LA Times: Ice Storms Are Caused By The Warming Earth

The anti-science Warmists are really reaching for the stars with this meme

Ice storm paradox: It’s colder because the Earth is warmer

…..

Put very simply, here is what the predominant science says: Average global temperatures have been rising in recent decades. Some of the warming could be part of a natural cycle but, almost certainly, increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere caused by the burning of fossil fuels are a pivotal factor in intensifying the phenomenon. The starkest evidence of the temperature jump is the rapid melting of the polar ice caps and the disappearance of the world’s glaciers.

Climate scientists have said another key signal to watch for is a dramatic shift in weather patterns. It is close to impossible to attribute any single weather event – a snowstorm, a tornado, a hurricane – to temperature rise, but, once extreme weather becomes normal and what has been normal is no longer the norm, we will know we are in the throes of change that is likely irreversible.

It sure looks like that could be where we are now. In just the last couple of years, Americans have experienced epic tornados in the center of the country, a monster storm that flooded Manhattan and ravaged New Jersey, extended drought in the West that threatens agriculture and water supplies, and an unprecedented number of wildfires in forests dried to the flammability of kindling. This winter, frigid polar air has slipped south, freezing much of the country, while in Alaska the season has been unusually warm. There are piles of snow in Atlanta, but a dearth of snow in the Sierra.

I’m not going to provide a deep recitation of just how much is wrong with the excerpt, much less the entire screed. We’ve been through it time and time again, and the science-challenged Warmists will simply stick with their mindless cult-like dogma. The article even includes this pithy comic

Strange, it’s almost like the polar vortex never ever happened before or something. Or, that they blamed global cooling on the polar vortex (which should properly be called the Circumpolar Vortex). But, Warmists aren’t interested in science, earth history, real world data and observations, nor reality.

And, just to be clear, not that Warmists will read, comprehend, or listen, the debate is not on warming, but on causation. There has been 1.4F warming since 1850. There has been no statistically significant warming since 1997. The Warmists models have been proven wrong 95% of the time.

Read: LA Times: Ice Storms Are Caused By The Warming Earth »

NC Gov McCrory Asked About “Climate Change” In Wake Of Winter Storms

No, seriously

(WRAL) Appearing on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” Sunday to talk about the winter storm that shut down the state last week, Gov. Pat McCrory sidestepped a pointed question about his position on climate change.

The question from host Bob Schieffer came at the end of a segment on North Carolina’s response to the storm.

“Governor, a couple of years ago, you made a remark that caught a lot of people’s attention. You said that global warming is ‘in God’s hands,'” Schieffer said. “After what you’ve – going through this thing, do you still feel that way? Is there something we ought to be doing about it in the meantime?”

“I think someone took a chop off the total sentence there,” McCrory responded. “I will say this: I feel that there’s always been climate change. The debate is, really, how much of it is man-made and how much will it cost to have any impact on climate change.

“My main argument is, let’s clean up the environment, and as mayor and now as governor, I’m spending my time cleaning our air, cleaning our water, cleaning the ground,” he continued. “I think that’s where the argument should be on both the left and the right, and if that has an impact on climate change, good. But I think that’s where the real argument should be, is doing what we can to clean up our environment.

“We also have to look for cost-effective ways to do it because, as governor, we’re walking that fine line of keeping our environment clean but also continuing economic recovery and making sure things like power are affordable for the consumer,” the governor concluded.

Amazing. North Carolina has suffered from many winter storms this year (like most of the states), and just saw one Wednesday that was brutal (but fortunately short lived in terms of effects) and Shieffer asked about “climate change”. But, then, these Warmist wankers actually believe that snow and cold and ice are caused by warmth. Now that is anti-science.

McCory makes a good point about focusing on real environmental issues such as clean air and water. But, this was all part of a greater focus by the media on “climate change” Sunday. I noted the exchange between Marsha Blackburn and Bill Nye on Meet The Press (Amy Ridenour has more detail on the exchange). McCrory was also asked similar questions on ABC’s This Week.

Read: NC Gov McCrory Asked About “Climate Change” In Wake Of Winter Storms »

LA Times: Executive Fixes To Obamacare Are A Bad Idea

Gee, they’re just noticing this? On the other hand, it’s nice that one of the leading papers actually notices this, and the Editorial Board decides to write about it

The wrong way to fix Obamacare

The sprawling 2010 Affordable Care Act has proved so hard to implement…

Who woulda thunk that such a massive piece of legislation which no one who voted in the affirmative for actually read would be so difficult, especially since implementation was put in the hands of incompetents and ideologues?

…that the Obama administration has delayed or waived multiple provisions of the law in the hope of avoiding even more breakdowns and confusion. Last week the administration put off for another year the requirement that larger employers provide coverage for some or all of their workers. It’s also reportedly considering a longer delay in implementing the law’s minimum standards for insurance policies. Although the administration may have the right motives, its aggressive use of executive power to change deadlines and weaken requirements sets an unwelcome precedent. It also risks subverting some of the goals of the law the president is trying to protect.

The EB goes on to discuss the latest delay, which gives businesses with 50-99 employees a break through 2016 (but fails to note the politics involved….small steps for the media, small steps), then notes

The rationale? The administration decided it would be better to have a “gradual phase-in” than the deadline Congress ordered.

Congress didn’t “order” it: it was embedded in the law, which was passed by the Dem controlled Congress and signed into law by Mr. Obama. The EB also notes that this has nothing to do with tax policy

The tax code gives the administration great flexibility when implementing changes in tax law, as long as its actions are consistent with Congress’ dictates. The employer mandate isn’t really a tax policy, however; it’s part of the initiative to extend insurance coverage to more Americans. Rather than changing the mandate by fiat, President Obama should have asked Congress to fix the provision. On the other hand, the Republicans who control the House have shown no interest in improving the law; they just want to kill it. So it’s hard to fault Obama for not engaging in a fool’s errand.

The ACA specifically states that implementation date is 1/1/2014. Period. Tax law has no bearing. As far as Republicans go, why should Republicans help in the least? Not one Republican voted for it. The American People were dead set against it before passage, during passage, and after passage, and are still against it. The Obama admin. had three years to get it right. And it is easy to fault Obama: the law is the law. The White House even told us this

The EB does briefly note that the changes to the individual mandate go past the midterms, and ends with

Again, the many complex changes set in motion by the Affordable Care Act were guaranteed to result in a rocky transition. And with congressional Republicans cheering for the law to fail rather than trying to ensure its success, the administration doesn’t have a lot of good options for solving the implementation problems it has encountered. Still, it would be easier to defend its actions had it at least made an effort to work with Congress on the necessary fixes. And if it has to resort to bending deadlines and mandates, it should do so in a way that doesn’t undermine the law’s goals.

How does one defend lawless actions? Is this what the 4th Estate has come to, defending lawless actions if they are needed? And we should always ask the questions “how would the media respond were it a Republican in office making these decisions?”

Sadly, there is not much Republicans can do about it, as Senator Mike Lee pointed out. No one supposedly has standing to show true harm. Strange, though, that no one has thought to sue Obama for failing to uphold his constitutional duty to follow the Constitution. They can also petition the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of Obama’s decrees. Remember, the primary purpose of the Supreme Court is constitutionality.

Finally, though, the LA Times EB seems to be quietly noting that what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, that a Republican president could do the same types of things, and Democrats would have no leg to stand on in complaining.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: LA Times: Executive Fixes To Obamacare Are A Bad Idea »

Rep. Marsha Blackburn Smacks Around Bill Nye On Meet The Press

Having gotten tired of being beaten up by Marc Morano multiple times in TV debates, Bill Nye decided he would give it a go against Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn), and really fared no better (video of the whole exchange here). Host David Gregory even interrupted Blackburn multiple times and tried to help out Nye and the Warmists, to no avail. Blackburn was calm, rational, adult, and had facts on her side, rather then hyperbole, “consensus” (which isn’t science), scaremongering, and creating links out of thing air.

Perhaps we should note that television production uses lots and lots of energy, which Warmists say causes “climate change”. Weird, eh?

Anyhow, Warmists were really not happy that NBC would even allow a debate, being the big time fascists that they are. Here’s National Journal

Senate Democrats recently joined a longstanding liberal coalition of media critics to demand that major news networks up their coverage of climate change.

This is not what they had in mind.

Sunday’s episode of NBC’s “Meet the Press” will feature a “climate change debate” between celebrity science educator Bill Nye (“the science guy”) and Tennessee Republican Rep. Marsha Blackburn.

For the political coalition—and, indeed, for the overwhelming majority of climate scientists— the connection between human greenhouse gas emissions and climate change is settled science, and they were hoping the networks would cover the impacts of that change. But Blackburn has disputed the scientific consensus on human-induced global warming, and the segment’s critics fear the episode will feature a he-said-she-said vibe that’s at odds with the science.

No, what they’re really worried about is that a Warmists would get beaten yet again. And they’re correct to be worried. Salon was concerned. So was Talking Points Memo. Here’s the Huffington Post

First, some context: TV news shows almost never cover climate change, which ought to be one of the most aggressively-reported issues around, given that, y’know, it’s a dire threat to the planet and everyone on it. A recent study from Media Matters found that the Sunday shows on NBC, ABC, CBS and Fox spent a combined 27 minutes on the topic in the whole of 2013. Meet the Press was singled out as “failing to offer a single substantial mention of climate change” for the entire year.

So, when “MTP” does finally decide that the issue merits its consideration, what does it do? It sets up a “debate” about the issue between Bill Nye—who, despite the great things he has done to popularize science, is not a climate scientist—and Blackburn, who has previously tweeted about how proud she is to deny that global warming exists.

The existence of climate change is no longer an issue up for discussion, and hasn’t been for decades. The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said there was a 95 percent chance that humans are responsible for global warming.

Interestingly, these are the same people who take long fossil fueled flights from all over the world to attend a nice working vacation, often on the taxpayer dime, in great spots. What the Warmists do not like is that anyone is allowed to debate the issue in the public eye. They want the opposition silenced.

Oh, and let’s not forget that 95% of the Warmists models have failed. If you want to talk consensus, that is it.

So, Nye was given the opportunity to go up against a politician in a supposedly scientific debate, and lost yet again.

Read: Rep. Marsha Blackburn Smacks Around Bill Nye On Meet The Press »

If All You See…

…is a warming world where warmth created snow melts to flood the lands, probably because of Fox News, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Nice Deb, with a post on Judge Pirro and Obama’s lawlessness.

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Patriotic Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another fine day in the Once and Future Nation of America. The sun is shining, Team USA is beating the snot out of Slovenia in hockey (they won 5-1. Takes awhile to write these posts). No idea who did this pinup, but I gave it a little help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Raised On Hoecakes discusses the union vote loss in Tennessee
  2. The Lonely Conservative notes that Bill DeBlasio comrades are staying away from him
  3. The Other McCain discusses Ellen Page coming out as a lesbian
  4. The People’s Cube notes 50 ways to discuss your gender
  5. This ain’t Hell… offers up more Obamacare issues
  6. Victory Girls Blog takes up 5 ways to become an Obassador (yeah, I just made that word up)
  7. The Gateway Pundit reports on a gun maker blowing off NY
  8. The Daley Gator wonders how Jay Carney looks himself in the mirror
  9. Powerline considers whether Obamacare is adorable
  10. The Political Commentator wonders what would happen if the story was about Muslims rather than Jews
  11. Maggie’s Notebook discusses license plate scanning in England
  12. Jammie Wearing Fools notes that it’s good to be the Queen
  13. Fire Andrea Mitchell covers Obamacare denying medicine
  14. Fausta covers the problems in Venezuela
  15. And last, but not least, Director Blue has the Wiktionary definition of fascism.

s 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 »

As Obama Whined About Drought In California, The Real Story Comes Out

I mentioned Saturday that Obama took a long fossil fueled plane trip all the way to Fresno, California to complain about “climate change” and announce a $1 billion “climate change” slush fund. Part of the trip was to whine about the drought in California. His “science” adviser, John Holdren ( a believer in Malthusian prophesy), even went so far as to say that it wasn’t about reservoirs (which some were calling to be built), but about the lack of water to fill the reservoirs. Actually, he’s half right, and there’s a reason for that

(IBD) President Obama visited California’s drought-hit Central Valley Friday, offering handouts and blaming global warming. But the state’s water shortage is due to the left’s refusal to deal with the state’s water needs.

The one thing that will mitigate droughts in California — a permanent feature of the state — is to restore the water flow from California’s water-heavy north to farmers in the central and south. That’s just what House Bill 3964, which passed by a 229-191 vote last week, does.

But Obama’s plan is not to get that worthy bill through the Senate (where Democrats are holding it up) but to shovel pork to environmental activists and their victims, insultingly offering out-of-work farmers a “summer meal plan” in his package.

What happened?

Environmental special interests managed to dismantle the system by diverting water meant for farms to pet projects, such as saving delta smelt, a baitfish. That move forced the flushing of 3 million acre-feet of water originally slated for the Central Valley into the ocean over the past five years.

California Democrats refused to allow reservoirs and water containment facilities to be built. Droughts are nothing new to California. Some droughts were shown to last 200 years. Much of this can be explained by the geography of California. The hills, mountains, ocean temperatures, winds, and weather patterns all contribute. Much of the Los Angeles are would be extremely dry without the water that is brought in.

Climate weenies blame are blaming the drought on climate change, rather than a typical natural occurring pattern shown to have happened before. Yet, their own policies have made it worse, much like their policies make wild fires worse. Perhaps if all the “climate change” believers would give up their own fossil fueled vehicles the drought would end. California should pass a law to ban all fossil fueled vehicles. We have to Do Something. Hey, why, California’s “climate change” legislation has worked wonders, right?

Meanwhile, after taking the long fossil fueled flight for a brief speech in Fresno, he hopped back on the plane to head to …. Palm Springs, where he’s playing golf. And met with King Abdullah II of Jordan, who he could have met with in Washington earlier in the week, instead of making him take a long fossil fueled trip to California.

And then there’s John Kerry

Secretary of State John Kerry will begin a series of speeches on Sunday that will call on the world to tackle climate change.

The blitz will begin in Jakarta, Indonesia, where Kerry will give the “first in a series of speeches on climate change this year,” according to a State Department official.

Kerry will lay out the “compelling and undeniable scientific case” of the growing climate change challenge that is “pushing the planet towards a tipping point of no return,” the official said.

Great. Says the man who took a long fossil fueled trip. Perhaps Kerry should be more concerned with the rise of hardcore Islamism in Indonesia rather than an imaginary boogeyman political issue.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: As Obama Whined About Drought In California, The Real Story Comes Out »

Hooray! Obama Takes Long Fossil Fueled Flight To Announce $1 Billion Climate Slush Fund

Yes, the man with the Largest Carbon Footprint In The World (41K metric tons) did actually do this

(Washington Post) FRESNO, Calif. — President Obama said here Friday that he will propose a $1 billion fund in his fiscal 2015 budget to help communities prepare for the effects of climate change and to fund research and technology to protect against its impact.

The president announced the “climate resilience fund” during a meeting with farmers and ranchers in Fresno, Calif., who have been severely affected by a drought in the state’s San Joaquin Valley.

Obama is expected to release his proposed 2015 budget in early March. The prospects for the climate fund are uncertain in a Republican-controlled House. But Obama, who made preparation for climate change one of the major themes of the climate action plan he released in June, will continue to press for the need to adapt, according to the White House.

Let’s take a step back from the argument regarding the causes of the changes in climate, namely, is it mostly or solely caused by Mankind, particularly fossil fuels usage, or is it mostly solely natural? The very fact is that changes in climate can cause real world issues within the environment and mankind. Of course, throughout time people and life have either adapted or died out. One of Darwin’s fundamental points. When the dust bowl occurred in the American mid-west, many people picked up and moved, particularly to California. There will always be changes. So, having plans in place to deal with these changes is not a bad idea.

Of course, how will this all work out, considering that hardcore Leftists are the ones pushing it?

(Reuters) Funds would be used to research how to better prepare for climate change-related effects like rising sea levels and extreme temperatures and encourage local initiatives. Other investments would include “breakthrough technologies and resilient infrastructure” such as building sea walls and more resilient electricity delivery systems to protect vulnerable cities and towns.

So they won’t actually be really doing much more than spreading money around to Warmist/Progressive friendly groups to do research, along with probably sending money to companies that will fail, much like with his “green energy” idiocy via The Stimulus.

The concept of the fund is based on a recommendation made in December 2012 by the think tank Center for American Progress.

Let’s not forget that the founder of CAP is John Podesta, now a senior adviser to Obama. CAP is an extremely left wing group, and you can bet the money would go to left leaning groups and companies, especially donors.

The problem is not so much any changes in weather, because weather always has, and always will, happen. The problem is more people living more modern lifestyles and dependent on infrastructure. The last thing we need is a guy who has a massive carbon footprint yammering on about the need to spend Other People’s Money on “climate change”, though.

Read: Hooray! Obama Takes Long Fossil Fueled Flight To Announce $1 Billion Climate Slush Fund »

If All You See…

…is warm snow because Someone Else forgot to unplug all their appliances, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on exactly who has paid for Obamacare.

Read: If All You See… »

CBS News: Hey, This Snow Thing Is Global Warming, Ya Know!

No one should be surprised that CBS News and the people they invite to participate are fully invested in anti-science

(Newsbusters) As a snow storm beared down on the east coast on Thursday, CBS This Morning sought to lay blame on global warming, with the headline on screen fretting: “Extreme Weather; Are These Kinds of Storms, Droughts Unprecedented?” Co-host Charlie Rose turned New York City College physics professor Michio Kaku and wondered: “What’s causing all this?”

Kaku proclaimed: “Well, the wacky weather could get even wackier. What we’re seeing is that the jet stream and the polar vortex are becoming unstable. Instability of historic proportions. We think it’s because of the gradual heating up of the North Pole. The North Pole is melting.” Rose interjected: “Global warming.”

Kaku continued: “That excess heat generated by all this warm water is destabilizing this gigantic bucket of cold air….So that’s the irony, that heating could cause gigantic storms of historic proportions.”

On CBS This Morning Thursday, co-host Gayle King theorized: “Does this explain why Niagra Falls is frozen and why it’s warm in Sochi? It’s all connected to the same thing, correct?” Kaku replied: “It’s connected. If you take a look at the jet stream, you see that England is flooding right now, Latin America is warm, while California has a drought. We’re talking about instabilities caused by the eratic nature of the jet stream.”

Except, the melting in the Arctic was much less this year. Many Warmists had predicted the Arctic would be ice free. Heck, many proclaimed that snowfall would be a thing of the past. Now these crazy anti-science people think massive, and in some cases, record, snowfall is caused by heating.

As far as Sochi goes

(Daily Caller) Marc Morano pointed out that Sochi’s position in Russia — thousands of miles south of Moscow and not far from the Turkish maritime border — lends the resort town an almost tropical feel that doesn’t produce much snow. Meanwhile, vast swathes of the Northern Hemisphere, including the storm-socked East Coast, remain buried under snow and ice.

“They’re waking up and seeing palm trees outside,” he said. “It’s the southernmost city in Russia. And had they held these Olympics in Michigan — upper Michigan was the coldest place on the entire planet in January — they should have held them in Michigan if they were looking for snow.”

“They should’ve held them in Iran,” Morano continued, “which and the most snow in 50 years, where 50 houses were crushed. They should’ve held them in Italy, where they’re having record snow. They should’ve held them anywhere in the United States, where we’ve broken over 4,000 snow records this past month.”

“The idea that they’d pick the most southern city with palm trees, and then use it as a springboard to call for a U.N. global warming treaty,” he said, “something’s just not adding up.”

He also points out that Sochi is considered the warmest city in Russia. Travel sites, like this one, consider it to be the warmest city in Russia. The Atlantic wondered last June whose bright idea it was to hold the Winter Olympics in the warmest part of Russia. The Washington Post notes “The Black Sea resort of Sochi, Russia, is the warmest city ever to host the Winter Olympic Games…”. Obviously, many of the games are held in the mountains, an hour away from Sochi. But, it made no sense to pick the city.

Read: CBS News: Hey, This Snow Thing Is Global Warming, Ya Know! »

Pirate's Cove