If All You See…

By William Teach December 18, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil electricity sucking smartphone which No One Else should have, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on haters gonna hate.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If Your Sea Rise Prediction Ranges 900%…

By William Teach December 18, 2013 – 10:43 am

..it’s not science, it’s prognostication from reading tea leaves. Here’s USA Today writer Wendy Koch going full bore stupid

Rising sea levels torment Norfolk, Va., and coastal U.S.

How high will they go? Scientists don’t know exactly how much the seas will rise, but they see an accelerating climb that could range from 8 inches to more than 6 feet by century’s end.

A range of 8 to 72 inches is a difference of 900%. Or, you could say 9 times the difference. After the typical opening sob story, we get

As the 10th part of its year-long series on climate change, USA TODAY traveled to Virginia’s picturesque Tidewater region — bound by creeks, rivers and the Chesapeake Bay — to look at how rising sea levels are affecting America’s coastal communities, where more than a third of its people and wealth reside.

The seas have risen and fallen before. What’s new is the enormity of coastal development that will need to be protected, moved or abandoned. In this 21st century tale, an old fisherman isn’t battling a large marlin (as in Ernest Hemingway’s classic The Old Man and the Sea), but the cities are battling the seas.

What’s new is the number of people who have built their homes and businesses in a coastal area, and are proclaiming “climate change” as a reason for Government to give them piles of cash to protect their property from what has happened before and will happen again.

Sea level has risen nearly 8 inches worldwide since 1880 but, unlike water in a bathtub, it doesn’t rise evenly. In the past 100 years, it has climbed about a foot or more in some U.S. cities because of ocean currents and land subsidence — 11 inches in New York and Boston, 12 in Charleston, 16 in Atlantic City, 18 in Norfolk and 25 in Galveston, Texas, according to a USA TODAY analysis of 2012 tide gauge data collected by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

8 inches would be actually below the historical average for the last 7,000 years of 6-8 inches per century. And the higher data would be well within the historical norm for what one would expect during a warm period during the Holocene. NOAA has a monitoring center in Sewell’s Point, Va, the closest for Norfolk, mentioned as 18 inches

This shows a completely linear rise going back to 1930, with a big spike during the El Nino year. Nothing unusual. This is nature in action. And there is no way to compare it properly to previous warm periods. So, is this unusual?

How much higher will it go? Scientists don’t know exactly but, depending on fossil fuel emissions, they project global sea level will rise about 1 foot to slightly more than 3 feet (or 39 inches) by 2100, according to this year’s Fifth Assessment Report by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. NOAA has projected sea level could rise higher, as much as 6½ feet, by century’s end.

And there we go, the blame is on Mankind, and especially fossil fuels. Despite there being nothing unusual about the sea level rise. Despite scientists not really knowing, which means they are simply making a WAG. Warmists want to spend a billion dollars in Norfolk alone to deal with “adaption”. A lot of Norfolk is only, at best, a few feet above sea level. What did they think was going to happen? Norfolk is also dealing with land subsidence. Welcome to the reality of natural changes in the earth, Warmists.

Read: If Your Sea Rise Prediction Ranges 900%… »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmist Christmas Wish List Includes New “Carbon” Regulations – On Other People

By William Teach December 18, 2013 – 8:27 am

Continuing the 25 Days Of Climate Christmas, here’s Warmist Karen Telleen-Lawton in Santa Barbara

(Noozhawk) My holiday wish list is a little beyond my family to manage, so I’m putting it out to the world. It’s not dazzling or even visible in the short term, but stems from the startling fact that the U.S. still has no national limit on carbon pollution from power plants.

Now, regulations on the largest source of carbon pollution are finally within sight. Last September, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed federal carbon pollution standards for new fossil fuel fired power plants. At an emission rate of about 2.3 billion tons of carbon dioxide pollution per year, fossil fuel-burning power plants are the nation’s single largest of source of emissions, producing about 40 percent of the total. Carbon dioxide traps heat, which destabilizes the climate. My wish is that these new regs be passed in 2014.

How cute, “destabilizes”. I hadn’t heard that gripe before, but I suppose it goes to the Warmist notion of “extreme weather”, which hasn’t happened. I wonder if Ms. Telleen-Lawton can enlighten us as to when Earth’s climate has been stable? Oh, right, that happens mostly during ice ages and “snowball Earth”

The proposed standards are not just an edict without reasonable alternatives for meeting the demand. Solutions are available and in use today, including renewable energy, natural gas, coal with carbon recapture technology, and improved energy efficiency. The proposed standards are good for business because they provide reduced uncertainty about investing in alternative sources. Technology businesses will be able to bring to production cleaner, safer and more efficient solutions.

Notice what’s going on here: Ms. Telleen-Lawton is doing the typical Warmist schtick and wanting to implement Hotcoldwetdry policies on Someone Else. Furthermore, nowhere does she realize that her “wish list” will cause pain for those companies, which will be passed on in the form of higher consumer costs and lost jobs.

Carbon pollution affects rich and poor, urban and rural in every state of the nation. With a leveled playing field, the market can be trusted to devise ways of encouraging sustainable practices and discouraging polluting ones. Santa, can you just sprinkle us with some (biodegradable) fairy dust to encourage passage of the carbon pollution regulations?

Leveled playing field? Doesn’t sound too fascistic (National Socialist Party, anyone?), does it? Santa, can you sprinkle Warmists with some fairy dust that causes Warmists to give up their own fossil fueled vehicles and make their own lives “carbon neutral”?

Read: Warmist Christmas Wish List Includes New “Carbon” Regulations – On Other People »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Christmas, Global Warming | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Senate Democrats Prefer Illegal Alien Welfare To Military Pensions

By William Teach December 18, 2013 – 7:58 am

We’ve long known that Democrats are not particular supporters of the military. This seemingly grew out of the hippy/anti-Vietnam movement…interestingly, a war started by Democrats…and strengthened during the Carter years, to the point that the Left has been attempting to cut military spending at every turn. They’re still trying to do it today, supporting cuts to the military while protecting illegals

(Daily Caller) Senate Republicans were unable to stop military pension cuts when Senate Democrats blocked a vote on an amendment to prevent the cuts by closing a welfare loophole for illegal immigrants Tuesday night.

The two-year budget deal brokered by Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray and House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, would cut military pensions by $6 billion over ten years, leaving some Senate Republicans scrambling to stop the cuts.

“Removing this unbalanced treatment of our military retirees ought to be one of the key actions we should take before this legislation moves forward. In fact, greater savings than this can be achieved by passing a legislative fix recommended by the Inspector General of the U.S. Treasury that would stop the IRS from improperly providing tax credits to illegal aliens,” Alabama Republican Jeff Sessions said Monday, announcing his co-sponsorship of Mississippi Republican Sen. Roger Wicker’s amendment to restore the military retirement benefits Monday.

What this is about is a provision in the law that allows the parents of illegal children to obtain welfare benefits, to the tune of $4.2 billion dollars in 2010. Sessions’ amendment would have required a Social Security number to be used to claim the child tax credit, rather than a taxpayer ID number, as well as restore the military pension cuts.

Sessions’ motion failed on a 46 – 54 party line vote, with North Carolina Sen. Kay Hagan crossing the aisle as the lone Democrat to vote with the Republicans.

“Reid’s majority just voted to keep pension cut for vets instead of cutting welfare payments to illegal aliens,” a Sessions aide emailed.

But of course. Democrats have determined that they really love illegal aliens. Military members? Not so much.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Senate Democrats Prefer Illegal Alien Welfare To Military Pensions »

Posted in Democrats | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

The Hobbit: The Desolation Of Smaug – My Take

By William Teach December 17, 2013 – 6:12 pm

It’s been quite a bit of time since I went to the movies. There has been little out recently which I’ve been interested in seeing in the theaters. Despite the big, and sometimes substantive, changes made to The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, as well as what Peter Jackson and company did to the Lord Of The Rings trilogy, I enjoyed the movies. I’ve watched the first Hobbit movie many, many times. Even with the changes, the substance was still there. The main “flavor”, if you will. Excellent. Same with TLOTR.

So, like many, I was excited for the Desolation of Smaug. And I haven’t been this disappointed in a movie since Terminator: Salvation, which I almost walked out on several times. I have never rented the movie, I sure didn’t purchase it, and I do not watch it when it’s on TV. That’s how I felt about TDOS. I suppose I’m in the vast minority of viewers. It’s trending pretty well on Rotten Tomatoes, both for critics and viewers. It was good visually, but not as majestic as the first. It was mostly dreary, which is kinda the scenery in the book. They missed some serious chances with the forest scenes and Lonely Mountain scenes. The acting was excellent, though. That said, I supposed I might have enjoyed it if I had never read the book. It was “based on a book written by J.R.R. Tolkien”, in the sense that someone read the book, created a Cliff Notes version, translated it into ancient Sumerian, described it to their drunk “black sheep of the family” uncle, who translated it back to English, then created an interpretive dance play, which was describe to the cousins of the screen-writers of Desolation who were on caffeine and donuts highs.

We’re not talking “taking liberties” in order to create some extra drama and stuff, folks, we’re talking about people who willfully changed the movie so there’s very little in common with the book besides names and locations. This is possibly one of the worst book-to-film adaptation of all time. It’s right up there with Sleepy Hollow (the only thing in common with the book were the names of the main characters and the location), Logan’s Run, Dune, Eragon, Starship Troopers and The Scarlet Letter, among others, as the worst adaptations.

Slight spoilers below the fold

Read More »

Read: The Hobbit: The Desolation Of Smaug – My Take »

Posted in Film | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Something Nice For Trish

By William Teach December 17, 2013 – 2:06 pm

I may not always respond in the comments, but I do read them. Here’s one of the best Christmas songs, by Nat King Cole

OK, that was more funny than nice. Awesome Christmas stuff below the fold

Read More »

Read: Something Nice For Trish »

Posted in Christmas, Humor | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach December 17, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is a flooded hot world at Christmas-time, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Scared Monkeys, with a post on how well Fox News is doing in the ratings war.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Reddit Bans Climate Realists

By William Teach December 17, 2013 – 11:38 am

Who’s shocked?

Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. Why don’t all newspapers do the same?

That’s the headline at Grist, which, unshockingly, takes the typical fascist route in wanting to shut down all debate that disagrees. Whether it was written by the writer of the article, Nathan Allen (who is a “scientist” and moderator at Reddit), is unknown

The forum, known as /r/science, provides a digital space for discussions about recent, peer-reviewed scientific publications. This puts us (along with /r/AskScience) on the front line of the science-public interface. On our little page, scientists and nonscientists can connect through discussions on everything from subatomic particles to interstellar astrophysics. (snip)

Some issues, however, are particularly contentious. While evolution and vaccines do have their detractors, no topic consistently evokes such rude, uninformed, and outspoken opinions as climate change.

Instead of the reasoned and civil conversations that arise in most threads, when it came to climate change the comment sections became a battleground. Rather than making thoughtful arguments based on peer-reviewed science to refute man-made climate change, contrarians immediately resorted to aggressive behaviors. On one side, deniers accused any of the hard-working scientists whose research supported and furthered our understanding of man-made climate change of being bought by “Big Green.” On the other side, deniers were frequently insulted and accused of being paid to comment on reddit by “Big Oil.”

So, obviously, Reddit has banned….the “deniers”, rather than the “hard-working scientists”. Anyhow, most of the article is whiny, simply highlighting that Warmists cannot stand up to people questioning them with facts and reality, which is the norm. And questioning of these “hard-working scientists” is deemed “trolling”.

As a scientist myself, it became clear to me that the contrarians were not capable of providing the science to support their “skepticism” on climate change.

A scientists, huh?

When 97 percent of climate scientists agree that man is changing the climate, we would hope the comments would at least acknowledge if not reflect such widespread consensus. Since that was not the case, we needed more than just an ad hoc approach to correct the situation.

If you’re going to mention “consensus”, you aren’t practicing science. Furthermore, that 97% meme has been fully discredited many, many times.

As a site, reddit is passionately dedicated to free speech..

Because they believe in “free speech”, they’ll ban any dissenters.

So if a half-dozen volunteers can keep a page with more than 4 million users from being a microphone for the antiscientific, is it too much to ask for newspapers to police their own editorial pages as proficiently?

In other words, Warmists love free speech and freedom of the press so much that they want to ban any discourse that diverges from the official cult doctrine.

Read: Reddit Bans Climate Realists »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming, Liberal World | Comments Off on Reddit Bans Climate Realists | Trackback URL

Bummer: 8 Ways “Climate Change” Is Ruining Christmas

By William Teach December 17, 2013 – 9:16 am

There is a 9th: having to listen to Warmists whine about Hotcoldwetdry ruining Christmas as they drive around in fossil fueled vehicles. Continuing the 25 Days Of Climate Christmas

8 Ways Climate Change Is Wrecking Christmas

Santa and his polar bear neighbors in the North Pole aren’t the only ones dealing with the consequences of climate change. At first glance, the climate change in the United States might seem less dramatic than melting icebergs in the Arctic. But scientists are starting to figure out how greenhouse-gas emissions are beginning to threaten some of the things Americans love the most—including holiday traditions like ham, trees and wine. “Global warming has certainly been observed very robustly, and we understand the processes by which humans are causing it quite well,” explains Noah Diffenbaugh, a Woods Institute for the Environment fellow and assistant professor of earth science at Stanford University. “But there’s also a lot of uncertainty in what will happen in future…what will people do in response to climate change?”

Strange. No statistically significant warming in 17 years. No warming during the 21st Century. 4 out of the past 5 winters, particularly in Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and parts of the Southern Hemisphere being harsh, with a potential harsh 2013-2014 winter being brutal. Most of the Antarctic getting colder. Global temperatures refusing to cooperate with Warmist models. Calls for an ice free Arctic in 2013 failing. In fact, there was a massive rebound in the Arctic this year. Hurricane activity down. Wildfires down. Etc. So on.

Anyhow, here’s what your use of a fossil fueled vehicles (yes, you, I blame you, not me, using Warmist doctrine of it always being the fault of Someone Else) is threatening when it comes to Christmas

  1. Your Holiday Ham – cause corn fields are threatened by drought and flood that never happened before 1980. Except for the massive corn harvests in 2013.
  2. Christmas Trees – because soil composition was always the same before 1980, and there were no pests
  3. Your Favorite Gift – which is supposedly blue jeans, but drought is affecting cotton, and “water shortages could threaten the very existence of the jeans industry” – not too alarmist, eh?
  4. Holiday Cookies – supposedly cookies with peanut butter will suffer, because it was never hot before 1980. This one is really a load of mule fritters, claiming that the harvest was down due to a few degrees of warm weather, when in fact there were record US harvests. And any negative effects were based on cool weather.
  5. California Wine – this might possibly maybe “could” be affected due to warming “projections”. Because, obviously, if the temperature decides it wants to start increasing again, it is against the Laws Of Reality to move production northwards.
  6. Oysters – here’s the ocean acidification argument, all based on “models”
  7. Your Holiday Candy – coco production could be harmed by a simple 1C increase or something in 2050, so “If there’s ever a reason to switch to energy-efficient lightbulbs and drive less, this is it!”
  8. Your Morning Cup o’ Joe – another one of those “this might happen” 20-100 years down the road. Except, there were massive harvests in 2013 and 2012, among others.

So, there you go, Christmas will be ruined sometime in the far flung future.

Read: Bummer: 8 Ways “Climate Change” Is Ruining Christmas »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, AGW Scaremongering, Christmas, Global Warming | Comments Off on Bummer: 8 Ways “Climate Change” Is Ruining Christmas | Trackback URL

The Small Business “Affordable” Care Act Bomb To Hit By Next October

By William Teach December 17, 2013 – 8:32 am

Another day, another big concern with Obamacare

(Politico) Think the canceled health policies hurt the Obamacare cause? There’s another political time bomb lurking that could explode not too long before next year’s elections: rate hikes for small businesses.

Like the canceled individual health plans, it’s another example of a tradeoff that health care experts have long known about, as the new rules for health insurance prices create winners and losers. But most Americans won’t become aware of it until some small business employees learn that their premiums are going up because of a law called — oops — the Affordable Care Act.

Some will learn the opposite, that their premiums are going down because of the law. But as we saw with the canceled individual health plans, it’s the losers who will get most of the attention.

And the timing will be terrible for Democrats: A lot of those small businesses will have to start dealing with their new prices in October — just in time for Republicans to make it an issue in their mid-term election campaigns.

As it is, small businesses are already dealing with issues such as moving employees to part-time, reticence to hire, and seeing their plans dropped.

Here’s why: Next year, small business health plans — generally those that cover less than 100 workers — will have to comply with a wide range of new rules, particularly the ones that say employees can’t be charged more if they have health problems. Their premiums will only vary based on their age, whether they have individual or family coverage, what part of the country they live in, and whether they use tobacco — and older workers won’t be able to be charged more than three times as much as younger ones.

Many companies wisely made changes early, allowing them to keep those old plans through 2014

But there will be a cluster of December renewals, industry officials say, and those small businesses will get the first look at their new prices in October — right at the height of an election that’s increasingly being framed as a referendum on the impact of Obamacare.

Obviously, Politico is Very Concerned as to how this will play out for Mr. Obama and Democrats come the midterms. That’s generally what Politico does. And they are concerned that not only will employees, mostly in those small businesses with 51-100 employees, see their premiums and deductibles spike, but that the companies will decide that it is more cost effective to dump the company health insurance offerings and pay the fine/tax/fee. But, hey, don’t worry, I’m sure that Obama will trot out his “nobody’s madder than me” line, and will surely blame Someone Else for daring to ….. bring the issue up.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: The Small Business “Affordable” Care Act Bomb To Hit By Next October »

Posted in Barry Obama, Democrats, Healthcare | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove