Court Rules In Favor Of Texas’ Razor Border Wall

By William Teach November 28, 2024 – 10:30 am

The best part is that come January 20th the Trump administration will drop any Biden-Harris admin appeal of this ruling and move to help Texas

Appeals court rules Texas has right to build razor wire border wall to deter illegal immigration: ‘Huge win’

A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled that Texas has the right to build a razor wire border wall to deter illegal immigration into the Lone Star State.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott announced the ruling on X, saying President Biden was “wrong to cut our razor wire.”

“We continue adding more razor wire border barrier,” the Republican leader wrote.

Wednesday’s 2-1 decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals clears the way for Texas to pursue a lawsuit accusing the Biden administration of trespassing without having to remove the fencing. (snip)

Circuit Judge Kyle Duncan, a Trump appointee during the president-elect’s first term, wrote for Wednesday’s majority that Texas was trying only to safeguard its own property, not “regulate” U.S. Border Patrol, and was likely to succeed in its trespass claims.

Los Federales have primacy on immigration per the Constitution, but, do States not have the right to protect their own statehood? Don’t forget, the original mean of “state” was “nation.” It was 13 former colonies now considering themselves to be almost their own nations brought together as the United States Of America, with a central federal government for certain functions. And a need to protect their land. It’s a novel argument.

Read: Court Rules In Favor Of Texas’ Razor Border Wall »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Hotcold Take: 14 Million Americans Could Maybe Might Sink In 76 Years

By William Teach November 28, 2024 – 7:50 am

Remember, this is all Science! Especially with all the bets hedging while using the world “may”

14 Million Americans May Sink Within 76 Years

It’s not good news for 14 million Americans living on the southeast Atlantic coast. In a new study published in Nature Climate Change—led by Patrick Barnard from the U.S. Geological Survey’s Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center in Santa Cruz, California—a team of experts wrote that the area running from Norfolk, Virginia, to Miami faces plenty more risks than simple coastal flooding as a result of several interconnected climate change-driven factors.

Basically, water is going up, land is going down, weather is going wild, and none of it is good news. (snip)

Assuming a conservative 3.2 feet of sea level rise by 2100—according to data from the United Nations published earlier this year, the current rate of sea level rise indicates that we should expect to see that figure at a minimum—the study authors wrote that more than 70 percent of residents in the southeast Atlantic coast of the United States will experience shallow and emerging groundwater, a danger 15 times greater than daily flooding from surface water. With groundwater potentially affecting more than 70 percent of coastal residents and innundating $1 trillion worth of property, it will create difficulty throughout municipalities, making the maintenance of everything from roads and building stability and septic systems and utilities significantly more difficult.

“Assuming”? There’s no doubt that there is sea rise, something expected during a Holocene warm period, as well as land subsiding. In Virginia, Sewells Point is one of the best long term gauges for Virginia, which sees 1.57 feet per 100 years. A little on the high end of expected sea rise during a Holocene warm period, but, it encompasses land going down. So, not 3.2 feet in less than 76 years as a “conservative” measure.

Virginia Key, an island right off the coast of Miami which is a park and has the Miami Seaquarium, no businesses or residents, is at 1.04 feet per 100 years, on the low end of expected sea rise during a warm period. Charleston, sort of in the middle, is at 1.14 feet per 100 years. There’s not one longterm gauge between Norfolk and Miami which is even close to a “conservative” 3.2 feet per 100 years.

Land sinking may not be the first thought that comes up when thinking about the impacts of climate change, but its a serious concern. According to data from NASA, many parts of the southeast Atlantic coast are sinking between 1 and 2 millimeters per year as part of a major glacial isostatic adjustment occurring deep underground. Compounding upon changes in land levels—especially in coastal areas of Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina—are dams blocking sediment that would have otherwise replenished coastal lands. Without that sediment, soils compact. And sink.

“Subsidence is a pernicious, highly localized, and often overlooked problem in comparison to global sea level rise,” Leonard Ohenhen, a geophysicist at Virginia Tech, said in a statement, “but it’s a major factor that explains why water levels are rising in many parts of the eastern U.S.”

Did mankind’s use of fossil fuels cause the end of the last glacial age 20,000 years ago? It would be mankind’s fault for the dams reducing sediment, but, there aren’t that many. And that would not be anthropogenic climate change.

The Nature study used geospatial data and a variety of modeling tools, including the Coastal Storm Modeling System, to project potential coastal hazard impacts, highlighting the risks associated with a range of interconnected conditions.

Surprise! Computer models. Cult in, cult out. But, how can they predict what will happen 76 years from now when they cannot even get a 7 day forecast right? It was supposed to be 61 and rainy today in Raleigh 7 days ago. Now the prediction is 69 and rainy.

Oh, and let’s not forget all the rich folks and politicians pushing this who buy beach houses.

Read: Hotcold Take: 14 Million Americans Could Maybe Might Sink In 76 Years »

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

Moonbat Women Engage In “Primal Scream” Over Trump Win

By William Teach November 28, 2024 – 7:30 am

Seriously, this is still going on. Even young children give up on their tantrums within a few hours to a day

Women engage in mass ‘primal scream’ in wake of Trump victory: ‘Release our pain’

Remarkable footage shows Wisconsin women screaming in unison towards Lake Michigan in the wake of Vice President Harris’s Nov. 5 loss to President-elect Trump.

The footage, which recently went viral on social media, was originally posted by a Facebook user named Tamara Gibbs. The event took place at Klode Park in Whitefish Bay on Nov. 9.

The extraordinary video shows around two dozen adult women screeching at the water. The screams eventually reach a crescendo, as video shows the shrieks getting gradually louder and louder until the group stopped.

“What a gorgeous morning to gather at Klode Park in Whitefish Bay to engage in a Primal Scream in order to release our pain and frustration after the election,” Gibbs wrote in a Facebook post. “If you zoom in you will see Trump supporters proudly waving their flag on top of the hill.”

Crazy do crazy

It almost seems more performative for social media, like, a couple of the loons said “hey, let’s do something crazy for social media.” “Oh, hey, we can yell at a lake Because Trump”.

Read: Moonbat Women Engage In “Primal Scream” Over Trump Win »

Posted in Unhinged Tools | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

John Kerry, Who Was In Vietnam, Says People Need To Be Forced To Behave To Stop Climate Doom

By William Teach November 27, 2024 – 3:00 pm

And people told me I was nuts back in 2004 when became a Skeptic because I saw this as all about politics and increasing government power rather than a science

Should we behave like the 40K who took fossil fueled flights to the latest UN climate conference, COP29? Or Kerry, who has multiple homes, cars, and private jets?

(Fox News) Former Secretary of State John Kerry claimed that there is a “climate emergency,” and suggested that Africans without electricity must select “the right kinds of electricity,” likely referring to green energy production, and that the U.S. must help them to afford it.

Kerry made the comments at a speaking event at the Harvard Kennedy School Institute of Politics on Nov. 21, 2024.

The Democrat suggested there will be a need to “declare a climate emergency, which is what we really have. And we need to get people to behave as if this really is a major transitional challenge to the whole planet.”

I prefer to act like Warmists, who refuse to make their own lives carbon neutral. I bet my life is more planet friendly from a real environmental point of view than theirs is, and I bet my carbon footprint is lower than theirs, unintentionally.

(Harvard) “Nobody lives as an island in this process, on this planet,” he said. “And no one country has enough money to deal with the climate crisis.”

And while political shifts are happening all over the world, Kerry said he firmly believes science should lead the way. “Everything I’ve ever done and advocated for in this is based on science. No politics. There’s no liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican electrons or molecules.”

If science leads the way than why does he use so much fossil fuel? And how does he propose to “get people to behave”? Sounds kind of Fascismy.

(I wonder if anyone still remembers the joke about Kerry always saying he was in Vietnam?)

Read: John Kerry, Who Was In Vietnam, Says People Need To Be Forced To Behave To Stop Climate Doom »

Posted in Global Warming | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 27, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is horrible planet killing meat, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Cold Fury, with a post on eating like Trump.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

USA Today Tells Parents To Not Let Kids Read Book “Wicked”

By William Teach November 27, 2024 – 10:30 am

Well, this is interesting

Take your kids to see ‘Wicked,’ but don’t let them read the book by Gregory Maguire

Long before Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo were holding space for the lyrics of “Defying Gravity,” there was “Wicked” the Broadway musical. And before that, there was “Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West,” by Gregory Maguire, based on L. Frank Baum’s characters in “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz.” (snip)

Is the ‘Wicked’ book appropriate for kids?

In a word, no. The “Wicked” book by Gregory Maguire has key adult differences from the stage adaptation. One of the opening scenes is puppets having sex. When we first meet Elphaba in the book, she’s a feral infant who is muzzled after biting off people’s appendages. The book contains drinking, drugs, sexual assault, prostitution, crime and wild sex parties between humans and animals.

In an interview with MassLive, Maguire said while the main themes translate, his book is a “tragedy” and the stage production is a “bittersweet drama.”

“I purposely put some somewhat raunchy material in the first few pages of ‘Wicked’ the novel to show what people were getting into, that they were going to have to leave behind their ideas about an all-singing, all-dancing chorus line of flying monkeys,” Maguire said.

So, really, no, Wicked is not for young kids. At best, it is PG-13 heading towards an R. But, it’s kind of interesting that the USA Today doesn’t want kids reading a book

Just a smattering of headlines from the USA Today, and, what are those books

Why you should read these 51 banned books now

As journalists, it’s our job to seek out the truth even when it’s uncomfortable. We value diverse perspectives, are open to new ideas and respect intellectual freedom. So it should come as no surprise that the thought of banning a book would make us riled.

What happens when a book is challenged in school boards and public libraries? Titles can be removed from school curriculums or library shelves. Most public schools and libraries have boards made up of elected officials or members appointed by elected officials. It is by the power of these officials that a book can go from challenged to banned in a school district or public library. Even if it happens only once, it is one time too many.

And some of those titles

  • ‘All Boys Aren’t Blue’ by George M. Johnson
  • ‘Gender Queer’ by Maia Kobabe
  • ‘Simon vs. the Homo Sapiens Agenda’ by Becky Albertalli
  • ‘Two Boys Kissing’ by David Levithan
  • ‘Beyond Magenta: Transgender Teens Speak Out’ by Susan Kuklin

There are plenty more like that. They are exactly the type you think are being taken out of schools, because they contain heavy sex, drugs, etc, just like ‘The Perks of Being a Wallflower’ by Stephen Chbosky, which includes

Some of the content throughout can be intense or inappropriate for younger readers – topics include alcohol, drugs, sex, abortion, mental health struggles, suicide and sexual abuse. But these are all things high schoolers can and often do experience, and blocking them from a story that explores them in a thoughtful, empathetic way doesn’t do anyone any good.

So, it’s fine for young kids to read utter smut, especially if it is LGBTQ, in school and at the library, but, not Wicked? Older teens, fine, but, the crazies in schools feed this stuff to young kids. And, yes, Wicked is not appropriate for them, either. Kids should be left to be kids and not fed adult sexuality and such. Just let them be kids.

In fairness, some of the books mentioned in that last link are ones banned by liberals, such as Animal Farm, Of Mice And Man, and Lord Of The Flies. Literary classics. And any assigned reading should be age appropriate.

Read: USA Today Tells Parents To Not Let Kids Read Book “Wicked” »

Posted in Books, Wonky Media | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Maine Sues Fossil Fuels Companies While Continue To Use Fossil Fuels For State Operations

By William Teach November 27, 2024 – 7:00 am

Weirdly, there is nothing in the lawsuit about the state giving up their own use of fossil fuels, nor for the Attorney General of Maine. And Democrats wonder why Trump won

Maine attorney general files lawsuit against oil companies over climate change

Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey announced Tuesday that he has filed a lawsuit in state court against a handful of major oil companies because he claims they have been deceiving Maine residents for decades about the role their fossil fuel products played in causing climate change.

The defendants listed in the lawsuit include BP, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Shell and Sunoco, as well as the American Petroleum Institute, the national trade association that represents all aspects of America’s oil and natural gas industry.

Frey said the state of Maine is seeking to hold the companies accountable for failing to warn Mainers and concealing their knowledge about the devastating consequences of the increasing use of fossil fuels on the state’s people, economy and environment.

The lawsuit claims the defendants knew about the potentially catastrophic consequences an increasing use of fossil fuels would cause as early the 1960s, but decided to deploy strategic public relations campaigns designed to discredit the scientific consensus on climate change, create doubt in the minds of the public and delay the energy economy’s transition to a lower-carbon future. According to the state, this conduct has resulted in enormous financial burdens, public health impacts, property damage and other harms across Maine as a result of extreme weather, rising sea levels and warmer temperatures.

“For over half a century, these companies chose to fuel profits instead of following their own science to prevent what are now likely irreversible, catastrophic climate effects,” Frey said in a statement. “In so doing, they burdened the state and our citizens with the consequences of their greed and deception.”

The suit, weirdly, isn’t asking the companies to stop selling their products in Maine, particularly to the state of Maine, they just want money. It sure would be fun if the companies refused to sell their products to the state. It would not be fun for the residents of Maine if they could no longer get heating oil, natural gas, etc, since so many rely on it.

Read: Maine Sues Fossil Fuels Companies While Continue To Use Fossil Fuels For State Operations »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Are US And NATO Considering Giving Ukraine Nuclear Weapons?

By William Teach November 27, 2024 – 6:45 am

Is this a case of “loose speech getting out”? Or “people are just making stuff up”? Or “we’re just throwing thoughts around but weren’t serious”? Or “yeah, we’re really considering this”?

Russia condemns “irresponsible” talk of nuclear weapons for Ukraine

Discussion in the West about arming Ukraine with nuclear weapons is “absolutely irresponsible”, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday, in response to a report in the New York Times citing unidentified officials who suggested such a possibility.

The New York Times reported last week that some unidentified Western officials had suggested U.S. President Joe Biden could give Ukraine nuclear weapons before he leaves office.

“Several officials even suggested that Mr. Biden could return nuclear weapons to Ukraine that were taken from it after the fall of the Soviet Union. That would be an instant and enormous deterrent. But such a step would be complicated and have serious implications,” the newspaper wrote

Asked about the report, Peskov told reporters: “These are absolutely irresponsible arguments of people who have a poor understanding of reality and who do not feel a shred of responsibility when making such statements. We also note that all of these statements are anonymous.”

Earlier, senior Russian security official Dmitry Medvedev said that if the West supplied nuclear weapons to Ukraine then Moscow could consider such a transfer to be tantamount to an attack on Russia, providing grounds for a nuclear response.

Well, I certainly hope this isn’t something they’re really considering, but, you never know with Joe, his advisors, and the warmongers in NATO.

(Newsweek) “We are not planning to equip Ukraine with nuclear weapons,” the White House told Newsweek, when contacted for a response to these reports and Medvedev’s comments.

Anyone else not feel any better?

{Dmitry Medvedev, the Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of Russia] continued, “Yet I must comment on the nonsense: 1) The very threat of transferring nuclear weapons to the Kyiv regime can be considered preparation for nuclear conflict with Russia;

2) The actual transfer of such weapons can be equated to an act of attack on our country under article 19 of the Fundamentals of State Policy in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence.
The consequences are obvious.”

I don’t feel better.

Medvedev also criticized President Joe Biden‘s authorization of Ukraine to use long-range weapons to conduct deep strikes into Russian territory, which began last week and have continued escalating as both countries retaliate against one another.

He said that Ukraine’s use of US-made ATACMS in an attack in Bryansk last week has led to what “can now be qualified as an attack by the bloc’s countries on Russia,” and that “in this case, the right arises to launch a retaliatory strike with weapons of mass destruction against Kyiv and the main NATO facilities, wherever they are. And this is already WWIII.”

Would Joe really want to get into a nuclear war just because he was booted out of running for re-election?

Read: Are US And NATO Considering Giving Ukraine Nuclear Weapons? »

Posted in 2996, Asides, Blogroll, Current Affairs, Dems in Charge: Now What?, Global Warming, Joe Biden, Liberal World, Midday Cute, Quizzes, Seasonal Humor | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

Your Fault: UK Homes Are Rubbish At Staying Warm

By William Teach November 26, 2024 – 3:00 pm

By your fault, I mean it’s the fault of the British elites, politicians, and climate cult groups for creating the issue

Why are UK homes so rubbish at staying warm? We asked the experts

A cold snap has swept across the UK this week, with temperatures plummeting to lows of -11c in some parts of the country.

These low temperatures are set to continue, with the Met Office issuing another weather warning as Storm Bert brings in 70mph winds, rain and snow this weekend.

While the lower-than-average temperatures continue, many of us are still hesitant to turn up the thermostat thanks to skyrocketing energy bills.

Even when we do crank up the heating, many find it difficult to keep the warmth inside leaving us reaching for an extra jumper or spare blanket.

So what is it about the UK’s heating system that leaves so many of us wanting? Here’s what we know about why the UK is so rubbish at heatings its homes properly, the challenges it faces, and how we make it fit for purpose.

They mention damp old houses and poor walls (meaning the insulation), but, then

Even though heating our homes can be a struggle, the UK now pays the highest electricity prices in the world — four times the price of the average bill in the US.

The energy price cap is predicted to rise by another 1.2% in January, making the average household energy bill £1738.

Gas prices are not much better. “We’re massively over reliant on natural gas,” Thomas said. “Other countries have a more diverse selection of heating sources being used in homes.

Why? UK government policies related to the climate scam. That 1738 pounds figure can’t be right for a month, can it? That’s $2,178 US.

“A third of people are in arrears with their energy supplier,” Simcock said.

“The average household in arrears owes about £1500 pounds for electricity and £1300 for gas.”

“We are hearing from people that they will only heat one room of the house. We’ve heard from parents who will give their bedroom to their children, and they themselves perhaps need to sleep in the living room, so that they only have to heat one room or two rooms,” Martiskainen told Yahoo News.

“We are a G7 country, one of the most wealthy countries in the world. So how is it that we are allowing six million households to live in fuel poverty?” she added.

Thank your government for joining a doomsday climate cult.

So, if the current system to heat our homes isn’t working, what are the alternatives?

Many of the experts Yahoo News spoke to voiced their support for installing heat pumps.

Which do not last that long and are expensive. How about just rolling back all the policies that make reliable, dependable energy so expensive?

Another option is district heating.

“District heating heats half of Paris and is in use quite a lot in parts of Scandinavia and parts of eastern Europe,” Thomas explained. “It is essentially where you have one massive boiler or – in the future – a massive heat pump producing very large quantities of heat that’s then pumped directly into people’s homes through underground pipes.

“You don’t have the heating source in your home, hot water is directly pumped into your home.”

And who would be in charge of this? The same government instituting terrbile energy policies? And, considering how far down the authoritarian road the UK government has gone, would you trust them to be in charge?

Read: Your Fault: UK Homes Are Rubbish At Staying Warm »

Posted in Energy, Europe, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 26, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible fossil fueled vehicle causing desertification, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Chicks On The Right, with a post on the Trump dance making it to women’s golf.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove