AGW Today: Trees Are “Scary”

By William Teach June 28, 2012 – 6:58 pm

We’re doomed or something

(Guardian) The African savannas appear peaceful but beneath the wings of birds and the hooves of mammals, a millennia-long battle is being fought. This struggle determines whether vast regions of the tropics and subtropics are covered in grasslands, savannas or forests. But a new study shows that rising concentrations of CO2 are shifting the odds to favour trees over grasses, suggesting that large regions of Africa’s savannas may be forests by the end of this century.

Oh, no, not trees….hmmm, grasses evolved tens of millions of years ago, when the atmospheric CO2 content was much higher.

This study, conducted by Steven Higgins, a professor of Applied Physical Geography at Goethe University and a researcher at the Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (BiK-F) in Frankfurt am Main, Germany, and Simon Scheiter, a postdoctoral researcher at BiK-F, investigated how increasing CO2 levels could influence tropical and subtropical grasslands, savannas and forests — dynamic ecosystems that the authors refer to as the “savanna complex”.

Historically, the savanna complex has always fluctuated between grasslands, savannas and forests due to local variations in temperature, fire and rainfall. But CO2 concentrations also affect this age-old struggle between grasses and trees.

“[A] study by a team based in Cape Town, South Africa showed that savanna trees were essentially CO2 starved under pre-industrial CO2 concentrations, and their growth really starts taking off at the CO2 concentrations we are currently experiencing,” [Kgope, Bond & Midgley (2010)] explained Professor Higgins in email. “The upshot is that savanna trees stand to profit enormously from the CO2-rich atmosphere [that] industrial activity is producing.”

Aren’t trees good? Oh, that’s right, I forgot that in Warmist world the environment is never supposed to change.

Carbon mitigation actions notwithstanding, I think this study’s findings are scary. Whilst rewriting and editing the manuscript for publication, I mentioned my concerns to Professor Higgins about what appear to be catastrophic ecosystem shifts and the potential effects these could have on Africa’s unique but already threatened floras and faunas.

The environment changing is “scary”. Even though the environment is always changing. It wasn’t that long ago, in geologic terms, that those savannahs were something else. The Sahara was under an ocean. The ocean circulatory patterns were different till an area in Panama closed off direct access between the Pacific and Atlantic about 5 million years ago. Go back 20,000 years ago and vast glaciers covered much of North American. These people need some Prozac.

Read: AGW Today: Trees Are “Scary” »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Stimulus Recipient Abound Solar To File For Bankruptcy

By William Teach June 28, 2012 – 4:32 pm

Well, the Stimulus is creating jobs for lawyers and people who handle companies closing down

(Businessweek) Abound Solar Inc., a U.S. solar manufacturer that was awarded a $400 million U.S. loan guarantee, is closing its doors and filing for bankruptcy, according to the U.S. Energy Department.

Abound, based in Loveland, Colorado, borrowed $70 million against the guarantee, the Energy Department said today in a statement.

More taxpayer money down the drain.

Read: Stimulus Recipient Abound Solar To File For Bankruptcy »

Posted in Energy, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 28, 2012 – 1:00 pm

…is a world killing plastic water bottle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler.

Read: If All You See… »

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

SCOTUS Finds Mandate Constitutional As A Tax

By William Teach June 28, 2012 – 10:08 am

It looks like the Mandate was shot down as the Commerce Clause applies, but was upheld as a tax. It seems that the court may have punted, 5-4 with John Roberts joining the liberals, the decision down the road to 2014 when the Mandate goes into effect

(CNN) Question: Can the court decide the constitutionality of health care now, or does it have to wait a few years?

To answer, the court had to decide whether a penalty the law imposes on people who do not have health insurance amounts to a tax.

A previously obscure law mandated that the legality of a tax cannot be challenged until it is imposed, and the health care law doesn’t call for penalties until 2014.

There are other parts of Obamacare that have been shot down and others upheld. That said, the ruling on the Mandate is not necessarily a win for Obama and the Democrats. Calling the Mandate a tax will not sit well with the American people, who already hate the legislation. People do not like to be taxed. Liberals say they love taxes, but only as long as that guy over there is getting taxed. They don’t like taxes for themselves. And, overall, people surely do not want to be taxed for economic inactivity, and certainly not for simply being born in America.

Look at the silver lining: (NMP) Obama and the Democrats will have a tough time campaigning on taxing people for being born American. Not a winning campaign talking point. Especially since Obama argued that it wasn’t a tax.

And this decision will, in fact, fire up Republicans and conservatives to win the Presidency and Senate in November.

Interestingly, according to SCOTUSblog live feed and other reports, Justice Kennedy voted to kill the whole bill. Ace is reporting that when it comes to the medicaid expansion, the Federal government cannot penalize States for not accepting the expansion.

We’re going to have to wait throughout the day for the full details of the decision to be digested.

You stay classy, Democrats

Patrick Gaspard is the executive director of the DNC.

Ed Morrissey: It’s an interesting argument, but one that should have Americans worried.  Basically, this is a tax that you have to pay to private companies.  For all of the screaming the Right did over single-payer — and for good, outcome-based reasons — at least the taxes raised to fund it would go directly to government.  The Supreme Court has signed off on what is, in very practical terms, a tax levied by the insurance industry on Americans simply for existing.  It’s an amazing, and fearsome, decision that really should have both Right and Left horrified.

Doug Powers: This doesn’t mean we’re stuck with Obamacare forever — it means that November 6th just got much more important, and I didn’t think that was possible.

Read: SCOTUS Finds Mandate Constitutional As A Tax »

Posted in Healthcare | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Romney: Obamacare Is A “Moral Failure”

By William Teach June 28, 2012 – 8:22 am

Mitt doesn’t hold back

(MSNBC) Mitt Romney reserved some of his harshest criticism of President Barack Obama’s health care reform law for the eve of the Supreme Court ruling that will decide its fate, labeling the law as “moral failure” by a president who chose to focus on healthcare, rather than jobs, at a time of national economic crisis.

“His policies were not focused on creating jobs. They were focused on implementing his liberal agenda. There’s nothing wrong with people having an agenda, but when the country’s in crisis, you have a moral responsibility to focus on helping people come out of that crisis,” Romney said at a rally here Wednesday evening. “It was not just bad policy; it was a moral failure to put forward a piece of legislation that wouldn’t help Americans get back to work, and to focus the energy of the White House on Obamacare.”

Let’s not forget that Democrats spent 10+ months putting that travesty of a bill together instead of dealing with the inherent instabilities in the economy. The Stimulus wasn’t helping people obtain long term work. The economy was just sputtering along despite the recession having officially ended in June 2009. And no one who voted for Obamacare actually read the legislation.

Romney went on to preview, as he did at a campaign stop in southern Virginia on Tuesday, his response to the court’s possible action on the law. The former Massachusetts governor said that if the law is upheld, he would work to repeal it as president, and if it gets struck down, he would replace it with “real reform.” Romney did not specify what such reforms would entail.

No, not during a campaign stop. But, would it be so hard for the media to head to Mitt’s campaign page and learn a bit? Much like the media says the GOP has no plans, when they do.

Read: Romney: Obamacare Is A “Moral Failure” »

Posted in Barry Obama, Healthcare, Romney | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

It’s Mandate-maggedon: Obama Prepares 3 Speeches

By William Teach June 28, 2012 – 7:32 am

Today is the day we should learn the fate of Obamacare. Will the mandate be upheld or go down? If it goes down, will the Court rule that there is no severability and tank the entire law? Will they tank other parts of the law? We should find out about 10am. In the meantime, Obama has three speeches ready

(Wall Street Journal) But Mr. Obama has been doing more than sitting back and waiting. The president has three separate speeches prepared in anticipation of the ruling on his signature legislative achievement, a person familiar with them said.

One of the speeches addresses a complete overturn of the law, while another is crafted as if the court strikes down the law’s individual mandate but upholds other provisions. The third speech, for if the court upholds the entire law, is more celebratory, according to this person.

The first two will be unbelievable whiny, if we think about Obama’s history of speechifying, particularly after a loss. Nowhere will he consider that the Democrats went too far in passing legislation that is not only highly unpopular as a whole, but unconstitutional. The third will be a gloating speech which will still blame Republicans and insult the majority of Americans who will still be against the legislation.

No matter the ruling, the White House is expected to continue highlighting provisions of the legislation that are more popular than the overall law, such as the requirements that insurance companies cover people with pre-existing conditions or allow parents to keep their children on their plans until they are 26 years old.

Yes, those are popular, and would have to be kept in any replacement legislation, regardless of whether the Conservative base hates them. They aren’t actually bad ideas, though there would have to be a few tweaks with the pre-existing conditions, such as deeming that those with pre-existing conditions cannot simply purchase insurance right before needing medical care. Oh, and let’s not forget that under Obamacare those with pre-existing conditions are being charged an arm and a leg for insurance.

But, Champ should continue talking about Obamacare. The more he associates himself with the unpopular law the better for Romney’s chances and the chance for Republicans to take back the Senate.

Meanwhile, Liberals are freaking out on the Supreme Court, as they must all feel that the Court will at a minimum tank the Mandate. You have E. J. Dionne calling for Scalia to resign. The Washington Post editorial board whines about Scalia. Roger Simon says the court has lost its honor. You can cruise around the Progressive blogosphere and find all sorts of whiny posts about the court. The far left only likes our system when they win.

How will Obama and liberals act of any portion of Obamacare goes down? I’m think Barking Moonbat Level 10. What’s your guess?

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: It’s Mandate-maggedon: Obama Prepares 3 Speeches »

Posted in Barry Obama, Healthcare | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

How A Carbon Tax Works

By William Teach June 27, 2012 – 2:18 pm

This comes from Jennifer Marohasy (via Tom Nelson)

Photobucket

(If you click the picture, you can see a slightly bigger version. Or click Ms. Marohasy’s link! Especially if you are Australian)

Read: How A Carbon Tax Works »

Posted in Carbon Credits, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 27, 2012 – 1:00 pm

…are hills that would be perfect for wind turbines, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Wizbang.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Waxman Blames Climate Change For Colorado Wildfires, Debby Doing Florida

By William Teach June 27, 2012 – 11:08 am

You just knew someone was going to do this

(The Hill) Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) seized on the portion of the decision that upheld EPA’s “endangerment finding” that greenhouse gases are a threat to human health and welfare.

Waxman, the top Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee, called the decision a “resounding victory for science.” The court found that EPA “relied on a substantial record of empirical data and scientific evidence.”

The California Democrat used the ruling to criticize the GOP’s efforts to nullify EPA’s climate rules.

“Today’s ruling is a message to Congress that it’s time to stop denying science. Extreme events like the wildfires in Colorado and the floods in Florida are going to get worse unless the Republican-controlled Congress changes course soon,” Waxman said in a statement.

Because they’ve never happened before. While the Colorado fire is bad (prayers for Michelle Malkin and those who are affected) it isn’t even close to being the biggest, as Steven Goddard showed. But, you know, if Waxman is so concerned, perhaps he should stop taking inter-continental flights back and forth between California and Washington, D.C.

PS: I also really wanted to find some way to reference Debby doing something, since she was doing Dallas.

Read: Waxman Blames Climate Change For Colorado Wildfires, Debby Doing Florida »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Barking Moonbats, Democrats, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

As We Await Mandatemageddon, ObamaCare Still Pretty Darned Unpopular

By William Teach June 27, 2012 – 7:33 am

But, says this poll, so is the current US health system. Must have really killed Obama cheerleader Chris Cillizza to write this

(Washington Post) A majority of Americans view both the United States’ current health care system and the changes enacted in President Obama’s health care bill in an unfavorable light — a one-two punch of disillusionment that epitomizes just how tough it is for politicians to talk about health care on the campaign trail.

Bold is the article writers. I guess they wanted to point out that this atrocity of a bill is his baby.

Fifty-six percent of Americans rate the nation’s current health care system unfavorably in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, while 52 percent regard the “federal law making changes in the health care system” in a negative light.

The numbers are even more stark when they are broken down into those who feel strongly favorably versus strongly unfavorably about each system. In each case, the number of people who feel strongly opposed is more than twice those who feel strongly in support — a testament to the fact that all of the energy on health care is on the side opposing both the old/new system.

And perhaps most interestingly, Americans who are not happy with their current health care also give Obama’s health care law negative ratings, by a 2-to-1 margin.

This is a group that health reform was theoretically supposed to help. Back in August 2009, a Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that people who were less satisfied with their current health care were more likely to believe it would improve under health care reform. That clearly hasn’t happened.

No, it hasn’t happened. Why? Because most people aren’t idiots, and even those who are even marginally informed understood then and understand now that Obamacare will in no way make health insurance and health care better, but will make them worse. It’ll raise costs, mess with their HSAs, cause their employer to drop their insurance offerings, etc and so on. Switching over to the ABC News story on the poll

One key challenge is that while Americans are broadly dissatisfied with the system overall, vastly more – 75 percent – rate their own quality of care favorably. The difficulty thus remains where it’s been all along: Forging solutions to the current system’s problems that don’t leave people fearing they’ll lose what many see as their own good quality of care now.

Democrats thought they had a mandate to Do Something, but what they ended up doing was unpopular, despite throwing in a few popular ideas like keeping kids on their parents insurance till the age of 26. They thought that since people thought the overall system was broken, they’d be able to fix it. Alas, when people realized (even before the bill was passed) that the ACA would effect their own health insurance/health care, they came out against the bill. And the popularity of it has not gotten better.

Read: As We Await Mandatemageddon, ObamaCare Still Pretty Darned Unpopular »

Posted in Healthcare | 4 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove