If All You See…

By William Teach June 14, 2023 – 1:00 pm

…is a world flooded by sea rise, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is A View From The Beach, with a post on yet another Oregon county voting to secede.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

In Order To Save Democracy, Democrats Look To Stop 2024 “Unity Ticket”

By William Teach June 14, 2023 – 10:30 am

That’s the refrain we hear on a constant basis from Democrats and their pet media, right? That we need to save democracy. So, why do they want to block people in the general election?

A ‘unity’ ticket in 2024 presidential race? Why Democrats are objecting to 3rd-party group’s plan

A “unity” team running for the White House next year may sound farfetched — one Republican and one Democrat teaming up to share a platform and a presidential ticket — but some Democrats say they are worried that such a possibility could spoil Joe Biden’s reelection hopes.

And they’re looking to stop it.

No Labels is the group floating a bipartisan team-up if 2024 features the increasingly likely rematch of Biden versus Donald Trump, both of whom face weak approval ratings. Democrats, burned by third-party candidates who may have tipped key states in 2016 — when, for example, Hillary Clinton lost Michigan to Trump by 11,000 votes while Libertarian Gary Johnson earned 172,000 ballots — are sounding the alarm that No Labels could similarly siphon votes from Biden.

In response, Democrats are mounting a scattered effort to blunt the outside group’s efforts.

Among No Labels’ gripes are what they decry as attempts to block access to the ballot in certain states. And while both Democrats and No Labels agree avoiding a Trump presidency is a priority, the feud has sparked a debate over whether efforts to pump the breaks on a third-party bid amount to suppression or due diligence.

Don’t Democrats typically push for more access to the ballot box? Yet, here we have them attempting to squash the ability of No Labels to be on the 2024 ballot. That would sure seem to be contradictory to “saving our democracy.” Of course, Democrats do no want Democracy except in terms of everyone voting and only having the Democratic Party to vote for, much like Saddam Hussein allowed voting and he was the only one on the ballot.

Still, Chavis and No Labels’ chief strategist, Ryan Clancy, insisted repeatedly in a nearly 45-minute interview that the momentum of a ballot access campaign wouldn’t prevent the group from pulling the plug if need be.

“No Labels is on the record, we will not be a spoiler in any case … to the interests of Donald Trump,” Chavis said.

So, they’re really about trying to take out Trump (or, whichever Republican wins the primary)

The Democratic Party in Arizona is suing No Labels and the Democratic secretary of state, contesting No Labels’ status as a third party in Arizona and accusing it instead of being a “dark money” group. And in Maine, the Democratic secretary of state sent letters to residents who signed forms registering with the No Labels Party seeking to ensure they indeed meant to register.

Saving our Democracy by limiting who can run.

“No Labels is kind of the ‘Seinfeld’ of political parties. It’s a party about nothing. And I think they’re pretty clearly out there to sabotage,” said one operative, Jared Leopold.

“Absolutely, Democrats should aggressively try to stop ballot access if there is reason to do so,” he added. “There’s a lot at stake here. And I think Democrats need to play hardball.”

Or, Democrats could offer a better platform and beat them at the ballot box. To save democracy, you know.

Read: In Order To Save Democracy, Democrats Look To Stop 2024 “Unity Ticket” »

Posted in Democrats | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Massachusetts To Create Green Bank For Climate Crisis (scam)

By William Teach June 14, 2023 – 7:00 am

There’s surely no ulterior motive to get the government into being the bank for all the citizens, controlling their money, right?

Massachusetts creates ‘green bank’ to help tackle climate change, housing crunch

Massachusetts is launching what Gov. Maura Healey described Tuesday as the nation’s “first green bank dedicated to affordable housing” — an effort to address two of the state’s top challenges: grappling with the effects of climate change and easing a dire housing market.

The goal of the $50 million Massachusetts Community Climate Bank is to increase investment in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from the building sector, focused in large part on affordable and public housing developments, said Healey, a Democrat.

“Other states have started climate banks. Ours, though, is the country’s first climate bank that is dedicated to housing — affordable housing in particular. That is the primary focus,” she said at a Statehouse press conference. “We’re centering environmental justice for folks hit hardest by the climate impacts and high energy costs.”

In Massachusetts, buildings account for more than 25% of greenhouse gas emissions — a number that rises to about 70% in the state’s larger, densely-populated cities, Healey said.

And this would allow the government the ability to dictate the building projects. Nice little schtick, eh?

Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, also a Democrat, said it’s important not to address climate change in isolation, but to see it as part of a range of challenges facing Boston and the state in general.

“Fossil fuel-free housing is one of those critical intersections where climate, quality of life, health equity and economic justice meet,” Wu said, adding that Boston is one of the cities where buildings account for about 70% of greenhouse gas emissions.

Sounds like BS to me, and all about government controlling everything via the ‘climate change’ push.

Read: Massachusetts To Create Green Bank For Climate Crisis (scam) »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Democrats Try To Reclaim “Parents’ Rights” In Education Or Something

By William Teach June 14, 2023 – 6:45 am

When was the last time Democrats supported parental rights? How many decades ago? How do Democrats regain parental rights as an issue when they keep saying that the government owns the kids?

How do they regain parental rights as an issue when they do not want parents anywhere schools. when they do not want to tell parents what the curriculum is, when they tell kids to not tell their parents what happens in schools, when they help kids pretend to be the other gender, and so forth?

Liberals try to reclaim ‘parents’ rights’ from conservatives in education

In the raging culture wars, conservative parents jumped out first with a robust agenda built around the defense of “parents’ rights.”

It’s not really an agenda. It’s simply Conservatives caring about their children and wanting involvement, and there are plenty of average Democrats who feel the same, namely that the government doesn’t own the kids.

Now, seeking to apply some countervailing pressure, groups are coalescing on the left to resist conservative efforts to remove books from schools, end student LGBTQ clubs and restrict classroom discussions of race and gender. Experts and advocates say the progressives — some forming groups nationally and others in states and local communities — increasingly are in a strong position to push back.

Liberal groups with names such as “Stop Moms for Liberty” are campaigning for like-minded school board candidates, lobbying legislators and training parents to show up at school board meetings. They host Zooms and Facebook pages where parents can commiserate and strategize.

How exactly is the reclaiming parental rights as an issue?

Now, seeking to apply some countervailing pressure, groups are coalescing on the left to resist conservative efforts to remove books from schools, end student LGBTQ clubs and restrict classroom discussions of race and gender. Experts and advocates say the progressives — some forming groups nationally and others in states and local communities — increasingly are in a strong position to push back.

Liberal groups with names such as “Stop Moms for Liberty” are campaigning for like-minded school board candidates, lobbying legislators and training parents to show up at school board meetings. They host Zooms and Facebook pages where parents can commiserate and strategize.

Let me summarize: Democrats are essentially attempting to win local elections and train leftist moms to fight back

In the meantime, many groups are working to train like-minded parents to attend and speak at school board meetings, something conservative groups have been doing since the height of the pandemic. To face them, Red, Wine and Blue has put more than 11,000 people through one-hour “troublemaker trainings.”

This spring in North Carolina, a group called HEAL Together held its first two sessions teaching parents to speak at school board meetings and track school board activity. They drew a combined 160 people from 32 out of the state’s 100 counties, and another 160 are registered for a training this week. They hope to train at least two people from each county this year.

And how is this parental rights, when they’re training them to empower government to keep parents out of everything educations?

The organization also promotes a pledge asking political candidates and elected officials to protect “our public schools, our children, and our country” by defending the “civil rights of [everyone] regardless of race, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, or anything else.”

In other words, they really are just pushing the same old same old

A year-old group with the unsubtle name Stop Moms for Liberty encourages its members to review school board agendas and track board votes. When they find decisions they believe will prove unpopular or controversial, they post on social media, contact reporters and notify advocates such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the NAACP, said founder Liz Mikitarian. The group also provides resources for members interested in running for school board themselves. And it hopes to send 50 to 60 people to protest the upcoming Moms for Liberty gathering in Philadelphia.

They’re trying to stop Moms For Liberty, a group pushing parental rights in education. Was the headline of the piece supposed to be a joke?

Read: Democrats Try To Reclaim “Parents’ Rights” In Education Or Something »

Posted in Unhinged Tools, Wonky Media | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Today: Trees In Tampa, Cruises, Wildfires

By William Teach June 13, 2023 – 3:00 pm

It’s the trees, baby!

Tampa Bay trees tamp down harsh climate change effects

Be-leaf it or not, trees are doing some of the hardest work in Tampa Bay.

Driving the news: Hillsborough and Sarasota counties ranked high in Climate Central’s recent nationwide analysis of urban trees.

Why it matters: Urban tree coverage helps reduce the impacts of extreme heat, prevents stormwater runoff, mitigates air pollution exposure and can even sequester carbon, Axios’ Ayurella Horn-Muller and Simran Parwani report.

  • Urban heat islands are created when developers replace natural landscapes with “dense concentrations of pavement, buildings, and other surfaces that absorb and retain heat,” per the EPA.
  • A tree’s leaves can also absorb pollutants like ozone and nitrogen dioxide, the report noted.

Wait, what was that about the urban tree coverage? The trees are simply reducing the rays of the nuclear furnace in the sky, as well as the urban heat island effect. This is not global warming, anthropogenic climate change. Go sit under a tree, or walk around with an umbrella when it’s sunny. It feels cooler, right? Especially in the South.

The Cruise Industry Is On a Course For Climate Disaster

To future archeologists, mega cruise ships might be some of the strangest artifacts of our civilization—these goliaths of mass-engineered delight, armed with dangling water slides and phalanxes of umbrellas. Looking up at one, you might gain the impression that cruise companies are trying to awe their customers into having a nice time. We have built battleships of pleasure, toiling the world’s oceans, hunting for fun.

It probably won’t come as a shock that the whole thing isn’t exactly sustainable. A medium-sized cruise ship spews greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to those of 12,000 cars, while environmentalists accuse big industry players of investing little in decarbonization, and of covering up endless delay tactics in a heavy coat of greenwash. And for years, the industry has been dogged by bad PR from everything from routine dumping of toxic sludge to increasingly organized outrage from communities tired of hordes of tourists getting dumped at their docks.

There’s nothing the climate cult won’t sink their claws into.

Wildfires aren’t getting worse because of climate change. The real culprit will surprise you

…

However, despite countless statements from liberals and climate activists over the past two decades about the dangers of wildfires and extreme weather events caused by climate change, the available evidence overwhelmingly shows that no such connection exists. Wildfires are not becoming more frequent or burning more acreage. In fact, just the opposite is true.

The U.S. National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC), which has been tracking wildfires for decades, reports that the number of fires in 2022 was 68,988, and the amount of acreage burned was 7.57 million acres.

That might sound like a lot of fires, but the NIFC data show that these figures are well within the historical norm. In 2017, for example, 71,499 fires were reported and more than 10 million acres were burned. One decade earlier, in 2007, there were 85,705 fires that burned 9.32 million acres.

So, not more? And causation?

The Center for Biological Diversity, a left-leaning environmental group, acknowledges that, “The vast majority of western dry forests are at risk of large, high-intensity fire because of the effects of poor forest management over the past century. The primary factors that lead to current forest conditions include logging large trees, fire suppression and livestock grazing. Since the beginning of the 20th century, all three of these factors have been present in western forests, and they continue to play a role today.”

A slight increase of 1.5F since 1850 will not have much of an effect. But, if the cult can scare people enough they’ll give up their money and freedom.

Read: Climate Today: Trees In Tampa, Cruises, Wildfires »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 13, 2023 – 1:00 pm

…are rough seas from too much carbon pollution driven Bad Weather, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 357 Magnum, with a post on San Francisco becoming East Germany.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

ABC News: Trump’s Case Is Totally Different From Biden And Hillary’s Or Something

By William Teach June 13, 2023 – 10:30 am

We’re totally in the spin phase with the Credentialed Media, where what Trump did was Bad and what Biden and Hillary did was not so bad

No, Donald Trump’s classified documents case is not like Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton cases

Almost immediately after the Justice Department on Friday unsealed its indictment against Donald Trump, the former president’s allies began crying foul, noting that — at least so far — no charges have been filed against President Joe Biden for retaining classified documents from his time as vice president or against Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server as secretary of state.

Posting to Twitter on Friday, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., denounced the “double standard.” And appearing on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Clinton “got away” with doing something “similar” to what Trump did.

Trump himself has made similar claims.

But a review of government documents and public statements tied to all three investigations suggests there are key differences between the evidence uncovered in Trump’s case and the others. It also helps to explain why the Justice Department recently declined to charge former Vice President Mike Pence for his handling of classified documents after leaving office.

Key differences, y’all! Key!

The most glaring difference between Trump’s case and Clinton’s case is what prosecutors found about their intent: While the indictment against Trump alleges he violated the Espionage Act through “willful retention of national defense information,” prosecutors in Clinton’s case determined they couldn’t show she was “willful” in her intent.

In fact, as later recounted by the Justice Department’s inspector general, prosecutors in Clinton’s case concluded the evidence they gathered showed “a lack of intent to communicate classified information on unclassified systems.”

Intent! Actually, intent has no bearing on the Clinton case: she had documents of various secret classifications, some of which should never have left a secure reading room. Documents were kept on a homebrew server, in violation of multiple federal laws and regulations. She was transmitting using a non-approved email address. Hillary employees who had no authorization to see the documents had access to them. Intent has nothing to do with it. A kid was prosecuted for taking a photo while on a submarine. Did he have intent? No. Just a dumb kid trying to impress his girlfriend. James Comey essentially laid out why Hillary should have been prosecuted, and the case start with a grand jury, during his press conference, before saying “never mind.”

Biden? He took the documents. Are any as secret as Trump’s? It doesn’t matter. He had them, and he wasn’t even a president. He couldn’t declassify. They were scattered all over. Including in his garage next to the Vette, where anyone could access them, including his drug addled son Hunter. It was irresponsible.

Consider that Ford pardoned Nixon so the country could move on. Despite all Trump’s calls to “lock her up”, he never let his DOJ of the chains to prosecute Hillary, because it would be a political prosecution. And that’s what this is. Regardless of whether what Trump did was wrong, you can bet all presidents have done this, and Biden’s DOJ intentionally went to find something from the start. The DOJ has most likely spent no time looking at Biden’s situation

The Credentialed Media will run lots of this “it’s not the same!” articles, but, are most people buying it? No. Of course, most would like both Trump and Biden to go away.

18 U.S. Code § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material

(a)Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.

Biden did, in fact, remove those documents knowingly, and knowing he had zero authority to do so, and retained those documents at multiple unauthorized locations. It’s a federal felony. He even had documents from prior to his time as VP. He doesn’t get to say “my bad!” all these years later. Unless there is a two-tiered justice system.

Read: ABC News: Trump’s Case Is Totally Different From Biden And Hillary’s Or Something »

Posted in Donald Trump, Journalistic Malpractice | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Can You Guess When Carbon Capture Will Truly Be Ready?

By William Teach June 13, 2023 – 7:15 am

If you read deep into ‘climate change’ like I do, you’ll constantly see articles about carbon capture, and how awesome it is. How it’s the wave of the future. About that

Removing Carbon From the Air Enters Its Awkward Teen Years

If you want to understand the potential of direct air capture, or DAC, all you have to do is see its end product: solid rock. The world’s first plant to pull carbon dioxide from the air and turn it into stone has been operating in Iceland for nearly two years, and the fruits of its labor were on display last week at Climeworks’ DAC Summit.

Sitting under glass and beneath a spotlight, a nondescript-looking gray cylinder of rock roughly the size of a water bottle containing carbon the company’s technology had removed from the air using massive machines was the centerpiece of the summit held in Zurich. It’s a wonder that could someday be in a museum, among the first few tons of carbon mechanically taken out of the atmosphere in the fight against climate change.

This is all that was done

There are now at least 18?direct air capture plants operating worldwide, according to the International Energy Agency, and more are coming online. That makes the rock on display at the summit a tiny piece of today’s $2 billion market for carbon removal, which includes everything from offsets to DAC. Depending on the rules that end up shaping the sector, direct air capture alone could be a nearly $1 trillion business in the next decade, according to projections from researchers at BloombergNEF.

As long as you taxpayers are willing to pony up lots of money…oh, heck, it doesn’t matter, government will give your money away regardless of what you think

Even if the concerns about high costs aren’t over, it’s still a remarkable moment in direct air capture’s history. The technology is leaving behind its training wheels and may be able to pass its driving test while remaining nowhere near ready to be an adult making meaningful contributions to cleaning up the atmosphere. The growing number of researchers, investors and policymakers willing to turn up at the party is a strong indicator, but there’s no guarantee direct air capture is ready for rapid growth.

But, they’re happy to take you money

Science has increasingly shown that to avert catastrophic levels of global warming, the world will need to cut carbon pollution dramatically while also developing the capacity to pull billions of tons of carbon dioxide — or gigatons — out of the atmosphere each year by 2050. Climeworks is the most advanced of the DAC hopefuls, and its vision is to become a megaton-scale company — that is, one capable of nabbing 1 million tons of CO2 — by the end of this decade.

The timing for getting this one up-and-coming company to a gigaton? Not until mid-century.

So, basically, a pipe dream. But, hey, I don’t blame them for trying to take advantage of the scam. There’s lots of money involved in the grift.

The DAC Summit highlighted some of the outside forces that could help the technology grow up fast. There are major corporate investments, such as the multiple multi-million dollar deals to buy carbon removal services using direct air capture. There are potentially billions of dollars in US government incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act, in addition to $3.5 billion in funding for so-called DAC hubs where fledging startups can run experiments and try to scale their technology.

Notice most money comes from government. If companies really saw the ability to make money they’d invest heavily.

Read: Can You Guess When Carbon Capture Will Truly Be Ready? »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Even Fewer Americans Support Biological Men Playing On Women’s Sports Teams

By William Teach June 13, 2023 – 7:00 am

Let’s be honest, this has almost nothing to do with biological women pretending to be men playing on male sports teams. How often do you hear that happening? Almost never? Huh. This is about biological males taking positions and wins from biological women, which can lead to loss of scholarships, not too mention simply stealing wins that the women worked for

Americans less supportive of transgender athletes playing for teams of their choice, poll finds

Americans are less supportive of transgender athlete participation in single-gender sports than they were two years ago, a national survey has found, even as more people say they know someone who is transgender.

The findings, gleaned from Gallup’s annual Values and Beliefs poll, suggest Americans see the issue more as one of competitive fairness than of transgender civil rights, said Jeff Jones, a senior editor for the public opinion polling firm.

What about the civil rights of actual women to not have their spots taken, their wins taken away, all their hard work destroyed? Is this fair?

Gallup’s telephone survey of 1,011 U.S. adults was conducted last month. It found that 69% of Americans say transgender athletes should be restricted to sports teams that conform with their birth gender, compared to 62% in 2021.

Likewise, the findings showed that just 26% of Americans support transgender athletes playing for teams matching their gender identity, compared to 34% two years ago.

They’re basically saying the same thing: most Americans do not want the gender deranged competing against biological women. I wonder how many who approve of it have women in their lives who have to compete, or have competed themselves? Because virtually every time real women have to compete against the gender confused men they lose.

Z Nicolazzo, an associate professor of trans studies in education at the University of Arizona, said the results show that fearmongering rhetoric accompanying the rapid rise in anti-trans legislation is having an effect.

“It’s resonating with people regardless of what the scientific evidence demonstrates,” she said.

But equally damaging, Nicolazzo said, is that Democrats and progressives are not creating “a pro-trans narrative.”

How about a pro-women narrative? What about real women? Good grief, it wasn’t that long ago that we were supposed to “believe all women”. Democrats just tried to pass their Equal Rights Amendment (which wouldn’t actually. And they cannot even define women anymore), yet, they’re all in for this trans madness fad. At the expense of real women.

Gallup’s poll found that more people say they know someone who is transgender compared to two years ago: 39% of Americans reported that someone they knew personally told them they were transgender, up from 31% in 2021.

The madness is spreading, and spreading fast.

Read: Surprise: Even Fewer Americans Support Biological Men Playing On Women’s Sports Teams »

Posted in Current Affairs | 27 Comments | Trackback URL

Montana Youts Go To Trial Over ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach June 12, 2023 – 5:10 pm

I’m really hoping that the lawyers for the state of Montana ask the youts what they’ve done in their own lives to reduce their own carbon footprints. Do they take fossil fueled travel in autos? Buses? Do they have FF ATVs to head out for recreation? How much time do they spend on-line, burning up lots of electricity?

Youth go to trial in a test of state’s obligation to protect Montana residents from warming

Youth plaintiffs said warming temperatures were harming their health and threatening their futures as a closely-watched climate trial kicked off Monday in Montana. But a lawyer for the fossil fuel-friendly state argued its emissions were “minuscule” on a global scale and that eliminating them would have little impact.

The case over state government obligations to protect people against worsening climate change is the first of dozens of similar lawsuits to reach trial. It’s scheduled to last two weeks.

The 16 young plaintiffs — supported by a parade of climate experts — are trying to persuade state District Judge Kathy Seeley that Montana’s allegiance to fossil fuel development endangers their health and livelihoods and those of future generations.

Plaintiffs attorney Roger Sullivan said in opening arguments that his clients and their families already were suffering health problems and economic losses as climate change dries up rivers and worsens wildfires. He said Montana has a obligation to protect residents from climate change under its unusually protective state constitution.

Here’s the thing: they’re going to have to prove it. They’re going to have to have facts, not scaremongering. They’ll have to prove that their health is suffering and it is due to the use of fossil fuels by Mankind which have cause a whopping 1.5F increase in global temperatures since 1850.

Experts say the case in state court could set legal precedent but isn’t likely to make immediate changes to policy in fossil fuel-friendly Montana.

Environmentalists have called the bench trial a turning point because similar suits in nearly every state have already been dismissed. A favorable decision could add to a handful of rulings globally that have declared governments have a duty to protect citizens from climate change.

Neither the US nor Montana Constitutions say anything of the sort. There is not duty to protect from a slight increase in temperatures, even if it was caused my Mankind. What will the climate cultists say if they lose the case?

The plaintiffs and their attorneys were cheered by supporters as they arrived outside the courthouse on Monday. Inside, Seeley’s small courtroom was packed with observers and members of the media.

How did the plaintiffs and attorneys arrive? Bus? Or, fossil fueled vehicles? One thing

One reason the case may have made it so far in Montana is the state’s constitutional requirement that government “maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment.” Only a few states, including Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and New York, have similar environmental protections in their constitutions.

Which is about actual environmental issues. ‘Climate change’ is not.

The case was brought in 2020 by attorneys for the environmental group Our Children’s Trust, which since 2010 has filed climate lawsuits in every state on behalf of youth plaintiffs. Many cases — including a previous one in Montana — have been dismissed.

In other words, it’s purely astroturfed, and plaintiffs are as young as 5. Does anyone think a 5 year knows what the hell is going on?

Read: Montana Youts Go To Trial Over ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove