services from an Atlanta area hospital, they state that De Palma’s sister is the only fully matched donor available.
In the denial letter, the U.S. Embassy in Mexico states that the relative did not demonstrate they have ties to Mexico that will compel them to return to their home country after the visit. The De Palma family says the sister has children who live in Mexico and owns two homes which constitutes as ties, according to the U.S. Embassy.
The De Palmas say it’s frustrating because their aunt has taken the proper legal steps in order to enter the country for a good purpose. They’re desperate because time is running out.
The family and their attorney are going to continue to attempt to get the visa approved. One would think this would be a slam dunk, allowing the aunt to come to the States for the transplant. It’s the humane, and right, thing to do. Perhaps the aunt should simply show up at the border, give herself up, then disappear after being let go and travel to Atlanta. That’s what happens with most other illegals.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Read: Mexican Woman Denied Temporary Visa To Allow Her To Donate Bone Marrow »
How’s that working out?
(UK Guardian) Richard Branson has failed to deliver on his much-vaunted pledge to spend $3bn (£1.8bn) over a decade to develop a low carbon fuel.
Seven years into the pledge, Branson has paid out only a small fraction of the promised money – “well under $300m†– according to a new book by the writer and activist, Naomi Klein.
The British entrepreneur famously promised to divert a share of the profits from his Virgin airlines empire to find a cleaner fuel, after a 2006 private meeting with Al Gore.
Branson went on to found a $25m Earth prize for a technology that could safely suck 1bn tons of carbon a year from the atmosphere. In 2009, he set up the Carbon War Room, an NGO which works on business solutions for climate change.
But by Klein’s estimate, Branson’s “firm commitment†of $3bn failed to materialise.
$300 million is not chump change, to be clear. But, it is not the $3 billion promised.
“So the sceptics might be right: Branson’s various climate adventures may indeed prove to have all been a spectacle, a Virgin production, with everyone’s favourite bearded billionaire playing the part of planetary saviour to build his brand, land on late night TV, fend off regulators, and feel good about doing bad,†Klein writes in This Changes Everything, Capitalism vs The Climate.
Actually, we’re right on most of the Warmists, particularly the leaders, who live a different life than what their talking points, prognostication, and hysteria demands.
Read: Remember When Richard Branson Pledged To Spend $3billion On Climate Change? »
…is a wonderful jungle which will be destroyed by CO2, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on sudden onset lesbian syndrome
Read: If All You See… »
Good thing all these fossil fuels hating Warmists aren’t going to take fossil fuel trips to attend the march, eh?
Climate Change Is About to Have a Populist Moment
Why an upcoming demonstration in NYC is so important
Nine days from now, on September 21, organizers of the largest climate change march in history expect at least one hundred thousand of people to join the People’s Climate March in New York City. Happening just before the United Nations holds a summit on climate change, the real goal of the march is to show convening world leaders that climate change isn’t just a policy issue that matters only to scientists and policy wonks. The idea is to show that climate action is a populist movement, too—and one that’s capable of making some noise. (snip)
Remember, the next year is a critical one for fighting climate change. We know that at some point, very soon, humans will need to slow their use of fossil fuels if we hope to contain global warming to a manageable level. Somehow that needs to be balanced with China and India’s interests in economic and population growth. Climate experts and poorer countries hit hard by extreme weather want a binding global deal to reach emissions targets. To get there, there will be another UN meeting in Peru in December, leading up to Paris in 2015, where—activists hope—an agreement can be finalized.
Iain Keith, a campaign organizer for Avaaz, a group organizing the march, may have summed up the goals of the day best.  “We realized that a march could send a powerful signal,â€Â Keith told Inside Climate News. “Marches don’t always change the world, but sometimes they are the only things that shake the system into widespread change.”
If only Warmists had spent the last 25 years spreading awareness and demonstrating and stuff.
https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/511208697759297537
When the facts refuse to accommodate you climahysterics, you can always fall back on populist movements, chants, marches, hyperbole, doomsaying, and marches.
Read: NYC Climate March Is Going To Have It’s Populist Moment Or Something »
It’s actually rather surprising that more nations do not want to join in the fight against ISIS, especially those in Europe, who are much closer to the danger than the United States. Of course, Obama has been terrible on the international stage when it comes to creating links to foreign leaders, but that doesn’t stop the liberal media from crowing. The NY Times is super thrilled that “several” Arab nations are offering to engage in air strikes, for one. The Obama admin is continuing to flog the notion of an international coalition to wage war, kinetic operations, or whatever it is today, against ISIS. And there is this Obama lapdog
https://twitter.com/RichardGrenell/status/511128546220077056
(Breitbart) For all the ridicule heaped upon George W. Bush’s so-called “Coalition of the Willing†by President Obama, Vice President Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry, among others, the US-led 2003 operation to liberate Iraq and overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein was assisted by 49 nations that provided material military support including troops, intelligence cooperation, material, logistics, ground facilities, and financial assistance.
Only nine nations are part of what President Obama grandiosely titles his “broad coalition†to assist the US effort to “degrade†and “eventually destroy†the Sunni terrorist ISIS army in what is now officially being called “a very significant counter terrorist operation.†What actual support those states have in fact offered remains unclear.
Normally, international military coalitions are forged prior to their being formally announced. In the case of the anti-ISIS coalition, President Obama proclaimed the establishment of a US-led “broad coalition†of nations committed to the military defeat of the terrorist ISIS army before any specific agreements were reached with any partners. More significant perhaps than the list of states that have signed on is the list of those who have not. The most important and reliable US allied nations have almost all begged off; as have critical regional allies.
The US’s greatest ally, Britain, has said “no thanks”. Germany (not part of Iraq coalition, either, particularly since they were selling banned goods to Saddam’s Iraq) says they won’t participate, and, even better, that they haven’t even been asked. Neither Obama nor Secretary of State John Kerry have done the job required to build an actual coalition, sadly. Sadly because it is best to go after ISIS now, as they are growing by leaps and bounds, and may not be a direct nor imminent threat at the moment, but eventually will be. Sadly, because this is the time to lead from in front, and Obama can’t.
(Daily Caller) Asked about his (Nigel Farage, leader of UK Independence Party) view of America’s stature in the world with President Obama, Farage said, “I’m a guest here and, don’t want to be rude, but it looks a little rudderless.†Referring to Obama as a “lame duck,†Farage said it “seems to me the chap is on the golf course every day. In terms of respect or fear of America, it is diminishing with this President.â€
And what was Obama doing Sunday after learning another hostage had been beheaded by ISIS?
@markknoller @southsalem @AndrewsAirForce must have had a beheading recently?? oh last night? he's late for golf then .. geez
— Nic_O_Tine (@Nic_O_tine) September 14, 2014
I want Obama to be strong on this. I want him to go after ISIS. I want him to succeed on this. He’s done a good job with his anti-terrorism actions so far. But, what I want from this president is not going to happen.
Read: Media Super Enthused Over Obama’s Tiny Anti-ISIS Coalition »
That’s out of 34 nations, to be clear
(Wall Street Journal) On Monday the Tax Foundation, which manages the widely followed State Business Tax Climate Index, will launch a new global benchmark, the International Tax Competitiveness Index. According to the foundation, the new index measures “the extent to which a country’s tax system adheres to two important principles of tax policy: competitiveness and neutrality.”
A competitive tax code is one that limits the taxation of businesses and investment. Since capital is mobile and businesses can choose where to invest, tax rates that are too high “drive investment elsewhere, leading to slower economic growth,” as the Tax Foundation puts it.
By neutrality the foundation means “a tax code that seeks to raise the most revenue with the fewest economic distortions. This means that it doesn’t favor consumption over saving, as happens with capital gains and dividends taxes, estate taxes, and high progressive income taxes. This also means no targeted tax breaks for businesses for specific business activities.” Crony capitalism that rewards the likes of green energy with lower tax bills while imposing higher bills on other firms is political arbitrage that misallocates capital and reduces economic growth.
The index takes into account more than 40 tax policy variables. And the inaugural ranking puts the U.S. at 32nd out of 34 industrialized countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
First you have high tax rates, so often used to punish and reward, then throw in missallocation of tax dollars to essentially reward campaign donors. Then you throw in a far left President and his political party which constantly talk about raising taxes and punishing companies and “the rich”, and it’s no wonder companies have been performing tax inversions more and more, as well as more and more people renouncing their US citizenship.
With the developed world’s highest corporate tax rate at over 39% including state levies, plus a rare demand that money earned overseas should be taxed as if it were earned domestically, the U.S. is almost in a class by itself. It ranks just behind Spain and Italy, of all economic humiliations. America did beat Portugal and France, which is currently run by an avowed socialist.
Only Saudi Arabia (55%) and Chad (40%) have higher marginal corporate tax rates. The world wide average is 22.6%, with a weighted average of 30.6%.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
All posts here are my views. None represent my employer. If ye can prove me wrong, so be it. Ye can rant and rave at me, but be mostly polite to any other commentors. I will put up with quite a bit, but be mostly respectful to others.
NOTICE In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.
Pirate's Cove by Pirate's Cove is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.