…is an awesome planet healing bike, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Sentry Journal, with a post on gun control.
Read: If All You See… »
…is an awesome planet healing bike, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Sentry Journal, with a post on gun control.
Read: If All You See… »
Fortunately for them, ObamaCare is working on making a shorter work day a reality, as are the Obama economic policies (via Tom Nelson, of course)
(US News And World Report) Want to reduce the effects of global warming? Stop working so hard. Working fewer hours might help slow global warming, according to a new study released Monday by the Center for Economic Policy and Research.
A worldwide switch to a “more European” work schedule, which includes working fewer hours and more vacation time, could prevent as much as half of the expected global temperature rise by 2100, according to the analysis, which used a 2012 study that found shorter work hours could be associated with lower carbon emissions.
The Center for Economic Policy and Research is a liberal think tank based in Washington.
Of course, those vacations would have to be staycations, otherwise all the fossil fueled travel would undo this plan. And, no, the Warmists don’t mind giving up economic prosperity to save Gaia from getting a fever.
And, let’s not forget that there really hasn’t been any real global warming since 1990, with a whopping increase of .28F over 22 years.
But, I’m sure Lefties would be thrilled with having to work less, and would agitate to get paid exactly the same.
Read: Warmist Paper Suggests People Should Work Less To Solve Hotcoldwetdry »
Of course, they’ll have to be pushed there since they can’t travel very far under their own power
(Reuters) Recent moves by Japan’s two largest automakers suggest that the electric car, after more than 100 years of development and several brief revivals, still is not ready for prime time – and may never be.
In the meantime, the attention of automotive executives in Asia, Europe and North America is beginning to swing toward an unusual but promising new alternate power source: hydrogen.
The reality is that consumers continue to show little interest in electric vehicles, or EVs, which dominated U.S. streets in the first decade of the 20th century before being displaced by gasoline-powered cars.
Despite the promise of “green” transportation – and despite billions of dollars in investment, most recently by Nissan Motor Co – EVs continue to be plagued by many of the problems that eventually scuttled electrics in the 1910s and more recently in the 1990s. Those include high cost, short driving range and lack of charging stations.
Even most climate astrologers weren’t interested in purchasing these vehicles, including the Chevy Firestarter, er, Volt. What’s the point of spending quite a bit of money for a vehicle that won’t go very far per charge, and tends to be tiny? Sure, Warmists would be saving the planet from boiling, but they’ve never had much interest in practicing what they preach. Why spend $45k on a Volt when one can purchase a load Civic for quite a bit less, and actually be able to drive somewhere? And people aren’t particularly enthused by EVs which could catch on fire in their garages. Nor getting stranded because there are no charging stations. Driving an EV requires the driver to become the most anal of travelers, planning each and every trip down to the second, even if that trip is simply to work, the grocery store, or the movies.
Eventually, perhaps EVs will be viable (of course, where’s the power for them coming from?). In the meantime, hybrids are the best alternative. Of course, most are still low powered, and cannot perform many functions that gas only vehicles with big engines are needed for.
…is a wonderful non-fossil fueled bike, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, who continues his great coverage of Hookergate.
Read: If All You See… »
I wonder if climate astrologer Gerald Elias will recommend for the Salt Lake Tribune to no longer allow their reporters to gather news using fossil fueled vehicles as well as stopping the usage of fossil fueled vehicles to distribute the Tribune? (via Tom Nelson)
Climate change: The next civil rights battle
Twentieth-century America saw hard-fought civil rights progress for organized labor, women, African Americans and gays. In the 21st century, the looming civil rights battle that will affect all Americans, all humanity, is the battle to save planet Earth from becoming uninhabitable due to climate change. And if we don’t win this one, there might not be a 22nd.
Climate change a civil rights issue? Why? Because humanity should not be held hostage by a profit-obsessed fossil-fuel cartel. Because humanity has the right to breathe air not laced with carbon; the right to drink water not contaminated by fracking; the right to live on land that hasn’t been slashed and burned into barren submission. Humanity has the right to live on a sustainable planet.
Hmm, Elias is a musician (doesn’t it require fossil fuels to travel around playing gigs?), author (aren’t trees killed to publish books, trees necessary to take the “carbon” out of the air?), and volunteer for the Citizens Climate Lobby. Also, someone who doesn’t seem to understand science, since climate change is a political phrase, and it is “carbon dioxide”, not carbon. And also seems to forget that CO2 is a trace gas necessary for life.
Read: Warmist Wonders If Hotcoldwetdry Is The Next Civil Rights Battle »
Perhaps instead of going after legal gun owners, Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel and Crook,er, Cook County President Toni Preckwinkle should concern themselves with the actual crime on their streets
(Chicago Tribune) Cook County and Chicago are adopting a tag-team approach on gun ownership. Our goal is to increase coordination between the city and the county, step up enforcement and reduce the flow of guns on our streets.
We plan to create a one-stop repository for all reports of lost, stolen, transferred or destroyed firearms, an important step in tracking guns used in crimes. It’s also an attempt to have a countywide gun strategy that is uniform, rather than a strategy where we each operate in isolation.
Hooray, we’re saved! This is the answer to stopping the lawlessness on Chicago’s streets!
An oft-cited University of Chicago Crime Lab study found that 29 percent of guns recovered in Chicago crimes were purchased legally in Cook County.
So, what about the other 71%? Rahm? Hello?
Nothing about what we are proposing is onerous for responsible gun owners. And we’re under no false illusion that this will stop the carnage on our streets. But the new approaches will help law enforcement go after people who repeatedly claim that their guns, after being recovered at a crime scene, had been lost or stolen. Their excuses will now have repercussions.
Oh, so we’re not saved? This plan to fine legal gun owners who see their guns (notice that nowhere within their little op-ed do they refer to “handguns”, “pistols”, or any specific type of gun. They mean all guns) stolen, lost, or sell or transfer them if it isn’t reported within 48 hours will not “stop the carnage on our streets.” So, exactly what is the purpose if it won’t stop the carnage? They say it will give The Government more information when it comes to the tiny amount of gun transfers and sales that occur without a background check, which is really tiny. But, this still won’t “stop the carnage on our streets.”
Perhaps Rahm and Preckwinkle might consider going after criminals.
Read: Mayor Of Deadly Chicago Wants To “Clean Up The Murky World Of Gun Ownership” »
Strangely, this super duper Harvard professor isn’t calling for Warmists to act like it’s a crisis and modify their own lives to be climate neutral
In the past three weeks there’s been much debate in U.S. environmental circles over a provocative new paper [PDF] from Harvard University political scientist Theda Skocpol. In it, Skocpol gives the most compelling analysis yet of why the 2009 cap-and-trade bill to fight global warming went down in flames. In sum, Skocpol argues that intense and radical opposition from Tea Party Republicans proved much stronger than the environmentalists’ insider-game, partner-with-business, harness-polls-instead-of-the-grassroots approach.
Wait, I thought we were only supposed to listen to people who are climatologists?
Skocpol, on the other hand, from my field-based perspective, nails both the key problems and the solutions we need for moving forward. She is absolutely correct to call for a completely different legislative approach for the next big push on climate in Washington. She is correct in arguing that round two should be based on the policy of “cap-and-dividend†instead of cap-and-trade. David Roberts at Grist and others have applauded Skocpol’s criticism of the cap-and-trade campaign. But they are skeptical of her view that the best alternative is a policy that caps carbon emissions through permit auctions and then rebates the money directly to all U.S. citizens with a monthly check — cap-and-dividend.
What these greenie weenie hypocrites are pushing for is to penalize Other People while giving money to themselves, because, um, well, prices are going to skyrocket, oh, and, that liberal canard of redistribution of wealth to those who haven’t earned it.
Read: Typical Warmist Wants More Awareness Spreading To Get Cap ‘N Tax Passed »