If All You See…

By William Teach March 6, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible smartphone sucking down lots of energy causing the seas to boil, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Gay Patriot, with a post on smart phones and rude people

Read: If All You See… »

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

Hotcoldwetdry Is Apparently Now “Intergenerational Evil”

By William Teach March 6, 2013 – 10:49 am

And “the fundamental moral issue of our time”

Climate Change: Generational Evil (VIDEO)

The following video is a compact and emotionally moving overview of the problem and solutions to climate change. It is designed to be a quick and compelling way to get up to speed on the issue and help others do the same.

In 2012 the dangers of human-caused climate disturbance became undeniable, making this the fundamental moral issue of our time. The following features clips from the world’s most respected climate scientist, NASA’s James Hansen, and two key advocates for systemic change: Bill McKibben and David Roberts.

Read: Hotcoldwetdry Is Apparently Now “Intergenerational Evil” »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Dem: No Need For Guns, Just Tell Men Not To Rape

By William Teach March 6, 2013 – 7:30 am

If only there were laws against things like sexual assault, violence, and rape. Why has no one thought to pass laws?

(The Blaze) Appearing on Fox News Tuesday night, Democratic Strategist Zerlina Maxwell argued that preventing rape should start by simply “telling men not to rape women.” She was arguing against women using guns as a means of self-defense when she made the questionable remarks.

Host Sean Hannity began by slamming the “ignorant politicians” in Colorado for trying to remove a woman’s right to use a firearm to defend herself against an attacker via gun control legislation.

“I don’t think that we should be telling women anything,” Maxwell said. “I think we should be telling men not to rape women and start the conversation there.”

OK, let’s start the conversation there:

  • “Hey, men, don’t rape women”
  • Rapist: “go f*** yourself, I’ll do what I want”
  • Woman with gun about to be raped: “Stop! No? Blam. Blam blam blam. Try raping someone without a penis”

That went well!

“Criminals are not going to listen to that,” Hannity interjected.

Wait, it is against the law? But people still rape?

Instead, Maxwell, who is a rape survivor herself, said she wants women to “not be in this situation.” She added that if you “train” men not to be rapists, we can prevent rape.

Perhaps she could explain exactly how men could be trained? Because it is against the law, and men know they shouldn’t do it. Humans have been telling themselves for centuries that rape is bad. Except for the criminals, who do not care. Perhaps we could change the punishment for rape (and other crimes) to include corporal punishment, instead of a somewhat cushy life in jail. Bring back things like the stocks, hard labor, and lashings. Remember that kid, Michael P. Fay, who received 4 lashes from a cane for vandalism in Singapore? I bet he never did that again. And Singapore, with corporal punishment, has one of the lowest crime rates in the world.

Read: Dem: No Need For Guns, Just Tell Men Not To Rape »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Amendment To Continuing Resolution Would Bar Obama Golf Outings On Public Dime

By William Teach March 6, 2013 – 7:01 am

At least until PINO Obama resumes White House tours

(Daily Caller) Republican Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert introduced an amendment to the Continuing Resolution that would not provide the White House with any taxpayer funds to transport President Barack Obama to and from any golf course until they resume White House public tours.

In a House floor speech, Gohmert said he filed the amendment with the House Rules Committee.

“None of the funds made available by a division of this act may be used to transport the president to or from a golf course until public tours of the White House resume,” the amendment reads.

“That way we will both work together so the president will not able to take a golf outing that causes 341 more federal officials to be furloughed and lose their job at least temporarily,” Gohmert said.

Exactly why did Obama cancel White House tours? If I had to hazard a guess, it was in a pique of fit, in order to make a statement. Plus, really, why would he want those kinds of people hanging around his house? But, mostly because he’s a chump who wants to make the Sequestration as painful as possible. Because getting a slight reduction in the increased appropriations is a problem for Democrats.

Again, here’s how it works. Let’s say that The Department Of Transporting Obama To Campaign Speeches received $1 billion during the previous fiscal year. They were scheduled to get $1.1 billion this fiscal year. Instead, they will get $1.08 billion, which apparently means doooooooooooom and that the agency cannot operate with more than they previously received.

Anyhow, many Republicans are making fun of Obama for this shutdown of tours. But, here’s a question: why in the hell are we doing a CR when Congress should be passing an ****ing budget? Was that not part of the deal to raise taxes?

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Amendment To Continuing Resolution Would Bar Obama Golf Outings On Public Dime »

Posted in Barry Obama, Economy, GOP | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Awesome! Mother Jones Offers Cheat Sheet To Win Climate Arguments For Warmists

By William Teach March 5, 2013 – 4:16 pm

It’s very amusing

“I don’t see what all those environmentalists are worried about,” sneers your Great Uncle Joe. “Carbon dioxide is harmless, and great for plants!”

Okay. Take a deep breath. If you’re not careful, comments like this can result in dinner-table screaming matches. Luckily, we have a secret weapon: A flowchart that will help you calmly slay even the most outlandish and annoying of climate-denying arguments:

You’ll have to go over to Mother Jones to see the whole amusing thing at full size. What? You don’t want to? Well, I have a smaller size version below the fold

I’d LOVE for any Warmist to attempt to win an argument with me using this claptrap. Consensus is not science. It’s politics. The earth has warmed a whopping .28F since 1990. There has been no warming over the last 16 years (see Andrew Bolt for more on this insignificant warming using the Warmists favorite sources). And, really, nothing from this scientifically shows that the current warm period, which started around the mid-1800’s, is anything but mostly natural.

Wendy McElroy calls this “how to lose a climate argument, and offers some excellent points

  • You assume your conclusion. Granting that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, there is little evidence that man’s CO2 emissions are the dominant force in global temperature. For the last 17 years, CO2 has risen but temperature has remained flat, which suggests that some other influence is stronger than CO2. Also, “too much” warming is a judgment call — there is no scientific basis for how much is too much. Sea level isn’t rising any faster than it used to. The ocean isn’t becoming acid; at most, it’s becoming slightly less alkaline, and that change is well with natural variation from place to place. The scientific evidence is that there is no linkage between CO2 emissions and extreme weather, even the IPCC has admitted as much in their recent SREX report. And no one has named a single species that has gone extinct due to global warming.
  • Wrong. First, the 97% figure comes from just 77 scientists in a survey of over 3100 scientists. The survey-takers threw out over 3000 responses to get the result they wanted. Second, the survey did not ask whether climate change is “driven” by humans; it asked if human activity is a “significant contributing factor” in changing global temperature. “Significant” might be a 10% effect; and that activity might be deforestation or agriculture, rather than CO2 emissions.

Make sure to read her entire essay.  Quite frankly, a couple warmists at work tried these arguments with me last week, and it took everything I had to not obliterate them with facts.

Read: Awesome! Mother Jones Offers Cheat Sheet To Win Climate Arguments For Warmists »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 5, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is world where all the plant life is gone, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 1389 Blog, with a post on gun registration. Oh, and congrats on 1 million hits!

Read: If All You See… »

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

House To Hold Globull Warming Hearings Wednesday, Gore Effect To Hit D.C. Hard

By William Teach March 5, 2013 – 12:56 pm

Via Climate Depot (which has the long history of the Gore Effect), we learn that the House Subcommittee on Environment will hold a hearing on Wed. with Warmists Dr. Judith Curry (fossil fueled trip from Georgia), Dr. William Chameides (fossil fueled trip from Durham, NC), and Dr. Bjørn Lomborg (wait, he’s from Copenhagen? Did he take a rowboat to D.C.? Oh, and he does hold some “skeptical” views).

Hmm, and there’s a winter storm warning for Tuesday night through Wednesday for the D.C. area.

The Washington Post weather gang offers

The Snowquester is coming with its fervent attempt to make a dent in our snow deficit. This is easily the biggest snow threat we’ve seen over the past two winters. The main precipitation starts tonight as a rain/snow mix in most areas which transitions to a heavy, wet snow from west to east early Wednesday. Significant snow accumulations of 3-8 inches are likely (and even more, 6-12 inches, west of the Beltway). Snow ends Wednesday night with a gradual warming trend Thurday into the weekend.

Enjoy that hearing!

And, yeah, George Soros funded Climate Progress is blaming this storm on “climate change”.

Read: House To Hold Globull Warming Hearings Wednesday, Gore Effect To Hit D.C. Hard »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post: Hey, You Warmists Are Idiots And Fighting The Wrong Battle

By William Teach March 5, 2013 – 9:29 am

Well, the editorial board doesn’t specifically call the climate astrologers idiots, but, it’s implies it

Environmentalists are fighting the wrong battles

Really, they’ve been fighting the wrong battles for over 20 years. Instead of dealing with real environmental issues and wisely pushing for cost effective alternative energy, they’ve been hysterical and wrapping every real issue under the banner of hotcoldwetdry, er, climate change, attempting to control the weather, while virtually refusing to make anything other than token changes in their own lives. Anyhow

PRESIDENT OBAMA began his second term with a promise to push harder on energy and climate change. The events of the past week remind us that he won’t have to contend just with Republicans and coal-state Democrats determined to oppose reasonable measures to combat global warming. He will also have to sidestep environmentalists demanding that he fight the wrong battles.

Last Friday, the State Department released a new draft analysis of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, opposition to which has become a counterproductive obsession of many in the environmental movement. In its 2,000 pages, the report dismantled the case that nixing the Canadian pipeline must be a priority for anyone concerned about climate change, explaining anew that accepting or rejecting the project won’t make much difference to global emissions, U.S. oil consumption or world oil markets.

The Board points out that no matter what, that tar sand oil is going somewhere. Why not bring it to the United States, and, really, the world demands oil (I’m sensing the WP has an ulterior motive here, considering that they require lots of fossil fuels to do their jobs and deliver their papers).

They also tell the Warmists to not bother going after Obama’s pick to head the Energy Dept, Ernest Moniz, because Moniz supports expansion of nuclear power and natural gas. Warmists should stop have this “knee jerk opposition” to natural gas, which will supposedly reduce “carbon emissions” and can be done safely.

Instead of indulging in distractions, Mr. Obama and his friends in the environmental movement should push for policies that could make a significant difference by cutting demand for carbon-intensive fuels. As we argued Sunday, a carbon tax is a cause that really is worth fighting for.

Of course the WP likes a carbon tax. It most likely wouldn’t affect them. At least not in terms of having to purchase permits. When their own costs start spiking after they realize that the rosy prognostications by the Brookings Institution’s Adele Morris weren’t worth the tree killing paper they were written on, well, they might change their tune. And, darn it all, if there was only something the WP could do in their own lives to reduce their own “carbon emissions”.

But, still, the WP is correct in that Warmists are picking the wrong fight, especially when so many took lots of fossil fueled travel from around the country to attend the D.C. protest the other week.

Read: Washington Post: Hey, You Warmists Are Idiots And Fighting The Wrong Battle »

Posted in Carbon Credits, Climahypocrites, Collapsing Science, Enviroweenies, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Colorado Dem To Rape Survivor: Being Raped Is Less Dangerous Than Carrying A Gun

By William Teach March 5, 2013 – 9:11 am

The real war on women

(The Blaze) Rape survivor Amanda Collins bravely spoke about her horrific attack during a Monday legislative hearing concerning Colorado’s proposed ban on concealed firearms on college campuses. She explained how she wished she would’ve had a firearm to defend herself from her rapist, which could have possibly prevented the attack from occurring.

After calling her story “unsettling,” Democratic state Sen. Evie Hudak quickly went after Collins, saying “actually, statistics are not on your side, even if you had a gun.”

“You said that you were a martial arts student, I mean person, experienced in taekwondo, and yet because this individual was so large, was able to overcome you even with your skills, and chances are that if you had had a gun, then he would have been able to get that from you and possibly use it against you,” she added.

Hudak claimed that for every one woman who used a handgun to kill someone in self-defense, 83 were murdered by them.

“Respectfully senator, you weren’t there,” Collins said before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday. “Had I been carrying concealed, he wouldn’t have known I had my weapon; and I was there. I know without a doubt in my mind at some point I would’ve been able to stop my attack by using my firearm.”

Democrats would rather see women disarmed and vulnerable to criminals, which highlights that what they are attempting to do is disarm law abiding citizens looking to defend themselves from criminals rather than go after the criminals. And this would turn law abiding citizens into criminals per law for simply wanting a firearm to protect themselves and their families. And, hey, if women have to be raped to reduce the number of guns in the hands of the citizenry, well, that’s a small price to pay.

And, hey, it’s not like “one in four collegiate women report experiences that fit the legal definition of rape and one in five woman are raped during their college years.” Oh, wait, it is just like that. And Colorado is set to vote on  quite a few pieces of legislation that mostly go after the 2nd Amendment rights of law abiding citizens on Friday

Colorado is the same state where lawmakers have proposed using ballpoint pens, rape whistles and safe zones as an alternative to people defending themselves with a gun. Additionally, the University of Colorado-Colorado Springs advised women to urinate and vomit on an attacker.

Criminals are thrilled that Colorado may become a gun free zone.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Colorado Dem To Rape Survivor: Being Raped Is Less Dangerous Than Carrying A Gun »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise! Warmists Blaming Volcanoes For Masking Globull Warming

By William Teach March 4, 2013 – 4:55 pm

Can volcanoes reduce global warming? Sure. But the point of this research is simply to provide cover for those who are pushing anthropogenic global warming in an age where atmospheric concentrations of CO2 continues to rise but the global temperature stagnates

(Business Line) Sulphur dioxide emissions from moderate volcanoes around the world can mask some of the effects of global warming by 25 per cent, a new study has found.

A team led by the University of Colorado Boulder looking for clues about why Earth did not warm as much as scientists expected between 2000 and 2010 now thinks the culprits are hiding in plain sight. (snip)

Neely said previous observations suggest that increases in stratospheric aerosols since 2000 have counter balanced as much as 25 per cent of the warming scientists blame on human greenhouse gas emissions.

It’s always about protecting the cult.

“But overall these eruptions are not going to counter the greenhouse effect. Emissions of volcanic gases go up and down, helping to cool or heat the planet, while greenhouse gas emissions from human activity just continue to go up,” Toon said.

Sixteen years with no increase in the global temperature. A whopping .28F increase since 1990. Yet, CO2 goes up. Funny how Warmist prognostications always fail.

Read: Surprise! Warmists Blaming Volcanoes For Masking Globull Warming »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove