The Climate Crisis (scam) Needs A New Culture And Politics Or Something

By William Teach May 24, 2021 – 3:00 pm

Once again, I’ll point out that Warmists, and even some Skeptics, used to give me guff back in the early 2000’s when I noted that this whole thing wasn’t about science, but authoritarian politics. More and more Warmists are opening up with their real agenda

The climate crisis requires a new culture and politics, not just new tech

…

resistanceOur society has come to believe that technology is the solution. Electricity from renewable sources, energy-efficient buildings, electric vehicles and hydrogen fuels are among the many innovations that we hope will play a decisive role in reducing emissions. Most of the mainstream climate-change models now assume some degree of “negative emissions” in the future, relying on large-scale carbon capture technology, despite the fact that it is far from ready to be implemented. And if all else fails, the story goes, we can geoengineer the Earth.

But the problem with this narrative is that it focuses on the symptoms, not the causes of environmental decay. Even if the technologies on which we pin our hopes for the future deliver as expected and do not lead to much collateral damage – both of which are huge assumptions – they will not have fixed our mindsets. This is a crisis of culture and politics, not of science and technology. To believe that we can innovate and engineer ourselves out of this mess is to miss the key lesson of the Anthropocene – that dealing with planetary-scale processes calls for humility, not arrogance.

What does this look like in practice? Changing the collective mindset of a civilisation calls for a shift in values. It means educating our children about humility and connectedness, rather than vanity and individuality. It means changing our relationship with consumption, breaking the spell of advertising, manufactured needs and status. It means political organising, generating demand for a politics that sees beyond the nation state, and beyond the lifespan of the currently living generations – Wales has already started, with its Wellbeing of Future Generations Act.

You will be forced to change by your Betters, who will still be able to go on with their lives with little change.

To solve climate change, the innovations we need are financial

….

But there was something else in the EIA report that caught my attention and perhaps deserves a bit more of all of our attention — how much investment in clean energy is needed. Take a look at this graph. The amount of money that was spent on clean energy in the last four years will need to be quadrupled in 2030 and again in 2050.

That’s no small feat. Especially when the investment world has been timid at best on clean energy over the last decade, although thankfully that’s starting to change.

This is going to mean a lot of taxation.

Read: The Climate Crisis (scam) Needs A New Culture And Politics Or Something »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach May 24, 2021 – 1:00 pm

(I’m guessing Imgr didn’t work this time. Replaced with Photobucket)

…is a raised living space for when the oceans flood the world from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Real Climate Science, with a post on US winter temps tracking the AMO.

Photobucket was down on me this AM.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Denver Progressives Were Happy To Support The Homeless Till The Camps Interfered With Their Lives

By William Teach May 24, 2021 – 10:30 am

Progressives love all sorts of social justice initiatives. They love wind turbines and solar panels, as long as they are far away. They love the defund the police movement, as long as they have police protection in their own neighborhoods. They love helping the homeless, as long as they are far away

Homeless camp in church parking lot? Denver neighbors say, ‘No way’

A plan to help homeless people during the pandemic by letting them set up camp in a church parking lot has forced residents in an affluent neighborhood to question their progressive values and commitment to helping ease social ills.

Advocates said unsheltered people were being left behind in Covid-19 mitigation efforts, so they devised a plan to provide safe outdoor spaces where homeless people could access meals, medical care and other services.

But when Pastor Nathan Adams of Park Hill United Methodist Church announced on Easter Sunday that it would put faith into action and create a camp on site for about 40 unsheltered people for six months, many residents in the community were unsettled.

“When I bought in Park Hill, it wasn’t because there was a homeless encampment one block from my front door,” said Jon Kinning, who lives a block away from the church. “If I wanted to live in downtown Denver and near homelessness in my face every day, having people sleep on my patio or go to the bathroom on my garage, I would live downtown.”

About 4 1/2 miles from downtown, Park Hill is full of flowering trees, stately brick homes and cozy bungalows. Black Lives Matter signs adorn front lawns in the largely white neighborhood surrounding the church, and in the 2020 election, about 67 percent of voters in Park Hill cast ballots for Joe Biden.

So, an upper middle class/rich Democrat neighborhood, who want to help the homeless, just elsewhere.

When members of the church approached the Colorado Village Collaborative about transforming the lot into a safe outdoor space, Adams and many of the 400 people on an informational call were supportive. Two such camps had already opened in December near the state Capitol downtown without any major problems.

Were they supportive because they didn’t think it would actually happen, or because they didn’t want to appear to be bigots and haters on the call, wanting to express their Virtue Signaling cred?

Despite the call to action, five Park Hill residents filed a lawsuit earlier this month in Denver District Court to stop the encampment and sought a temporary restraining order to prevent the project from moving forward.

They said in the lawsuit that the proposal “pose[s] a real danger to minors and school-aged children,” does not address the impact on the neighborhood and displaces people from one part of the city “with available resources to an area not equipped to handle” the safe-camping site.

The lawsuit was dismissed. Might residents, and more of them, try again once the encampment actually starts, and they seen the homeless wandering around, many drug and alcohol addled, peeing in the bushes, pooping on their driveways, hassling their kids, reducing their property values, committing crimes, and so forth?

Yet Booth-Nadav’s daughter, Ariella Nadav, 18, said she will fear for her safety when she gets home from work late at night and has to park on the street.

“I don’t want to walk into my house every night over the summer and be scared for my life, and not just my life, but my well-being,” she said. “I don’t want to have to deal with getting sexually harassed every day.”

This is not a discussion on trying to help the homeless. We can have that, if you like. This is about Progressives Virtue Signaling about the huge numbers of homeless in their Progressive cities, wanting to Do Something, as long as it is Somewhere Else. Just wait till they see all the illegal aliens Joe is shipping to their towns.

Read: Denver Progressives Were Happy To Support The Homeless Till The Camps Interfered With Their Lives »

Posted in Liberal World | 18 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Advisor Gina McCarthy Says It’s Not Quite Yet Time To Force Citizens To Sacrifice

By William Teach May 24, 2021 – 7:04 am

Gina McCarthy is combing climate cult worship with a bit of reality, so, it begs the question, when is it the right time to force the climate cult down the throats of citizens using Fascist government?

Biden adviser Gina McCarthy calls it “ridiculous” to push climate sacrifice now

electric vehicleOn “Axios on HBO,” White House national climate adviser Gina McCarthy called for a practical rather than idealistic approach to getting Americans to change their routines to save the planet.

McCarthy told me that with all the lost jobs, “Now is not the time to sit them down and say: ‘Let’s talk about climate. How can you sacrifice?’ … [I]t’s never going to be a winning strategy. Right now, it’s ridiculous.”

Why it matters: Electric vehicles have had a luxury image. But McCarthy took me for a spin in an electric Chevrolet Bolt before the interview, as part of an effort to show electric vehicles can be an economical part of the average American’s future.

The average American is not going to spend a starting $36500 for a new Bolt. The average American isn’t looking to pay $600-700 a month for a car payment on something that will depreciate around 50% in under 3 years. The average American typically looks at the $30,000 range and under.

McCarthy — the head of the EPA under President Obama, and now in a new job created by President Biden — noted that change is hard, because people love their routines.

McCarthy said that with all the new technology, “the whole job is to get people excited about what’s available, get that deployed to its maximum.”

“They don’t want to have to do research on things like cars,” she added. “They just want ’em to be what they used to be. And if you want to make the kind of shift that we need for climate, you’ve got to be optimistic about the future.”

Is it really the government’s job to be the shills for the auto industry and EVs? Is she calling consumers lazy and dumb, as they don’t want to do research? Of course, their research ends fast when they see the price tag, unless they happen to be an upper middle class/rich person who wants the status of driving an EV around town …. and have a fossil fueled vehicle for longer trips. You don’t see that many, if any, EVs when driving the longer distance roads.

Further, Gina is rather admitting that the government is looking to force people to “sacrifice” for the climate crisis (scam). She doesn’t delve deep into that in the video at the link, but, we all know that means higher taxes, higher cost of living, government telling us how to live our lives, where we can go, where we can live, you name it, because the Cult of Climastrology has linked their cultish beliefs to pretty much everything. All while the leaders in the CoC refuse to change their own lives.

Read: Climate Advisor Gina McCarthy Says It’s Not Quite Yet Time To Force Citizens To Sacrifice »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Surprise: Multiple Wuhan Lab Employees Went To Hospital Sick In November 2019

By William Teach May 24, 2021 – 6:45 am

This story is, unsurprisingly, mostly being ignored by most of the big media players, because they need to protect China, I guess. Or, is it that they do not want to give credence to a Trump and MAGA theory? Because TDS? Or, are they just not wanting to engage in speculation and “conspiracy theories”, despite constantly engaging in them against Trump?

Intelligence on sick staff at Wuhan lab fuels debate on COVID-19 origin

Three researchers from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology became sick enough in November 2019 that they sought hospital care, according to a previously undisclosed U.S. intelligence report that could add weight to growing calls for a fuller probe of whether the COVID-19 virus may have escaped from the laboratory.

The details of the reporting go beyond a State Department fact sheet, issued during the final days of the Trump administration, which said that several researchers at the lab, a center for the study of coronaviruses and other pathogens, became sick in autumn 2019 “with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illness.”

The disclosure of the number of researchers, the timing of their illnesses and their hospital visits come on the eve of a meeting of the World Health Organization’s decision-making body, which is expected to discuss the next phase of an investigation into COVID-19’s origins.

Current and former officials familiar with the intelligence about the lab researchers expressed differing views about the strength of the supporting evidence for the assessment. One person said that it was provided by an international partner and was potentially significant but still in need of further investigation and additional corroboration.

Another person described the intelligence as stronger. “The information that we had coming from the various sources was of exquisite quality. It was very precise. What it didn’t tell you was exactly why they got sick,” he said, referring to the researchers.

November 2019 is roughly when many epidemiologists and virologists believe SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind the pandemic, first began circulating around the central Chinese city of Wuhan, where Beijing says that the first confirmed case was a man who fell ill on Dec. 8, 2019.

Is this something, or just a cause of correlation isn’t causation? A bit of serendipity?

The Biden administration declined to comment on the intelligence but said that all technically credible theories on the origin of the pandemic should be investigated by the WHO and international experts.

This would be the same WHO which protected China through most of the pandemic, right? Not like there will be much cooperation from China to start with. They have been less than forthcoming since this started, and were just fine with Democrats Blaming Trump. They aren’t going to start cooperating now. Does China Joe actually want answers which could hurt the amount of money he and his kids have made from China?

Read: Surprise: Multiple Wuhan Lab Employees Went To Hospital Sick In November 2019 »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, Is America Ready To Switch To Electric Vehicles?

By William Teach May 23, 2021 – 3:00 pm

Well, sure, if we were all rich, right? Because EVs are primarily toys for the rich

Turn off the gas: is America ready to embrace electric vehicles?

Electric vehicleIn Detroit, auto plants have for decades churned out trucks built with Motor City steel and fueled by gasoline. But this week’s rollout of the Ford F-150 Lightning electric truck offered a vision of the future in America’s automotive heartland: aluminum-clad pickups running off of electric powertrains with lithium batteries.

An electric model of the nation’s best-selling vehicle at an accessible $40,000 has the potential to shift the auto industry’s course, and do more to advance the transportation sector’s electrification than any recent development, analysts say.

“Offering a well-known vehicle at a competitive price could really help push the EV agenda in the US,” said Jessica Caldwell, executive director of insights at Edmunds.com.

We can all afford a $40k base model truck, right?

It’s uncharted territory, said Autotrader executive analyst Michelle Krebs. The success of the Lightning or any EV hinges on a major infrastructure build-out that’s far from certain.

Wouldn’t the success be based on consumers actually wanting them and buying them?

The Lightning feature that seems to be catching the most attention isn’t under the hood or in the cab, but on the price tag. With EV tax incentives, the truck’s base model could cost about $32,000 – less than a $37,000 gas-powered F-150 with a crew cab. By contrast, the GMC Hummer EV and Rivian R1T, are priced at $80,000 and $70,000 though they are slightly flashier.

That is a lie. You get a tax credit, not actual cash off. And that tax credit doesn’t equate to saving $7000, $7500, $10000, or whatever the credit is.

The Lightning’s range is also notable. One charge will take a base model Lightning 230 miles, or, for an additional $20,000, the extended range trim will travel 300 miles. It can haul up to 2,000lbs of payload and tow up to 10,000lbs. However, Ford doesn’t offer any data on range with a heavy payload or tow, and Car And Drive estimated it at as little as 100 miles.

Wait, $20k to go an extra 70 miles? And towing range is extraordinarily limited?

That’s the type of detail that could keep consumers away from not just the Lightning, but all electric pickups. On a 150kw DC fast charger, the extended-range trim targets up to 54 miles of range in 10 minutes, or just under an hour for a full charge.

It’s not hard to imagine a scenario in which someone who may be buying a truck to tow a camper a long distance once or twice per year opting for a gas-powered F-150 instead being inconvenienced with an hour-long stop to recharge every 100 miles or so, Caldwell said.

You can fill a regular F150 in under 10 minutes, be on your way.

Buy-in from the auto industry could help Biden push his proposal with Congress, though it’s uniformly opposed by the GOP. Republican leadership has pointed to the lack of infrastructure as a chief reason for opposing spending on the EV transition, but at the same time opposes funding an infrastructure build-out.

If the auto industry thought a lot of consumers would buy EVs they’d be making more. Even regular hybrids sell a lot less than straight gas cars (note: I’m heavily considering leasing a Honda Insight when my current one is up in February, provided the lease rates are worth it. Have to be comparable to Civics and Accords). Buy-in means nothing if consumers won’t purchase. Having a shit-ton of charging stations will mean nothing if consumers won’t buy them, if they don’t want them. If they don’t want to deal with the inconvenience, if they realize they can get a car that still gets pretty good MPG and have a lot of features vs more expensive base model EVs.

Read: Say, Is America Ready To Switch To Electric Vehicles? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Energy, Global Warming | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 23, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is an area that will be decimated by climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Blazing Cat Fur, with a post on voting machines in Pa. that wouldn’t recognize Republican votes.

It’s Italy week!

Read: If All You See… »

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

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach May 23, 2021 – 9:30 am

Patriotic Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in the Once and Future Nation of America. The sun is shining, the Dodgers are winning again, and summer is fast approaching. This pinup is supposedly by McClelland Barclay, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Weasel Zippers notes the cost of meat going up in China Joe’s America
  2. Vox Popoli covers a black woman beating a white girl in a pizza place
  3. The Right Scoop discusses what Ron Desantis has to say on critical race theory
  4. The Other McCain covers Chubby St. Greta vs China
  5. The Gateway Pundit notes teacher’s just being super exhausted
  6. The First Street Journal discusses walling off Philadelphia
  7. Raised On Hoecakes notes American Airlines investigating a pilot who’s against CRT
  8. Powerline highlights that it’s verboten to criticize The Squad members
  9. Patterico’s Pontifications notes Gavin Newsome’s “grassroots” support
  10. Pacific Pundit covers the NFL discriminating against Eugene Chung
  11. Moonbattery notes Walgreens forced to close in California due to pretty much legal shoplifting
  12. Legal Insurrection discusses the vote for Oregon areas to join Idaho
  13. Jihad Watch highlights pro-Palestinians threatening Jews in Canada
  14. House of Eratosthenes discusses liberals vs leftists
  15. And last, but not least, Geller Report News covers Ashli Babbitt’s family suing the Capital Police

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page (nope, that’s gone, the newest Apache killed access, and the program hasn’t been upgraded since 2014). While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me.

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. And do you have a favorite blog you can recommend be added to the feedreader?

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Posted in Patriotic Pinup | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

New York Trots Out Sweeping Police “Reform” Legislation, Would See Police Leave In Droves

By William Teach May 23, 2021 – 8:15 am

If people think the current state of affairs in Democrat run states and cities has been counter-productive to law and order and has caused police to retire/leave in large numbers now, just wait to see if this legislation makes it through to become law

How a Sweeping New Proposal Would Limit Police Use of Force in New York

unintended consequencesPolice officers in New York state could only use physical force as a last resort, would have to meet a higher threshold for using deadly force and would face new criminal penalties for violating those guidelines under a sweeping legislative proposal unveiled Friday.

If adopted, the changes could drastically alter the nature of law enforcement in New York at a time when the issue of police accountability is at the center of a fraught national debate over persistent racism in America’s criminal justice system.

The legislation was proposed by Letitia James, the state’s attorney general, who said in a statement that her goal was to provide “clear and legitimate standards for when the use of force is acceptable and enacting real consequences for when an officer crosses that line.”

The proposal — announced nearly a year after a white Minneapolis police officer, Derek Chauvin, killed George Floyd, a Black man — came amid continuing calls for increasing the accountability applied to officers who are involved in such killings.

Instead of providing better training, instead of reaching out to the communities where the violence tends to occur making the cops use force, instead of teaching the proper actions in schools, they will handcuff the police and make it much more likely to be sued and/or criminally charged. Hence, a lot of police officers will leave, because they never know when they will be thrown into a bad situation with the ever increasing amount of people willing to engage police in violence, who resist, who fail to follow commands, who run, who pull a weapon on police. Just think about how many are blaming the officer who shot Ma’Khia Bryant, despite the officer having just rolled up, yelled for Ma’Khia to stop, then shot her when she was about to stab another girl (obviously, the other black girl’s life doesn’t matter to the cop haters).

James’ proposal — sponsored in the state Legislature by Brooklyn Democrats Sen. Kevin Parker and Assembly member Nick Perry — is certain to face opposition from Republicans and potentially some moderate Democrats in suburban districts.

The legislation would amend state law to require officers to exhaust so-called de-escalation tactics, like verbal warnings, before using force and would create a “last resort” standard for justifying such a use of force.

“Police officers are imbued with an incredible amount of police power and state power,” James, a Democrat, said at a news conference in Manhattan Friday. “The state has every right to demand that that power is used as seldom as possible, and when it must be used, only appropriately and proportionally.”

And the vast majority of them do. But, this would make it virtually impossible to actually use force when necessary.

Patrick Lynch, president of the Police Benevolent Association, which represents police officers in New York City, criticized the legislation sharply.

“This sweeping proposal would make it impossible for police officers to determine whether or not we are permitted to use force in a given situation,” he said in a statement. “The only reasonable solution will be to avoid confrontations where force might become necessary.”

In other words, those police who do not leave will be tasked with patrolling the rich, then upper middle class, then middle class neighborhoods. They will avoid going to areas where there is lots of crime. They will be slow to respond to calls which could put them in a bad situation. Domestic dispute? Avoid. There is a high chance of things going bad. Kids fighting? Nope. Stolen car? File insurance claim. Guy running around threatening people? Nope. Someone walking around pinching women? Nope.

Crime will skyrocket. And the law should include a provision that anyone who voted for any lawmaker that approves of this bill should not be allowed to move from the State of New York. This includes if they voted for AG Letitia James. This is what they were voting for. There might not be enough Republicans and moderate Democrats to stop this trainwreck. But, hey, you never know if the general assembly will become reasonable.

Read: New York Trots Out Sweeping Police “Reform” Legislation, Would See Police Leave In Droves »

Posted in Beyond Moonbat, Democrats | 37 Comments | Trackback URL

US Army To Prioritize Focus On ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach May 22, 2021 – 3:00 pm

Anyone think China and Russia are doing the same? We aren’t talking about taking the weather into account, or how the climate has always changed. We’re talking Cult of Climastrology stuff

US Army to prioritize fight against climate change

The U.S. Army recently released a bulletin stating that it will henceforth be “prioritizing climate change” in its strategic defense planning.  The Defense Department has already established the “Department of Defense Climate Working Group,” a new office that will coordinate the DOD’s ongoing response to the allegedly grave threat that climate change poses to the national security of the United States.  I wonder if Greta Thunberg will be heading up the DDCWG.

The Army’s laser focus on climate change appears to be in response to President Biden’s stated agenda of aggressively addressing climate change across governmental bodies and is occurring simultaneously with the culture change being imposed on the U.S. military from the top down.  Defense secretary Lloyd Austin, for example, fully supports Biden’s emphasis on climate change…as long as it doesn’t take time away from the troops’ mandatory “Diversity, Inclusion and Equity Training” or their indoctrination into Marxist theory.

This past April, Austin asserted that “climate change is making the world more unsafe and we need to act.”  He added, “Today, no nation can find lasting security without addressing the climate crisis.  We face all kinds of threats in our line of work, but few of them truly deserve to be called existential.  The climate crisis does.”

Am I the only one concerned that the most important military in the world is frightened by climate change?

No. I’m concerned that they are forgetting what their mission is, and will make the Army weak. We’re already seeing that happen. Soon it will only be stocked with soy boys, militant feminists, and envirowackos, who will all be worthless in a fight, and will mostly all be conscientious objectors.

Austin also noted that his military is committed to electrifying its vehicle fleets and operating more sustainably.  What about the cost to build/retrofit, as well as issues with performance and charging time, etc.?  All things considered, will these vehicles really be better for the environment?  And is that the point of a military?

How will you electrify a tank? How will you charge vehicles in the middle of the desert? Should be fun having large numbers of vehicles sitting around for long periods charging, eh? I’m sure the enemy will wait patiently. How about the planes and helicopters? The ships?

Shouldn’t we all be more concerned about the “sustainability” of our freedom and way of life?

That’s so old school. You need to wake up to the New Army, pal.

Read: US Army To Prioritize Focus On ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove