…is the heat that is hiding in the deep ocean, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Political Realities, with a post on yet another Liberal blaming Bush for Obama’s Syria dithering.
Read: If All You See… »
…is the heat that is hiding in the deep ocean, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Political Realities, with a post on yet another Liberal blaming Bush for Obama’s Syria dithering.
Read: If All You See… »
It’s not the first time recent conflicts are being blamed on “climate change”, ie, because you, dear reader, drove a fossil fueled vehicle and probably have an ice maker in your fridge. Nor will it be the last. But Warmists see an opening to push their cult like dogma when it comes to Syria
(Motherboard) Most Americans’ understanding of the root of the Syrian conflict boils down to something like this: Bashar al-Assad is a sociopathic maniac who’d rather mow down his own people than relinquish dictatorship. While that’s undoubtedly part of the equation, there’s obviously a lot more at play than that. And some of the blame, scholars argue, can be traced all the way to climate change.
As was the case with many of the nations touched by the Arab Spring, a large swath of Syria’s citizenry wasn’t just poor, oppressed, and disenfranchised by an authoritarian regime—they were starving, too. And they were starving because Syria had been stricken by a five year drought believed to be exacerbated by climate change. There was eventually too little rain to even grow crops or to feed livestock.
William Polk, an ex-US State Department advisor, has written a meticulously detailed account of the genesis of the conflict over at The Atlantic. As Digby writes at Alternet, “It is the most cogent recitation and analysis of the Syrian crisis that I’ve seen.”
It is also an exceptionally detailed case study of how, exactly, climate change can directly influence—even precipitate—a violent conflict. Considering Syria’s path to war, step-by-step, provides a powerful breakdown of what might continue to happen in the future, so as long as the globe continues to warm, the food system continues to be in thrall to commodity traders and market swings, and vast swaths of the global population remain impoverished.
See? It’s so simple. Colleges refuse to divest from evil fossil fuels, and the next thing you know Assad (or someone) is using chemical weapons. You refuse to purchase a Chevy Volt and keep your AC at 80 degrees, and I saw you eating that cheeseburger and CO2 infused soft drink, so we can further Blame you.
The article comes via Climate Depot, which notes that the drought of the 1933 was blamed on the yo-yo, ending with Syria banning it.
BTW, who would possibly have thought that somewhere in the middle east would experience drought?
Secretary Of State John “Waffles” Kerry offers up an opinion piece at the far left Huffington Post which attempts to make the case to the far left that going all bomby on Syria is the Right Thing To Do, which starts off with a headline taking Obama’s line about it being the world setting the red line
A Yes Vote of Conscience for the World’s Red Line
I’m sometimes asked how, as someone who testified 42 years ago against the Vietnam War in which I had fought, I could testify in favor of action to hold the Assad regime accountable today.
The answer is, I spoke my conscience in 1971 and I’m speaking my conscience now in 2013.
Secretary Hagel and I support limited military action against Syrian regime targets not because we’ve forgotten the lessons and horrors of war — but because we remember them.
Make no mistake: If another Vietnam or another Iraq were on the table in the Situation Room, I wouldn’t be sitting at the witness table before Congress advocating for action.
Right. He’d be for the action before he was against it (for partisan political reasons). Funny how he remembers the horrors of war after 1,400 people were killed, but not another 100K plus.
I spent two years of my life working to stop the war in Vietnam, and made enemies and lost friends because of my decision to speak my mind.
Yes, you spent two years denigrating and slurring your fellow Americans who were serving/served in Vietnam, most of whom were drafted. You complained about Nixon “lying” in 1968, even though he was not yet in office, and even seemed to be blaming him for the 16,000 US deaths that year. You were not a good person, and deserved all the scorn and loss of friends that accompanied your horrible testimony.
As part of that effort, this weekend I will meet with European Foreign Ministers in Vilnius, Lithuania, where I will continue to lay out the evidence we have collected and seek to broaden support for a limited military response to deter the Assad regime from launching another chemical weapons attack.
Whew! If Lithuania joins up, that’s huge!
So what’s at stake here that caused the President to come to the Congress and ask Congress to authorize action?
Those of us who believe in the international order and believe in efforts to ensure that certain international norms against chemical weapons are respected — we have much at stake in this debate.
One would think some sort of rationale would be laid out which would provide reasons beyond the moral, alas, no, other than maybe, possibly, chemical weapons would be used against some other country like “Israel, Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq”. Fortunately, Kerry, doesn’t appear to have a problem with bombs and bullets.
And I have no doubt that for anyone who wants to see a diplomatic solution to two of the world’s most pressing proliferation challenges — Iran and North Korea — ask yourselves: Are these two countries more or less likely to plunge ahead with proliferation and provocation if they see Assad’s actions go unanswered? I would argue that we all know the answer to this question: They are more likely to do so.
They are more likely to be emboldened by the waffling, vacillation, and incompetence of Team Obama, along with the notion that they’ll be informed of exactly where, what, and how the US would strike. Also, that Team Obama is unable to build a coalition beyond (maybe) France, and is now down to attempting to get Lithuania to help out.
This is a vote of conscience. And I know that the same reasons that compelled me to join the United States Navy and serve, and the same reasons that compelled me to speak out against the war in which I’d fought, tell me now that the cause of conscience and conviction is the cause for action in Syria.
What of all those Coptic Christians being slaughtered in Egypt? Or those Christians being slaughter in Darfur? Do the people being killed by guns and bombs in Syria count for naught? If this was such an easy decision, more nations would be joining, Team Obama would take it to the United Nations, and Americans would be behind an military action. They all obviously aren’t. This has little to nothing to do with American security or interests.
Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.
Read: Conscience Of The World Kerry Forgets To Mention What Syria Has To Do With US National Security »
I was really, really, really hoping this would be part of the White House’s Blamestorming as to yet another “eh” and “blah” jobs report. Alas, no
(Telegraph) The US porn industry is latest reason being given for the worse-than-expected non-farm payroll. The Washington Post’s Wonkblog reports :
The adult film industry appears to have made a disappointing August jobs report look even worse. The report shows carnage in the movie business. It lost 22,000 jobs on the month, or nearly 6 percent of its total jobs.
Of course, that was expected to be temporary, due to a temporary shutdown because of an HIV scare, as one actress apparently tested HIV positive.
As the Administration stresses every month, the monthly employment and unemployment figures can be volatile, and payroll employment estimates can be subject to substantial revision. Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is informative to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.  Nevertheless, incoming economic data broadly suggest that the recovery continues to make progress. It is therefore essential that policymakers avoid “self-inflicted wounds†that could derail the recovery and stay focused on policies that will help sustain and boost the pace of job creation.
Ed Morrissey breaks down all the numbers (except the porn part), and notes a jump of 516,000 who disappeared from the workforce in despair. I’m sure they’re thrilled that the Admin sees progress in the recovery. Which has been going on for over 4 years now.
Read: Weaker Than Expected Jobs Report Partly Due To Adult Film Layoffs »
…is a horrid ocean that will rise up and cover all humanity in the blink of an eye, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jammie Wearing Fools, with post noting that the Congressional Black Caucus was told to keep quiet on Syria.
Read: If All You See… »
And so are you for driving it. Here’s The Washington Post’s hyper-Warmist Jason Samenow (via Junk Science)
Global warming in one unmistakably compelling chart
If you have any doubt the balance of the globe has warmed over the last century, view this chart:
Produced by NASA, the chart illustrates how temperatures have compared to “normal†(or the 1951-1980 average) from 1880 to present, from pole to pole (-90 latitude to 90 latitude).
What I see is a few things. First, how are the temps shown during the 1951-1980 period, supposed the “average”, warmer than the time period considered average? Second, we already know from actual data that the time period that Warmists use as a baseline for “average”, of which there is no such thing on Earth, was one of flat if not cooling temperatures. Remember how climatologists were very concerned about a coming ice age right up to the end of the 1970’s?
Third, isn’t this exactly what we would expect during a warm period which follows a cool period which followed a warm period which followed a cool period etc. all the way back over at least the last 7,000 years during the Holocene? Yes. Yes it is.
Also, it’s not like NASA (or any other Warmist leaning organization, say, the NCDC) has been caught manipulating data before.
Read: NASA Offers Hyperventilating Graphic To Prove Your Car Is Evil »
“But, but, but, it could have included some components of Hotcoldwetdry too!!!! Please, believe us, we have bills to pay” (via Junk Science)
(Financial Times) Cities along the US east coast face a looming “sea level rise crisis†from a growing number of disasters as severe as hurricane Sandy, according to research on links between extreme weather and climate change.
Except, sea level height increases are pretty much average for what one would expect during a mild warm period. The 20th century average was about 8 inches. The average over the last 7,000 years, since the end of the massive sea rise post-glacial age is…6-8 inches. One would expect much more during a warm period, because sea rise would be much less if not negative during the cool periods.
Human-made global warming was a factor in at least six intense weather events last year, the study shows, from the superstorm that hit New York in October to the record melting of the Arctic and US heatwaves.
Is “climate change”, ie, man induced hotcoldwetdry, involved in 4 of the last 5 winters being harsh around most of the world? How about Europe and other parts of the world having virtually no spring in 2013? How about Antarctic sea ice setting a record for growth? How about this cool year, where over 60% of the US being at or below average? How about the Arctic doing very well this year, thank you very much? How about the Arctic not being ice free in 2013 as Warmists predicted?
Climate change also had a role in Spain’s drought and torrential New Zealand rains, though natural weather variation was a leading culprit in each case, and no strong connection was found in other prominent 2012 weather events such as the US drought.
“We don’t have evidence that we are seeing things that could not have happened without natural weather variability doing its stuff,†said Peter Stott of the UK Met Office, one of the report’s editors. “But potentially climate change can in some cases add something on top.â€
Of course Stott had to add in part of their religion. But what he’s mostly referring to would be localized effects from the Urban Heat Island Effect. And let’s not forget that since 2005 landfalling hurricane activity has dropped precipitously. No Category 3+ strikes since October 2005. Only one hurricane, Issac, since October 2008 (and it could be argued that Issac wasn’t a hurricane). Sandy was not a hurricane at time of landfall, per windspeed. What made it so bad was the combination of a really cold cold front.
Anyhow, admitting one has a problem is the first step in solving it. Admitting nature is the primary driver is a step towards actual science.