Warmist: Increase In Snow Cover Is Cause By….Global Warming

By William Teach February 23, 2013 – 12:18 pm

Cult

(AccuWeather) Has there been a noticeable decrease in snow cover across the northern Hemisphere since the mid 1960’s?

Well, it depends on the time of the year.

My friends from the Rutgers University Global Snow Lab (my alma mata 89′) keep a close track of global snow cover and have data that go back to the 1960’s.

For the month of January, there has actually been an upward trend in snow cover over the past dozen years. Part of the reason for this is that the significant warming in the high latitudes over the past 20 years has caused an increase in moisture (warmer air holds more moisture than cold) and thus more snowfall over areas that are normally quite dry during the winter.

See? There’s nothing that can disprove their pet cult. Under their doctrines, snowball earth was caused by too much heat.

Read: Warmist: Increase In Snow Cover Is Cause By….Global Warming »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Most Miserable U.S. Cities Are Surprisingly All Liberal Cities

By William Teach February 23, 2013 – 8:44 am

Forbes has put together the most miserable U.S. cities

Economist Arthur Okun developed the original Misery Index in the 1960s. It combines unemployment and inflation (and was 10.2 last year nationally, down from an 18-year high of 12.1 in 2011).

Our look at misery is more localized, and includes unemployment, as well as other things that aggravate people.

This year we examined nine factors for the 200 largest metro areas in the U.S. The metrics include the serious: violent crime, unemployment, foreclosures, taxes (income and property) and home prices. We also include less weighty, but still important quality-of-life issues like commute times and weather.

We tweaked the methodology in this year’s list in response to feedback from readers, dropping our rankings of both pro sports team success and political corruption, since both were based on regional, rather than city-specific data. We also added a new measure—net migration—which we see as a clear gauge of whether or not residents feel a community is worth living in. Detroit, which ranked No. 2 last year, also would have finished No. 1 under the previous methodology (click here for more details about the criteria for the list).

And how’d that turn out?

  1. Detroit, MI
  2. Flint, MI
  3. Rockford, IL
  4. Chicago, IL
  5. Modesto, CA
  6. Vallejo, CA
  7. Warren, MI
  8. Stockton, CA
  9. Lake County, IL
  10.  New York, NY
  11. Toledo, Ohio
  12. St. Louis, Mo.
  13. Camden, NJ
  14. Milwaukee, Wisc
  15. Atlantic City, NJ
  16. Atlanta, Ga.
  17. Cleveland, Oh
  18. Poughkeepsie, NY
  19. Gary, Ind
  20. Youngstown, Oh

Every single one of those cities votes overwhelmingly for Democrats. You’re saying “woah, woah, Teach, Atlanta and St. Louis are in states that vote Republican. That means you are a complete and utter liar, and how dare you make this whole story up!!!!1!!!” Ah, but Atlanta is mostly in Fulton County, which voted 64-34% for Obama over Romney. DeKalb County, which includes a tiny bit of Atlanta, voted even higher for Obama over Romney.

The city of St. Louis, considered independent of a county, voted 82.7-16% for Obama.

Every single one of these cities is a recipient of massive liberal/Democrat policies and governance. Their citizens are overwhelmingly liberal. The funny (not ha-ha) part is that liberals are abandoning these cities in droves (those that can escape), which is one of the article measurements. And where do they tend to move? Areas that aren’t practicing far left policies and ideas, then these, let’s call them…..a**holes, bring the same Leftists ideas which destroyed the cities they’ve abandoned to other cities.

Read: Most Miserable U.S. Cities Are Surprisingly All Liberal Cities »

Posted in Liberal World | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Hooray, Obama Proposes A Replacement Plan For Sequestration!

By William Teach February 23, 2013 – 8:17 am

I guess David Brooks is wrong: Obama does have a plan. Or at least an outline of a plan. Whether there are any actual details and legislation that can be voted on is unknown. Here’s Jennifer Palmieri blogging for Obama

A Balanced Plan to Avert the Sequester and Reduce the Deficit

Good thing America doesn’t have over $16 trillion in debt.

In eight days, apocalyptic automatic cuts are slated to take effect, threatening tens of millions of jobs, and cutting vital services for children, seniors, people with mental illness and our men and women in uniform, forcing them to live on the streets and be part of involuntary servitude. 50% of hospital will close, we’ll have to lay off 90% of First Responders, all of our Navy ships will be out of fuel and floating around, our submarines will sink to the bottom of the ocean, our planes will fall out of the sky. People will be stuck in 10 hour lines at airports, jails will have to close leading to cannibalism, and, worse, Andrews Air Force Base golf course will close. Most schools will close, turning our kids into rebels without a cause. Bears will eat tourists in our national parks without the hand of park rangers to protect them. Did I mention that Andrews golf course will close?

We’re dooooooooomed!

Only Congress can avoid this self-inflicted wound to our economy and middle class families, and the only thing standing in the way of a solution today is Congressional Republicans’ refusal to even consider closing tax loopholes that benefit wealthy Americans and well-connected corporations. The President and Congressional Democrats have put forward solutions to avoid these cuts and allow time for both sides to work on a long-term, balanced solution to our deficit challenges.

I love how the official White House website has been turned into a Daily Kos diary. Then we get some yapping about Obama having already reduced spending $1.4 trillion, which is a bunch of mule fritters, especially considering that the federal budget keeps going up and up and up, as does the debt. But, Obama’s got a plan!

Remember, this is laid out over 10 years. $100 billion for non-defense discretionary spending? A pittance. $400 billion saved in medical outlays? That means denial of service, including medicine and through the IPAB (“death panels”). $130 billion in Social Security cuts? In practice it’ll never happen. And let’s not forget $50 billion in new spending on infrastructure, as if Obama hadn’t already wasted $850 billion in borrowed money on Stimulus.

Unsurprisingly, he’s big on taxes, to the tune on $580 billion. But, even if people don’t change their behavior to avoid those taxes and the money comes in (unlikely), we are still talking about 10 years. Like Sequester, this is a joke. $1.8 billion over 10 years is a pittance when we’re running trillion dollar deficits and adding over a trillion a year to the debt.

Sadly, few Americans are willing to make cuts. We’re one step closer to being Greece.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Hooray, Obama Proposes A Replacement Plan For Sequestration! »

Posted in Barry Obama, Current Affairs, Economy | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Surprise! Climastrologers Want Massive Taxes To Stop Bad Weather

By William Teach February 22, 2013 – 8:27 pm

Via Tom Nelson, who notes that our new Climate Astrologer Sec. Of State John Kerry (who has many homes and fossil fueled vehicles) says “not going to happen”

(Santa Fe New Mexican) Future generations face sea-level rises of 18 to 27 feet, extinction of 30 percent to 50 percent of animal species and other catastrophes if carbon-based fuels continue to be used at the same rate as today, a climate scientist told a group at the Santa Fe Institute on Thursday.

James Hansen, physicist, astronomer and adjunct professor at Columbia University’s Earth Institute, said average temperatures have risen eight-tenths of a degree centigrade over the last century, and efforts to stem climate change will be ineffectual as long as fossil fuels remain the cheapest form of energy.

No scare mongering there. Hansen goes on to whine about fossil fuels and….hey, wait, how did Hansen get to Santa Fe?

Hansen proposed a new tax for carbon emissions from oil, gas and coal, collected at the wellhead, mine or port of entry, increasing $10 per ton annually for 30 years, with proceeds distributed directly to the public, which in a decade would mean $2,000 to $3,000 per resident, or $6,000 to $9,000 per family.

Not mentioned in the article is that under Hansen’s proposal the money would magically come back to US citizens. Insert GIF of someone laughing here. Hansen also discusses essentially destroying international commerce, in that you would pay way more for items from other countries (and even other States) over local products.

“This would affect your lifestyle and you could make changes. When you get your new car, you better consider a more efficient one. … Are you going to commute 50 miles a day every day?”

This from a guy who constantly takes fossil fueled travel all over the country and world. Funny how Warmists mostly refuse to change their own lifestyles. I blame them for bad weather events.

Read: Surprise! Climastrologers Want Massive Taxes To Stop Bad Weather »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Carbon Credits, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

What Happens When Concealed Carry Permits Are Legalized?

By William Teach February 22, 2013 – 3:59 pm

Doug Ross calls this the “one chart that says it all about women and safety”

That’s what happened when Colorado State University legalized concealed carry in 2003. Perhaps vomiting or urinating on oneself or blowing a “rape whistle” isn’t really the best idea for defense. (originally from Fire Andrea Mitchell)

Read: What Happens When Concealed Carry Permits Are Legalized? »

Posted in 2nd Amendment | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 22, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled truck causing the planet to boil, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jammie Wearing Fools, with a post on irony and Bob Menendez.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Change: The Skeptics Case In 12 Minutes

By William Teach February 22, 2013 – 10:51 am

This is a long video (12 minutes, obviously), but well worth the watch

This is accompanied by a link to Dr. David M.W. Evans’ website with charts and graphs and data and facts. Like me, Mr. Evans used to be a Believer, and is now a Climate Realist. He is showing that all the climate models are pretty much mule fritters. Something we’ve all know for a while now.

PS: this in no way means that the global climate didn’t warm post-Little Ice Age (it has) nor should it conclude that we are headed for a cool period.

Read: Climate Change: The Skeptics Case In 12 Minutes »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Gun Grabber States Consider Requiring Insurance

By William Teach February 22, 2013 – 8:13 am

Just more proof that this debate is about doing everything possible to burden legal gun owners with draconian rules while failing to go after criminals with guns

(NY Times) Both sides in a nation sharply divided over guns seem to agree on at least one thing: a bigger role for the insurance industry in a heavily armed society. But just what that role should be, and whether insurers will choose to accept it, are much in dispute.

By “both sides”, do writers Michael Cooper and Mary Williams Walsh mean liberals and Progressives? Actually, what they’re referring to is that groups like the NRA and United States Concealed Carry Association recommend and/or offer insurance for gun owners. The difference here is that it is voluntary, while many gun grabber States would make insurance mandatory, and you can bet your bottom dollar that it will be expensive and burdensome.

Lawmakers in at least half a dozen states, including California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York and Pennsylvania, have proposed legislation this year that would require gun owners to buy liability insurance — much as car owners are required to buy auto insurance. Doing so would give a financial incentive for safe behavior, they hope, as people with less dangerous weapons or safety locks could qualify for lower rates.

So, if you’re a tiny woman and want a scary looking gun with a collapsible stock which makes it easier to hold, say, a Bushmaster .223, you’re rates would be sky high (hey, you can always vomit on yourself instead to stop a rapist!). But, if you buy a Vepr-Pioneer .223, which is harder to hold for a small woman, you can save money. As for safe behavior, will that include insurance agents and law enforcement making random and un-announced visits?

“I believe that if we get the private sector and insurance companies involved in gun safety, we can help prevent a number of gun tragedies every year,” said David P. Linsky, a Democratic state representative in Massachusetts who wants to require gun owners to buy insurance. He believes it will encourage more responsible behavior and therefore reduce accidental shootings. “Insurance companies are very good at evaluating risk factors and setting their premiums appropriately,” he added.

What about criminals who engage in violence with guns, Mr. Linksy? Like most of the gun grabbers, Linsky is silent on that point. And all that this gun grabbing will do is make law abiding citizens more prone to being the recipients of criminal behavior. Don’t worry, though, because law enforcement will be around sometime after the assault to…check to make sure you have all your guns locked up tight and your insurance is in order.

Read: Gun Grabber States Consider Requiring Insurance »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Politico: Is Obama Overplaying Sequestor Hand?

By William Teach February 22, 2013 – 7:45 am

A random act of journalism from Carrie Budoff Brown and Jake Sherman

(Politico) President Barack Obama’s greatest adversary in the latest budget battle isn’t the Republican leadership in Congress — it’s his confidence in his own ability to force a win.

He has been so certain of his campaign skills that he didn’t open a line of communication with House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell until Thursday, a week before the spending ax hits. And when they did finally hear from Obama, the calls were perfunctory, with no request to step up negotiations or invitations to the White House.

Is anyone particularly surprised that Mr. Obama didn’t bother talking to Boehner nor McConnell until yesterday? I wouldn’t be surprised if he had failed to discuss this with Congressional Democrats. It’s all part of Obama’s crisis creation governance system, based on Cloward-Piven. We’ve seen this time and time again, it follow the same pattern. He waits till the last minute, he demonizes and insults his opponents (before even engaging them in discourse), he scare-mongers in front of groups of human shields, and also tends to scuttle any deals which Congressional Republicans and Dems have worked out. Plus more demonizing and insults.

That’s because Obama’s all-in on an outside strategy, doing just about everything other than holding serious talks with Republicans. In the last two days alone, he’s courted local TV anchors, called in a select group of White House correspondents to talk off-the-record, chatted up black broadcasters, and announced plans to stump next week at Virginia’s Newport News Shipyard. Throughout, he’s talked in tough terms that signal little interest in compromise — or suggestion of backing down.

All this is guaranteed to create a crisis without attempting to do anything to mitigate or solve the issue. It’s part of the Neverending Campaign, but campaigning is not governing.

White House aides argued that a precedent had been set in the short-term deal by paying down the sequester with a share of spending cuts and tax hikes. They also rationalized that the reprieve would give both sides some space to figure out a solution.

But there has been no discernible effort by the White House to work on a bill that might pass.

Well, you know, golf lessons and hitting the links with Tiger Woods. One has to prioritize one’s calendar, and Obama probably understands the reality of the situation, namely that the Sequester is meaningless. It contains no cuts, it’s simply a slight reduction in the rate of growth, and will probably be blown off in a year or two. But, hey, once a community agitator always a community agitator. For someone who was handed a Nobel Peace Prize, Mr. Obama sure likes picking fights.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Politico: Is Obama Overplaying Sequestor Hand? »

Posted in Barry Obama, Current Affairs | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

MTGP: IPCC Head Admits Global Warming Standstill

By William Teach February 21, 2013 – 3:05 pm

Don’t worry, he’ll find a way around this

(GWPF) The UN’s climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, has acknowledged a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed recently by Britain’s Met Office, but said it would need to last “30 to 40 years at least” to break the long-term global warming trend.

This comes from an The Australian article beyond a pay wall. Pachauri has absolutely no problem Moving The Goal Posts with the “30-40 years” thing. Warmists see a thunderstorm or a fart in the wind and blame AGW

Dr Pachauri said global average temperatures had plateaued at record levels and that the halt did not disprove global warming.

Of course not. Nothing will ever disprove AGW in the minds of the Warmists. If the Earth went into an actual glaciation period this year they’d blame it on Mankind.

“The climate is changing because of natural factors and the impact of human actions,” Dr Pachauri said.

“If you look at temperatures going back 150 years, there are clearly fluctuations which have occurred largely as a result of natural factors: solar activity, volcanic activity and so on.

“What is quite perceptible is, in the last 50 years, the trend is upwards.

“This is not to say you won’t have ups and downs – you will – but what we should be concerned about is the trend, and that is being influenced now to a large extent by human actions.”

If it was mostly natural factors back then, why can’t it be mostly natural factors now?

Read: MTGP: IPCC Head Admits Global Warming Standstill »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove