No one really agrees where it will pass over
Tracking Chinese Balloon over North Carolina soon. @WRAL pic.twitter.com/MGqwbYc36A
— Mark Boyle (@MarkBoyleTV) February 3, 2023
CBS17 has it passing through the Charlotte area into South Carolina. The Raleigh News And Observer includes this
Read: China’s Not Shot Down Spy Balloon To Pass Over NC Saturday »
I’ve probably mentioned in the past that I’m not a big fan of earbuds that go in your ear canal, since they stuff your ears up and make it seem like you have a cold, hearing every little breath like your ears and nose are stuffed up. But, it’s really hard to find ones that are really good and don’t. I do have a pair of JBLs that do not go in the ear canal, sound is OK. Use them for just being out and about and talking on the phone (I like to use just the left one). Not great for the gym in terms of staying in. I’ve been using these Vidonn at the gym, since they wrap around ears and stay in. Decent sound and volume. But, they are getting a bit old, battery doesn’t hold charge as long. I’ve tried Skullcandy Push Ultra, but, they have a problem with the left dropping out all the time.
Had some extra cash, was thinking of getting a pair of Apple earbuds, the Bose Sport were on sale around October, thought I would give them a try, had some birthday money sitting around. I love the sound of Bose, have speakers and a pair of wired earbuds. Well worth it. They have a less round rubber tip, do not go way down in the ear canal. Sound is outstanding, really like it, and, sounds louder since blocking some of the outside sound. Battery length is good. I’ve been using them for both out and about and at the gym. They stay in, very comfortable, my ears do not hurt even after a long session. The only downside is that you can only use the right one for phone calls, since it has the microphone. I’ll grab my JBLs if I need to makes some calls. Definitely a good value for $129
I was given the Quiet Comfort 1’s for Christmas. I probably would not have bought them for $199 myself, would be afraid to carry them around. I was close to returning them, because the case is pretty big, not exactly convenient for carrying around. But, gave them a shot at the gym, and they are great. The noise cancellation is wonderful, really getting rid of the noise from other people and the overhead music. And, since the buds are a little bigger than the Sports, the sound is a bit better. And the gym is where I listen the most at one time. Extremely comfortable. And you can adjust the bass, middle, and treble from the app. One nice things is that there are not a ton of controls on the buds, so, you cannot mess things up by accident. The case is wireless, so I can plop it on a charging pad, have a few, no problem. They aren’t quite as loud with the noise cancellation on, but, even cranking the volume of the phone up the sound quality doesn’t suffer. I do not mind that the buds are a bit bigger, can barely feel the weight.
Have not tried them with phone calls yet. Probably won’t, as the mike is in the right. Neither is truly “True Wireless”, since the left requires the right to be connected. I’m fine with that. Less chance of dropping out. For both, if you take the right one out of your ear music and videos will pause. I like that.
The Quiet Comforts 2 have a smaller case and are a bit smaller, but, I’m not spending $249 (sale price) and carrying them around in a pocket.
Trackback URL
Of course, Gizmodo has to give a disclaimer, but, the very fact that they’re even going down this road shows how deranged this whole cult is
The Last of Us Is Right: Climate Change Is Making Fungi More Dangerous
Zombie-creating fungi are an unlikely possibility, but a warmer world will make fungi more of a threat.
“Unlikely”. Look, I love reading zombie book, and read a bunch each year. Working through a series right now. But, it’s not going to happen (well, unless scientists screw with something, and it would be more like 28 Days Later).
HBO has another bonafide hit on its hand with the recent release of The Last of Us, the post-apocalyptic TV show based on the hit video game series produced by Naughty Dog. Both the game and show (at least through the first three episodes) weave together a blend of pulse-pounding action and gut-wrenching drama, as protagonists Joel and Ellie journey across the ruins of the United States.
The central cause of said apocalypse is a fungal infection that turns its victims into zombie-like creatures. While the fictional disease has its fantastical aspects, it’s based on the very real Cordyceps and Ophiocordyceps—two related families of parasitic fungal species that spread by manipulating the behavior of their insect or arachnid hosts. Real and creepy as those fungi are, it’s unlikely that any existing Cordyceps species will pose that sort of danger to humans, at least in the near future. Among other things, it’s taken millions of years for the fungi to evolve their unique way of life with any one specific bug, and our human biology has little in common with these hosts.
Fungi tend to require a certain range of temperatures to sustain life. Our typical body temperature, roughly 97 degrees Fahrenheit, is too high to be comfortable for most fungi to regularly infect us. But as climate change raises the average temperature in many regions, the argument goes, some fungi will adapt and learn to thrive under the heat. And if people are routinely exposed to these heat-adapted fungi, some may then successfully make the jump into becoming a human pathogen.
Doom! Skipping through all the missives of climate cult apocalypse to the end
“We need more research into tracking the spread of fungal diseases and increasing our arsenal of antifungal drug treatments,” Gusa said. “This means we need better diagnostic tools, increased surveillance, new antifungal drugs and clinical trials for vaccine candidates.”
The Last of Us might be fiction, but the fungal threat is real.
Read: Your Fault: ‘Climate Change’ Could Make Dangerous Fungi Like In The Last Of Us »
…are boats set up and ready for when the seas flood, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post on resistance to funding Ukraine rising in liberal NYC.
Read: If All You See… »
I do have one question that hasn’t been addressed in any of the stories: just when did the U.S. military notice the balloon?
U.S. Military Monitoring Suspected Chinese Spy Balloon
The U.S. military is currently monitoring a suspected Chinese spy balloon that has been hovering for several days over the northern United States.
Pentagon Press Secretary Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder said in a statement on Thursday that the “high-altitude surveillance balloon” poses no immediate threat to the United States and will be monitored for the time-being.
“The United States Government has detected and is tracking a high-altitude surveillance balloon that is over the continental United States right now,” said Ryder, adding:
The U.S. government, including NORAD, continues to track and monitor it closely. The balloon is currently traveling at an altitude well above commercial air traffic and does not present a military or physical threat to people on the ground. Instances of this kind of balloon activity have been observed previously over the past several years. Once the balloon was detected, the U.S. government acted immediately to protect against the collection of sensitive information.
According to NBC News, the balloon was initially spotted over Billings, Montana, after it had flown over the Aleutian Islands and through Canada. The exact whereabouts of the balloon remains unknown to the public at this time.
Billings, Montana was the first time? It apparently, they think, floated down over Alaska then Canada, and none of our military assets, all our radars and such, noticed it? That does not provide confidence in the military’s ability to detect anything else, like, say, ICMBs, coming towards the U.S.
The leaders reviewed the threat profile of the Chinese stratospheric balloon and possible response options, and ultimately decided not to recommend taking it out kinetically, because of the risk to safety and security of people on the ground from the possible debris field. Pentagon leaders presented the options to President Joe Biden on Wednesday.
President Biden was reportedly briefed on the matter and advised not to order the balloon be shot down.
There are no dumb questions, right? What is the balloon made of that if it were shot down it could pose such a risk? Wondering when we could consider that collateral damage “worth it”?
What’s the point of China using it if it can’t bring much “additive value”?
— Waiting4theTrumpet (@Waiting4Trumpet) February 2, 2023
It’s not like there’s much out there in Montana. The population density is 7 people per square mile, and most are in towns. Not shooting it down shows weakness.
(Fox News) China has announced its government is looking into reports that a suspected Chinese spy balloon was discovered flying in U.S. airspace over Montana.
“China is a responsible country and has always strictly abided by international laws, and China has no intention to violate the territory and airspace of any sovereign countries,” said Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning during a daily briefing on Friday.
She also urged U.S. officials and Chinese authorities to proceed “calmly and carefully” amid the investigation.
Yes, stay calm, just let the spy balloon fly over the U.S., capture its data, and fly away. Just like when the Soviets were able to get a lock on the U-2 flown by Gary Powers. Oh, right. That’s the game. If it gets noticed, it gets shot down. Biden’s weakness will further embolden China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, etc.
Read: China Sends Spy Balloon Over U.S., Biden Admin Doesn’t Shoot It Down »
What’s the point of a union? Well, one thing is to protect the employees from bad business practices from management and ownership, right?
‘Hypocritical’: environmental groups blocking union efforts, US workers say
Workers at some of the top environmental organizations in the US are calling out their managers as “incredibly hypocritical” as they argue the progressive non-profits are fighting workers’ efforts to unionize.
A wave of unionization efforts has swept the non-profit sector as part of a renewed national enthusiasm for unionization. Shortly into the Covid-19 pandemic, workers at 350.org, Sunrise Movement, the National Audubon Society, Defenders of Wildlife, Greenpeace USA, the Public Interest Network and the Center for Biological Diversity unionized.
But workers at many of these organizations say they have experienced aggressive opposition and alleged retaliation in the lead-up to unionizing and through bargaining efforts for a first union contract.
Well, that’s strange. You’d think all the Modern Socialists running those unhinged groups would be all in favor of unionization and treat the employees well, right?
Defenders of Wildlife has fought unionization since the campaign went public, according to workers, and has continued to do so through bargaining. The organization, which works to protect all native animals and plants throughout North America, rejected a request to voluntarily recognize the union, but workers successfully won a union election in September 2021 with a vote of 70 to five to join the Office and Professional Employees Union Local 2. (snip)
Workers at the National Audubon Society successfully unionized in 2021 with the Communications Workers of America (CWA), but have claimed significant union opposition from management through unionization and bargaining. At 350.org, workers have accused the environmental non-profit of retaliating against workers for unionizing.
Huh.
Zachary Barber, a field organizer for PennEnvironment, part of the Public Interest Network, claimed the organization has repeatedly rejected proposals in bargaining and recently went to arbitration to try to limit the size of the bargaining unit, which the union won. The union has filed several unfair labor practice charges against the organization, including allegations of retaliation against workers and making unilateral changes to employment without bargaining.
“We’ve been told directly by senior members in leadership that if we don’t agree with the way they’re running the organization that we should just leave,” said Barber. “Generally the point of the union is giving people the ability to come together and have a voice in their workplace, and that’s the same thing we fight for every day as a grassroots organization.”
Well, yeah. Unless it’s unsafe, if employees don’t like it they’re welcome to start their own business. Which is pretty much what these “non-profits” are. Shady money scammers.
Read: Climate Crisis (scam) Groups Having Lots Of Problems With Unions »
The state with the most gun control laws, that mostly affect law abiding citizens looking to protect themselves from criminals, wants to do more
California Introduces New Gun Legislation Following Mass Shootings
California Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state officials announced new gun safety legislation Wednesday, days after the state was rocked by a string of deadly mass shootings.
California has the strongest gun legislation in the country, Newsom said at a press conference Wednesday, but the state continues “to recognize with humility that we could do more and better.”
The legislation, which the Democratic governor announced alongside state Attorney General Rob Bonta and state Sen. Anthony Portantino (D), is very similar to legislation that failed last year, but its proponents are confident that a key change to the language and a new slate of lawmakers in the California State Legislature will help it glide to victory.
The new rules proposed in the legislation are largely aimed at making it harder for guns to end up in the hands of dangerous or irresponsible people. If enacted, they would beef up the licensing protocols local officials must follow when issuing firearms permits, requiring them to conduct in-person interviews, gather character references and review applicants’ social media profiles.
It would also prohibit anyone younger than 21 from obtaining a concealed-carry license and designate certain public spaces as gun-free, including schools, hospitals, government buildings, places of worship and public transit facilities.
That should scare off criminals, right? It’s just another way to go after the law abiding, instead of cracking down on the actual criminals who use guns, the gang bangers, and other degenerates. It’ll definitely let the criminals know that anyone under 21 won’t be carrying.
As for those interviews and references and social media, well, the courts just wacked those in NY, right?
The things is, Gavin failed to mention how any of this would have stopped any of those shootings.
Read: California Looks To Pass New Gun Laws That Won’t Stop Mass Shootings »
It’s all about the Free Speech, you know
Climate change consumer deception lawsuits threaten free speech. Will the Supreme Court take note?
Courts are increasingly taking a close look at the validity of climate change lawsuits against oil producers. And for good reason: These cases severely test the boundaries of court jurisdiction, the breadth of tort law, the protections of due process and even the sanctity of free speech.
As one example of this scrutiny, last Oct. 3, the U.S. Supreme Court signaled a serious interest in the proper forum and scope for climate change litigation.
In Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v. Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County, the Supreme Court invited the solicitor general of the United States to weigh in, even though the United States is not a party to the litigation. The federal government is invited to file a brief with an official legal opinion of the federal government about the questions presented regarding the role of federal and state courts and the scope of federal and state common law for evaluating lawsuits alleging climate change injuries from fossil fuel production and consumption. These invitations are rare.
All of the cases similar to Suncor percolating across the country are focused on suing companies for the effects of climate change. Yet, each of these lawsuits also tack on “consumer deception” and related “greenwashing” claims. Both categories get a lot of attention, but the latter deserves special inspection.
Is there deception when companies claim they are Doing Something about climate apocalypse but aren’t really doing that much? Is it deception when that burger doesn’t look exactly like the one in the TV ad?
These so-called deception claims sometimes allege that the companies downplayed the impacts of climate change despite that there is no affirmative duty to share everything you know, especially when consumers in the market have access to the same information.
Companies have no duty to share anything as such. If they’re trying to make themselves look better to the cult, so be it.
Other times the greenwashing claims allege that the companies should not have been allowed to advertise about efforts they are making toward developing cleaner energy because these efforts were not as robust as the plaintiffs would have liked. Indeed, in several cases, the plaintiffs have essentially stated that these companies should not have been allowed to speak about their environmental successes because the only clean fossil fuel is no fossil fuel.
These consumer deception lawsuits are direct attacks on rights to speak and the corollary rights to not be compelled to speak. But there should be no climate change exception to free speech.
It’s a much longer article, well worth the read, so, let me note that the Warmists are part of the Modern Socialist movement, where the only rights are those they Approve of. You are not allowed to do or say anything that contradicts their beliefs. And they will use all sorts of methods, from bullying to lawsuits to government force to erode your rights. I’ve been saying this since the mid-2000’s, that this really has little to do with science, and people are finally catching up.
The writer of the piece is Donald J. Kochan, a professor of law and the executive director of the Law & Economics Center at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School, and you can bet the little moonbats at the school will try and have him cancelled for daring to write it.
Read: Will Supreme Court Take Up Climate Crisis (scam) Deception Lawsuits Case? »
…is a tropical tree that will soon grow in Siberia, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is The American Conservative, with a post on the National Air And Space Museum kicking out a bunch of Catholic high school kids for wearing beanies with pro-life messages.
Read: If All You See… »
Nothing better than paying federal employees to sit around at home and “work” rather than having them come back to the office and be supervised to sort of work, right?
205 Democrats vote against bill forcing federal workers to return to the office as COVID winds down
Nearly every House Democrat on Wednesday voted against a Republican bill requiring federal agencies to end their COVID-era telework policies and force federal workers to return to their offices.
Two hundred five Democrats voted against the Stopping Home Office Work’s Unproductive Problems Act, or the SHOW UP Act, and just three Democrats voted for it. The bill, which passed 221-206, would require federal agencies to return to the telework policies that were in place before the pandemic hit, and also require them to conduct an assessment of how nearly three years of telework affected the government’s productivity.
House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., said the legislation is needed because the liberal telework policy that has existed for nearly three years has eroded government service.
“Federal agencies are falling short of their missions,” Comer said on the House floor. “They are not carrying out their duties. They are failing the American people.”
“They have waited for months for their tax returns from the IRS,” he added. “They have waited for months for the Social Security administration to answer their questions and provide their benefits. Our veterans have even waited for months to get their medical records from the National Archives.”
You know the federal unions are fighting to keep their workers from coming back in, so, Democrats will back those unions.
Democrats rejected that argument and said telework has made the federal government more efficient.
“We strongly oppose this bill, which is an assault on all the progress we have made over the last several years in telework policy,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the top Democrat on the Oversight and Accountability Committee.
Most private companies returned to the office long ago. It’s high time that federal workers do so. The question now, can Republicans get a few Democrats to flip over and vote for the bill in the Senate?
Read: Democrats Vote Against Federal Employees Returning To Work »
All posts here are my views. None represent my employer. If ye can prove me wrong, so be it. Ye can rant and rave at me, but be mostly polite to any other commentors. I will put up with quite a bit, but be mostly respectful to others.
NOTICE In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.
Pirate's Cove by Pirate's Cove is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.