Your Fault: Climate Crisis (scam) Could Make Old Faithful Less Faithful

By William Teach October 14, 2020 – 8:51 am

Remember back to the socially distanced gathering you had the other month, where people ate burgers, cheese, and ice cream which came from Evil moo cows? This future event is Your Fault

Climate Change Could Make Yellowstone’s Famous Geyser Less Faithful

Yellowstone National Park’s famous Old Faithful geyser is famously reliable, firing a jet of scalding water and steam high into the air some 17 times a day at 60 to 110-minute intervals.

But new research suggests that 800 years ago a severe drought caused this geyser, which was once somewhat hyperbolically known as “Eternity’s Timepiece,” to stop erupting altogether for many decades, reports Colin Barras for Science. When taken with climate model predictions of increasingly severe droughts, the findings could mean that America’s most dependable geyser will erupt less often or stop completely in the future.

Researchers arrived at the new findings, published last week in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, by studying 13 chunks of petrified wood found on Old Faithful’s mound. Trees can’t survive the geyser’s blasts of super-heated, alkaline water, so finding trees growing on Old Faithful’s mound is a sign that its regularly scheduled eruptions were at one point on hiatus. When researchers tested the tree remnants, they dated back to around 1230-1360 A.D., reports Catherine Meyers for Inside Science.

“When I submitted the samples for radiocarbon dating I didn’t know whether they would be hundreds or thousands of years old,” Shaul Hurwitz, a geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey and first author of the new paper, tells Science. “It was an ‘aha!’ moment when they all clustered within a hundred-year period in the 13th and 14th centuries.”

One specimen was large enough to allow Hurwitz and his team to estimate it grew for some 80 years, suggesting Old Faithful stopped erupting for nearly 100 years sometime between the 13th and 14th centuries.

Did that scare you? I’m sure it did, and you’re now willing to give up your use of fossil fuels, pay lots more taxes and fees, and give up your liberty, freedom, and choice, right? Perhaps they could explain what caused the climate change at that time, which was near the end of the Medieval Warm Period, which went from around 900 AD (10th Century) to 1350 (14th Century)? Were they driving fossil fueled vehicles and taking long trips, getting consumer products and practicing capitalism?

Are they saying that the current warm period is mostly/solely natural, just like the MWP?

Today, human-caused climate change is exacerbating droughts in the Yellowstone region, per Inside Science. Hurwitz and other researchers published a paper in 2008 showing decreased precipitation in recent decades may have added a minute or two to the time between Old Faithful’s eruptions. If the climate continues to dry out, as climate models predict it will, the researchers write that Old Faithful’s “geyser eruptions could become less frequent or completely cease.”

If Old Faithful is added to the list of climate change’s casualties, Maxwell Rudolph, a geophysicist at the University of California, Davis who wasn’t involved in the study, tells Science that “the extinction of this natural treasure would be a profound loss.”

It’s always something.

Read: Your Fault: Climate Crisis (scam) Could Make Old Faithful Less Faithful »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

CNN Seems Rather Concerned That ACB Owns A Gun And Could Rule On Cases

By William Teach October 14, 2020 – 8:32 am

They’re Concerned

The inference here is that you shouldn’t trust her if you are a lefty gun grabber with a case in front the Supreme Court. From the link

President Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court says her family owns a gun and that she thinks she can fairly judge a guns case. Asked by Senate Judiciary chairman Senator Lindsey Graham if she owns a gun, Barrett replied, “we do own a gun”.

The Supreme Court has gone a decade without acting on a major case concerning the Second Amendment, an issue that could receive rare attention in the future by the high court should Judge Amy Coney Barrett be confirmed to the bench in the coming weeks.

The court has resisted taking up a significant Second Amendment case since the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller – which held that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm – and a 2010 follow-up, turning away 10 gun rights cases in the last term alone.

Here’s how that exchange went:

Graham: Okay. So when it comes to your personal views about this topic, do you own a gun?

Barrett: We do own a gun.

Graham: Okay. All right. Do you think you could fairly decide a case even though you own a gun?

Barrett: Yes.

As Jazz Shaw points out, this was part of a much longer exchange with Lindsay Graham, who was asking her just how the system works where suits get to the Supreme Court, how they can’t just say “hey, lets doing something on this issue and make a ruling”, and how personal views come into play. Well, at lest for Constitutionalists. We know how personal views work most of the time for Liberals. As Jonah Goldberg writes “Seriously, this is amazingly dumb. Imagine this framing for any other right in the Bill of Rights.”

Meanwhile, the San Francisco Chronicle is comparing ACB to a disease

Editorial: Amy Coney Barrett’s elevation to the Supreme Court is proceeding with all the inevitability of a contagion

Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s accession to the Supreme Court barreled forward in a cloud of partisanship and pestilence Monday. Introduced as President Trump’s nominee on the brink of his coronavirus-haunted re-election bid in what turned out to be a super-spreading event, Barrett appeared before a Senate Judiciary Committee hobbled by the contagion, its convalescing and quarantining members a testament to the farcically precipitous process.

Read: CNN Seems Rather Concerned That ACB Owns A Gun And Could Rule On Cases »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats, Wonky Media | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

New Talking Poll: People Want New COVID Relief Over ACB

By William Teach October 13, 2020 – 4:14 pm

This is what you call a push/pull, because it was designed to elicit a very specific response

Yahoo News/YouGov poll: As opposition to Trump’s pandemic approach grows, most voters want Senate to pass stimulus before considering Amy Coney Barrett

As the Senate begins confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, two-thirds of voters say Congress should focus instead on passing more COVID-19 relief for struggling workers and businesses, according to a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll.

The survey, which was conducted from Oct. 9 to 11, found that large majorities of the public think Congress has its priorities backward. Not only do more than three-quarters (77 percent) of registered voters want legislators to approve another major pandemic relief package; 66 percent want the Senate to vote on it before voting on Barrett’s nomination. A full third of Republicans (33 percent) agree.

The consensus around Congress’s misplaced priorities reflects the deepening influence of COVID-19 on the final days of the 2020 election. While slightly more voters blame Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (43 percent) than President Trump (40 percent) for Washington’s continuing failure to agree on a relief bill, that dynamic has in no way boosted Trump. On the contrary, Trump continues to trail Democratic nominee Joe Biden by 8 percentage points among likely voters (43 percent to 51 percent) in large part because they have taken an even dimmer view of the president’s leadership on COVID-19 in the wake of his own recent hospitalization and the broader White House outbreak that has left dozens infected.

Pretty much most of the poll is meant to bash Trump and Republicans, and attempt to sway squishy GOP Senators into shutting down the hearings, stopping a vote, or, at least, vote against ACB. In the Age Of McCain, they might have gotten this. But, these days, even squishy Lindsay Graham has a spine.

Democrats need to just give it up. They never figured out how to attack her like they did with Kavanaugh. You just got silly questions on abortion and Obamacare, and, heck, Sheldon Whitehouse didn’t even ask a question, just yammered on about dark money and stuff.

Read: New Talking Poll: People Want New COVID Relief Over ACB »

Posted in Current Affairs, Democrats | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 13, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible plastic straw which causes Bad Weather, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Bustednuckles, with a post on some thoughts about a little slice of new Amerika.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Biden Finally Sorta Answers On Court Packing

By William Teach October 13, 2020 – 10:30 am

In order to increase the number of Supreme Court, and lower federal court judges, Congress would need to pass legislation, then President Harris, er, Biden, would have to sign it. Lefty groups are super excited to pack the courts, and aren’t shy at saying it. They even claim it is normal! Heck, history shows that it’s normal, claims CNN, even though it’s been the same is 1869, and FDRs attempt to pack the court was decidedly unpopular in 1937.

Why voters seriously need Joe Biden to answer the court-packing question

Voters “don’t deserve” to know if a President Joe Biden would pack the Supreme Court, the candidate told an interviewer on Saturday. Yes, they do, Joe: Americans deserve to know who they’re electing — and it shouldn’t be that hard to answer.

Biden, running mate Kamala Harris and their campaign insist the court-packing question is simply a “distraction” from the real issues — that is, the ones they want to talk about. “I’m not going to play his game,” is how Biden puts it.

Except it’s the “game” of the American people. (snip)

Moreover, doing it now would require killing the Senate’s filibuster rules entirely — opening the door to lots of other radical legislation, such as the Green New Deal.

Biden claims to be a moderate, so why can’t he rule out this madness? Why insist that he’ll only answer after Election Day?

Liberals are doing their best to explain away his refusal to commit. Joe would never do it, they claim — he just doesn’t want to turn off voters in the AOC-Bernie Sanders radical wing of the party before he gets their votes. Even if true, he’s turning off at least some moderate voters by leaving the question open, when it ought to be a slam-dunk.

More: If he can’t say no to the far left now, you have to wonder if he will as president. He’s done nothing but appease progressives since clinching the nomination, even letting Sanders write much of the party platform.

Well, even though the Credentialed Media is not bothering to demand Joe answer, he finally attempted to thread the needle

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden said Monday that he is “not a fan” of the idea of adding seats to the Supreme Court after repeatedly dodging questions about the issue.

“I’m not a fan of court packing, but I don’t want to get off on that whole issue. I want to keep focused,” Biden told WKRC, a Cincinnati-area CBS/CW affiliate. “The president would like nothing better than to fight about whether or not I would in fact pack the court or not pack the court, et cetera. The focus is, why is he doing what he’s doing now?”

OK, he’s not a fan. Good to know, Joe, way to take a stance

The former vice president also described Republicans’ push to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court before November’s election as a form of court packing.

“Court packing’s going on now. Never before, when an election has already begun and millions of votes already cast, has it ever been that a Supreme Court nominee was put forward,” Biden said. “And one of the reasons is the only shot the American people get to determine who will be on a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court or federal court is when they pick their senator or their president.”

And the deflection. Of course, people shouldn’t be voting, as the Constitution rather lays out which day we’re supposed to vote. And, Joe doesn’t want to get off on that whole rather important issue. He doesn’t seem to want to talk about many issues at all.

Read: Biden Finally Sorta Answers On Court Packing »

Posted in Constitution, Joe Biden | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

UN Warns Of More Weather Disasters Because You Ate A Cheeseburger

By William Teach October 13, 2020 – 7:50 am

This is all your fault, you know. You were warned about coming doom, but, no, you had to take a fossil fueled trip to that burger place, and you refuse to pay taxes and give up your freedom. For shame!

Climate change means more weather disasters every year, warns UN

In the wake of heat waves, global warming, forest fires, storms, droughts and a rising number of hurricanes, the UN weather agency is warning that the number of people who need international humanitarian help could rise 50 per cent by 2030 compared to the 108 million who needed it worldwide in 2018.

In a new report released with partners on Tuesday, the World Meteorological Agency says more disasters attributed to weather are taking place each year.

It said over 11,000 disasters have been attributed to weather, climate and phenomena like tsunamis that are related to water over the last 50 years causing 2 million deaths and racking up USD 3.6 trillion worth of economic costs.

In one hopeful development over that period, the average number of deaths from each separate weather disaster per year has dropped by one-third, even as the number of such events and the economic costs from them have both surged.

Wait, wait, wait, did they just blame tsunamis on man-caused climate change from carbon pollution? WTF? They don’t bother attempting to explain this, they just throw it in an expect climate cultists to believe it.

“While COVID-19 generated a large international health and economic crisis from which it will take years to recover, it is crucial to remember that climate change will continue to pose an on-going and increasing threat to human lives, ecosystems, economies and societies for centuries to come,” said WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas.

“Recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic is an opportunity to move forward along a more sustainable path towards resilience and adaptation in the light of anthropogenic climate change,” he said.

Did everyone enjoy their test drive of what society would look like with all the climate crisis scam policies implemented during COVID lockdown?

Read: UN Warns Of More Weather Disasters Because You Ate A Cheeseburger »

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

Liberal Media Attacks ACB Over Religion And Her Kids

By William Teach October 13, 2020 – 7:37 am

Why? They’re disgusting, horrible people. First, here’s

Nolte: Fearing They’ve Lost Amy Coney Barrett Fight, Democrats Plug Obamacare

Democrats sounded more than a little defeated during their opening statements on Monday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing for Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation.

Rather than use this time to try to stop Barrett’s confirmation with the ludicrous stalling tactics we saw during the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh two years ago or to question Barrett’s legal bona fides or to make any of the wild claims about hidden documents and rape we saw in 2018, so far, Democrats are reduced to doing the equivalent of a cable news appearance.

Democrats do not appear to have a plan of any kind to lay some sort of groundwork to derail Barrett or to pick off the three or four Republican senators needed to kill her nomination. Democrats are, instead, using this allotted time to plug Obamacare as something it’s not — worth a damn. They’re also attacking President Trump as a racist and coronavirus super-spreader, firing off anti-science complaints about how this hearing might result in their catching the coronavirus, and, of course, lying about how confirming a Supreme Court justice during an election year is unprecedented — fact check: it’s not.

That’s it. That’s all they have.

That is all they have. Ted Cruz said “Let me observe, as Sherlock Holmes famously observed, that what speaks the loudest is the dog that didn’t bark, which is, to date, of every Democrat who’s spoken, we’ve heard virtually not a single word about Judge Barrett!” So, we end up with things like this, from the NY Times

If Amy Coney Barrett Were Muslim

Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, has faced immense scrutiny of her religious beliefs, and we need to be vigilant against any religious bias or discrimination.

But I marvel at the hypocrisy of Republicans who are expressing shock and outrage over this, after the way the right has treated Muslims. President Trump responded to the alarm over Judge Barrett’s nomination by accusing Democrats of bias against Catholics and “basically fighting a major religion in our country.” This is rich from the man who is running against Joe Biden, a Catholic; who promoted a Muslim ban; and who told America, “I think Islam hates us.” (snip)

I can’t help wondering: How would Republicans behave if Judge Barrett were a Democrat whose strongly held religious beliefs came from Islam instead of Catholicism?

There was no Muslim ban, and, yes, a lot of Islam does, in fact, hate us. The writer, Wajahat Ali, has never been bothered by protecting Iran and extremist Islamists, and this is just a cute way of attacking ACB, Republicans, and, get this, most Christians. It in no way disqualifies ACB, and the Credentialed Media isn’t even bothering to try, just going for barking moonbat smears. The NY Times obviously has plenty more moonbattery, let’s look at the Washington Post. This is on the front page as “perspective”, which means “not actually news, just a way to attack without making us look like The Daily Kos or some lunatic left wing blog”

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett has seven kids. And don’t you dare forget it.

The opening day of Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court was kid-friendly. It was child-obsessed. It was a little over five hours of children as talking points and visual aids and proof of unwavering conservative values. It’s hard to recall a meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee that was so focused on the well-being, the deportment and the birth story of our youngest citizens.

Yeah, we were supposed to focus on all the smears from Democrats, except they couldn’t find any and couldn’t make stuff up. The UK Guardian tried to trot out an old high school mate who didn’t want her on the court because ACB is pro-life. What, no stories of hazing? Nope

The many references to Barrett’s children were a not-so-subtle pronouncement that her prolific motherhood was especially good and admirable and a sign that she was not shirking her womanly duty while she was unleashing her ambition. Barrett had it all — on terms that were acceptable to social conservatives.

Except, they didn’t spend that much time doing this, other than initial politeness, something Democrats have forgotten.

Republicans felt compelled to shine a special spotlight on the two children she and her husband adopted from Haiti. Are they not all her children, and shouldn’t they simply be described as such — at least by those outside her circle? Highlighting their adoption comes across as a way for Republicans to vouch for Barrett’s welcoming nature and her embrace of diversity. It’s their antiabortion argument that there are loving homes waiting to welcome any and all kids.

This is a typical disgusting line of attack, obviously meant to uphold the “right” to killing the unborn, an attack that one would not expect in a major media outlet. But, the Washington Post is just as deranged as most left wing blogs, which is why left wing blogs have either disappeared or lost a lot of traffic. Why read them when you can just go to regular news outlets?

Read: Liberal Media Attacks ACB Over Religion And Her Kids »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Current Affairs | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

We Need To Tackle Fuel Poverty Or Something

By William Teach October 12, 2020 – 2:44 pm

Well, this is a new one from the Cult of Climastrology

Tackle fuel poverty and the climate crisis

Experts are right to raise the alarm about the climate impacts of how we heat our homes. That the UK is on course to take 700 years to achieve low-carbon heating should spur the government to action (Report, 8 October).

Its first step should be to end the subsidy for heating that maintains the high-carbon status quo and does little to help those in fuel poverty. The reduced VAT rate on domestic gas is discouraging innovation and investment in low-carbon heating technology, and the £2bn in uncollected revenue mainly benefits the wealthy because they use the most energy.

Understandably, politicians don’t want to raise heating bills for those on the lowest incomes. But they don’t have to, if they design a fairer policy that actually does more for the poorest households. This would involve removing the discount on gas and heating fuels and ringfencing the extra revenue. It should be redistributed to low-income homes and used to install energy efficiency measures and low-carbon heating systems. That way, fuel poverty and its health impacts could be tackled at the same time as climate change.

Got that? Instead of providing “the poor” with reasonably priced, and reliable, energy, “The Rich” should be taxed out the ying yang so that The Poor will be able to afford the expensive, and unreliable, alternative energy.

Wait, is the letter writer to the UK Guardian exposing the dirty little secret that renewables/alternatives are expensive as hell? Huh.

Read: We Need To Tackle Fuel Poverty Or Something »

Posted in Energy, Global Warming | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 12, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is cornfield that is obviously in distress from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Blazing Cat Fur, with a post on the gutting of America by the Chinese.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Millions Could Be Returned To Bat Soup Virus Lockdown

By William Teach October 12, 2020 – 10:30 am

So, are they saying that masks and such don’t work?

Millions will be ordered not to leave their local areas in new Covid clampdown

Millions of people will be asked not to travel outside their local areas and could be banned from mixing with other households, even outdoors, amid fears that some hospitals in the North-West could be overwhelmed within days.

This weekend, Downing Street was briefing mayors and council leaders on the planned three-tier “Local Covid Alert Levels” system of restrictions for England, expected to be announced by Boris Johnson on Monday.

Joe Anderson, the Mayor of Liverpool, said he was in discussions with Number 10 about placing the city into the third tier – with the toughest restrictions – amid mounting concern over the number of cases and the capacity of intensive care units at hospitals in the area.

The talks included discussions about deals that would give local leaders greater autonomy over measures and testing in their area in exchange for helping to enforce and explain the rules.

Because this worked so well before, right? Certainly the British police won’t abuse their powers again, right?

I wonder what the World Health Organization has to say

Coronavirus: WHO backflips on virus stance by condemning lockdowns

The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.

Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.

He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.

“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.

Funny how lefties are seeing that lockdowns actually hurt people now that elections are happening. And we’re still getting cases and deaths. And who wanted the economy open? That would be Donald Trump. Who wanted it closed? Democrats, including Joe Biden. Who’s demanding everyone be forced to wear masks and calling for fines and arrests if they don’t? Democrats.

In honesty, masks certainly help a bit. Dems, Republicans, and Trump should have gotten together to advocate that people wear them when close contact is unavoidable. That would be better than forced compliance. Of course, now that there are all these mask mandates people are getting to close. I don’t know how often I have to step back from people.

BTW, Sweden is still doing pretty good, which makes those who want lockdowns even madder.

Read: Surprise: Millions Could Be Returned To Bat Soup Virus Lockdown »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus | 4 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove