…is a wonderful low carbon bike which Everyone Else should be forced to ride, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is The Daley Gator (which is back online, different URL), with a post on more things that should not be taught in school.
Read: If All You See… »
Whatever those policies were, the US economy was doing great, energy prices were low, gas prices were low, freedom was on the rise. Until we hit the Chinese coronavirus. How are things working now? (NY Times article, using the Yahoo version to avoid paywall)
Trump Policies Sent U.S. Tumbling in a Climate Ranking
For four years under President Donald Trump, the United States all but stopped trying to combat climate change at the federal level. Trump is no longer in office, but his presidency left the country far behind in a race that was already difficult to win.
A new report from researchers at Yale and Columbia universities shows that the United States’ environmental performance has tumbled in relation to other countries — a reflection of the fact that, while the United States squandered nearly half a decade, many of its peers moved deliberately.
And what were those policies? Nowhere in the cult screed are they mentioned. Why? I mean, I can name a few things off the top of my head, like pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement, but, that didn’t happen till early November of 2020 officially. He enabled the exploration and drilling of petroleum and natural gas. Tried to roll back CAFE standards, though, really, car manufacturers didn’t roll back their own standards, since the production was already in place. He does get blamed for rolling back Obama’s Clean Power Plan, but, really, it was killed by the courts during the Obama admin. And de-emphasized the use of ‘climate change’ in every rule like Obama did.
So why not mention any of these?
But, underscoring the profound obstacles to cutting greenhouse gas emissions rapidly enough to prevent the worst effects of climate change, even that movement was insufficient. The report’s sobering bottom line is that, while almost every country has pledged by 2050 to reach net-zero emissions (the point where their activities no longer add greenhouse gases to the atmosphere), almost none are on track to do it.
The report, called the Environmental Performance Index, or EPI, found that, based on their trajectories from 2010 through 2019, only Denmark and Britain were on a sustainable path to eliminate emissions by midcentury.
Namibia and Botswana appeared to be on track with caveats: They had stronger records than their peers in sub-Saharan Africa, but their emissions were minimal to begin with, and the researchers did not characterize their progress as sustainable because it was not clear that current policies would suffice as their economies develop.
The 176 other nations in the report were poised to fall short of net-zero goals, some by large margins. China, India, the United States and Russia were on track to account for more than half of global emissions in 2050. But even countries like Germany that have enacted more comprehensive climate policies are not doing enough.
Ah, so the majority of nations, who haven’t left the Paris agreement, aren’t close, despite having all the rules and regs and restrictions and such that the climate cult wants in place. Stuff that limits their economies. Stuff that restricts citizens freedom and life choices, and takes more money out of their pockets. The NY Times just needed to start with some Trump Derangement Syndrome, as he’s still living rent free in their heads.
“We think this report’s going to be a wake-up call to a wide range of countries, a number of whom might have imagined themselves to be doing what they needed to do and not many of whom really are,” said Daniel C. Esty, the director of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, which produces the EPI every two years.
Yeah, that’s what they say every year since the Kyoto Protocol, and almost every country failed on their pledges every year. And, the same is happening with Paris.
The 2022 edition of the index, provided to The New York Times before its release Wednesday, scored 180 countries on 40 indicators related to climate, environmental health and ecosystem vitality. The individual metrics were wide-ranging, including tree-cover loss, wastewater treatment, fine-particulate-matter pollution and lead exposure.
I wonder how many will have nothing to do with anthropogenic climate change? Oh, and what is the NY Times doing to reduce its own carbon footprint? They never tell us.
Read: Bummer: Unnamed Trump Policies Sent U.S. Climate Ranking Tumbling »
All because you refuse to stop taking fossil fueled travel and buy a bike
Siberian tundra ‘could disappear by 2050’ due to climate change
The Siberian tundra could have vanished entirely by the middle of this century, researchers have warned.
Temperatures in the Arctic are soaring due to climate change, and larch forests are steadily marching north into the territory of the tundra.
Researchers at the Alfred Wegener Institute in Germany ran computer simulations and found that even if climate change measures are taken, just 30% of the Siberian tundra – home to unique animals and plants – will survive by 2050.
In other scenarios, the Siberian tundra will vanish entirely. The study was released in the journal eLife. (snip)
“In the course of our study, we simulated this process for the tundra in northeast Russia.
“The central question that concerned us was: which emissions path does humanity have to follow in order to preserve the tundra as a refuge for flora and fauna, as well its role for the cultures of indigenous peoples and their traditional ties to the environment?”
Computer models. Did they even travel around Siberia taking measurements? This is what they call science these days.
Hummingbirds May Struggle To Go Any Further Uphill To Evade Climate Change
Any animal ascending a mountain experiences a double whammy of difficulties: the air gets thinner while it also becomes colder, which is particularly problematic for creatures striving to keep warm when less oxygen is available. For tiny animals with the highest-octane lives, such as hovering hummingbirds, the challenges of migrating to higher levels to evade climate change may be too much, but no one knew whether these incredible aviators may have more gas in the tank to keep them flying at higher altitudes.
As Anna’s hummingbirds (Calypte anna) are comfortable up to elevations of ~2,800 m (~9200 feet), Austin Spence from the University of Connecticut, USA, and Morgan Tingley from the University of California, Los Angeles, USA, were curious to find out how hummingbirds that originated from close to sea level and those that live at the loftier end of the range would cope when transported well above their natural habitat to an altitude of 3,800m (12,500 feet). They published their discovery in the Journal of Experimental Biology that the birds struggle to hover and suffer a 37% drop in their metabolic rate at that height – in addition to becoming torpid for most of the night to conserve energy – making it unlikely that they can relocate to higher altitudes.
So, they took the hummingbirds way, way above their normal height range, and are shocked! that they have trouble. And this is all your fault.
What’s the difference between the Canadian premiere and the ruler of Cuba?
TRUDEAU says he is putting forward legislation to put a national freeze on gun ownership. “What this means is that it will no longer be possible to buy, sell, transfer, or import handguns anywhere in Canada," he said.https://t.co/OKYTM6ZJBe
— Jacqui Heinrich (@JacquiHeinrich) May 30, 2022
Canada already bans 1,500 types of “assault” rifles, and now
(CBC) New gun control legislation the federal government tabled today includes a national freeze on the purchase, sale, importation and transfer of handguns in Canada.
The government also is pledging to start buying back thousands of banned assault-style weapons before the end of the year.
While the proposal falls short of a full ban on handguns, it would effectively limit their number in Canada.
“In other words, we’re capping the market for handguns,” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told a press conference Monday.
And the next step will be to ban ownership if handguns in Canada, you know, the place where they cracked down on a peaceful protest against the government, and locked down their own citizens over COVID? The one who won’t let unvaccinated citizens travel or leave the country?
They include taking away firearms licences from those involved in domestic violence or criminal harassment, increasing criminal penalties for smuggling and trafficking of firearms, and a “red flag” law which would require people deemed a threat to themselves or others to turn in their firearms to law enforcement.
Canada has prosecuted many people for saying Mean Things, so, they can apply the red flag laws to those people
“We recognize that the vast majority of gun owners use them safely, and in accordance with the law,” Trudeau said.
“But other than using firearms for sport shooting and for hunting, there is no reason anyone in Canada should need guns in their everyday lives.”
So says an authoritarian government.
(Breitbart) As President Biden spoke to reporters on Memorial Day he criticized “high caliber weapons” and claimed that a 9mm bullet “blows the lung out of the body.”
Biden made this statement while telling reporters about a Senate briefing he had received regarding gunshot wounds.
He said, “The 22 caliber bullet will lodge in the lungs and we can get it out,” Biden said. “A 9 mm bullet blows the lung out of the body.”
Will he and his Democrats Comrades next try and attempt to do away with certain calibers? Of course, the criminals would still have them.
Read: Comrade Trudeau Looks To Freeze All Handgun Purchases In Canada »
Remember, though, this is perfectly normal because the World Is About To End
‘Eco-fascist’ violence targets old scapegoats for new fears
Mass shooting suspects, including the man arrested for the recent Buffalo, N.Y., grocery store massacre, are increasingly invoking the so-called eco-fascist movement, which launders racist and anti-immigrant conspiracy theories through the lens of environmentalism.
The Buffalo suspect, who has been charged with the murder of 10 predominantly Black shoppers at a grocery store, identified as an eco-fascist. Similar sentiments can be found in the writings of shooters in New Zealand and El Paso, Texas, who targeted Muslims and Latinos, respectively.
As the climate crisis intensifies and leads to increased migration and political instability, experts say the problem is likely to get worse.
In practice, the term refers to “a kind of political ideology that combines fascism with some kind of environmental or ecological focus,” said Matthew Lyons, author of “Insurgent Supremacists: The U.S. Far Right’s Challenge to State and Empire” and co-author with Chip Berlet of “Right-Wing Populism in America.”
Typically, Lyons said, this equates to scapegoating groups like immigrants and nonwhites for the climate crisis, environmental degradation and the depletion of natural resources.
It’s not “the Right” which is doing this…I mean, technically, it is, since Progressivism is not actually far left, but, far right on the political scale, in the Authoritarian model, but, we still call them “The Left”…it is the far left. This is also an attempt to explain away why these mass murderers share so much in common with Progressives
Eco-fascism is at heart simply a rebranding of a much older “murderous political strategy,” said Cassie Miller, a senior research analyst at the Southern Poverty Law Center, and uses environmental concerns as a sort of Trojan horse for extremist ideas.
“This is a movement that is looking for any avenue that it can get recruits or to enter larger political conversations,” she said. “And the language of environmentalism, especially at a time of climate disaster, is a very clear way to do that.”
I’m sure that somehow this is all your fault, you know.
Later in the 20th century, Ted Kaczynski, who killed three people and injured 23 more with a series of bombings, wrote a manifesto decrying the Industrial Revolution and calling for a return to nature; however, he also railed against feminists, gay rights activists and animal welfare advocates in the same document.
Although Kaczynski also blasts conservative politics in his writings, in recent years, far-right spaces online have semi-ironically celebrated Kaczynski as “Uncle Ted.”
See? They’re going to attempt to blame Republicans for this, and like minded small government Classical Liberals around the world. Which shifts the blame off the real culprit, a doomsday cult.
Meanwhile, Real Climate Science links to this
(India Times) Art lovers and museum visitors to the Louvre were shocked recently after a man dressed as an old woman tried vandalising the Mona Lisa. The person jumped out of a wheelchair and reportedly smeared cake over the iconic painting.
A clip showing visitors taking photos of the cake-covered painting has now been widely circulated on social media. Fortunately, the cake didn’t touch the real artwork. It was only smeared over the glass that protects the famous piece by Leonardo da Vinci.
Maybe this is just nuts to me????but an man dressed as an old lady jumps out of a wheel chair and attempted to smash the bullet proof glass of the Mona Lisa. Then proceeds to smear cake on the glass, and throws roses everywhere all before being tackled by security. ??????? pic.twitter.com/OFXdx9eWcM
— Lukeee???? (@lukeXC2002) May 29, 2022
Definitely MAGA, right?
…is a fossil fueled fighter jet, needed because ‘climate change’ causes war, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Bunkerville, with a post on a Memorial Day remembrance.
Doubleshot below the fold, check out Chicks On the Right, with a post on How Our Fractured Societal Priorities May Have Influenced The Police Response In Uvalde.
Read: If All You See… »
Many economists are positioning this as a good thing. And, at the end of the day, the economy will rise above all other issues
More signs that a major shift in the economic narrative could be underway
There’s more evidence that the economic narrative could be undergoing a major shift.
For months, we’ve been living in an economy in which strong demand has been met with lagging supply, causing inflation inflation to surge. We now appear to be shifting to a phase where demand growth is cooling and supply chains are easing, which should cause inflation to come down.
According to Census Bureau data released Wednesday, orders for nondefense capital goods excluding aircraft — a.k.a. core capex or business investment — climbed 0.3% to a record $73.1 billion in April.
While the 0.3% growth rate represents a deceleration from the 1.1% rate in March, it’s the kind of slowing that’s welcome news for folks like the Federal Reserve, which is actively working to cool economic growth in its effort to bring down inflation.
“That is consistent with our view that economic activity is bending rather than breaking under the impact of higher rates,” Michael Pearce, senior U.S. economist for Capital Economics, said in a note on Wednesday.
Here’s the thing: the demand was normal, the supply chain was way down. The supply chain is not exactly getting better. Automobiles sure aren’t. Toyota recently announced a 100K worldwide care production decrease, primarily blaming the chip shortage. Anyone redesigning for 2023 will remove many things that use chips, such as XM radio, or combine multiple features per chip, which could potentially overload a chip. What you often see on the shelf is it. There’s no extra in the backroom. Supply chains are slimmed down, which is why you may not find the products you used to find. You want furniture? It could be months. Heavy machinery? Could be a year.
If demand growth is cooling, that means people are just not buying things they would normally buy, to match the lower supply availability. This may, in fact, help inflation, but, it will mean lower spending by consumers, who are already stretched from the rise in costs. Will this mean a reduction in costs? Probably not. At least not soon. Because gas and diesel are still rising. Interest rates are up (fortunately not as high as expected).
“Growth has slowed since peaking in March, most notably in the service sector, as pent up demand following the reopening of the economy after the Omicron wave shows signs of waning,” Chris Williamson, chief business economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence, wrote on Wednesday.
Yeah, the time when you couldn’t get stuff done to your house. But, you want body work on your car? You could wait at least a month. Everywhere. People can still wait weeks for a physical therapist, months to get into the dentist, and so on.
News of a slowdown is not exactly the kind of thing that warrants a celebratory tone. But it’s exactly the kind of thing that should help bring inflation down.
More pain.
“Many have touted March as the peak in inflation and are looking for inflation to cool from here,” Grant Thornton Chief Economist Diane Swonk said on Friday.. “We are not as convinced given the risks we still face due to the war in Ukraine and lockdowns in China. Either way, it is important to note that any cooling we see will have a high floor. Both the overall and core PCE indices remain well above the Federal Reserve’s 2% target.”
Indeed, inflation has a long way to go to get to 2% from 4.9%.
The best way would be an increase in the availability of products to match the spending. But, this is the Biden Economy, hence, we need below normal spending to match below normal availability.
Read: There Could Be A Major Shift In Economic Activity Coming, Affecting Inflation »
Why? Because it could help the fight against Hotcoldwetdry
Why the cryptocurrency price collapse offers hope for slowing climate change
Cryptocurrencies like bitcoin were meant to be used as digital cash. Instead, they’ve become popular as speculative investments. As well as being resource-intensive and inherently wasteful, cryptocurrencies are also incredibly volatile. Prices for the largest cryptocurrencies, bitcoin and ethereum, have both dropped by over 55% in six months, leading some to suggest that regulation is needed to contain the turmoil. (snip)
The most polluting “proof-of-work” cryptocurrencies, like bitcoin, ethereum and dogecoin, together use around 300 terawatt-hours (TW/h) of mainly fossil-fuelled electricity each year. Bitcoin has an annual carbon footprint of around 114 million tonnes. That’s roughly comparable to 380,000 space rocket launches, or the annual carbon footprint of the Czech Republic.
Proof-of-work mining can be thought of as a controlled way of wasting energy. The process involves specialist computers repeatedly taking random shots at guessing a long string of digits. The amount of computing power dedicated to this effort is referred to as the network’s hash rate.
See, crypto is Bad for ‘climate change’, so, it’s good that people are losing butt tons of their money, so, hopefully people will stop using them
The damage caused by bitcoin mining disproportionately affects poor and vulnerable communities, as mining outfits and crypto developers take advantage of economic instability, weak regulations and access to cheap energy. Locals wanting to use these resources for productive purposes can be priced out by bitcoin miners. These communities also tend to face the sharp end of the climate crisis, which crypto mining fuels.
It’s always the uber-white middle and upper class Warmists whiteknighting for the poor and minorities, while creating policies that keep them poor.
In the aftermath of the 2008-10 global financial crisis, governments promised a crackdown on toxic financial instruments with make-believe valuations. For the global climate and a stable economy, cracking down now on crypto will be a boon for everyone. But if environmental regulation efforts are not globally coordinated or far-reaching enough, crypto’s climate contagion will continue to grow.
By cracking down, the writer, “Peter Howson, Senior Lecturer in International Development, Northumbria University, Newcastle”, means banning cryto. How much money would people lose at that point, all for a doomsday cult?
Read: Warmists Seem Pretty Happy That A Lot Of People Lost A Lot Of Money On Crypto »
Sure, most people are in favor of keeping guns out of the hands of people with bad intent. We can all agree on that, right? Unless you’re planning to shoot someone or more than one. The devil is always in the details, though, and as soon as you start looking at those details the types of gun control being pushed poll lower and lower, and people realize that it mostly affects the law abiding, are stepping stones toward even more restrictions, and what the unhinged barking moonbat base really wants is bans
The Hill: Democrats Have Lost Elections Because of Gun-Control Push
On Saturday, the Hill published a column on the Democrats’ precarious position of desiring to secure more gun control but knowing that pursuit of new gun laws has cost them elections in the past.
The Hill reported:
While Republicans have been criticized for an unwillingness to take even small steps to restrict access to guns in response to a national plague of mass shootings, it’s not lost on Democrats that the last time they had an extended debate and votes on ambitious gun proposals in 2013, they lost nine seats and their Senate majority in the following election.”
The Hill noted Democrats also believe voter pushback to the 1994-2004 “assault weapons” ban is part of why they lost the 2000 president election.
And here is something else to consider: ABC News noted the federal “assault weapons” ban was signed on September 8, 1994. Approximately two months later, the “GOP easily [took] control of the U.S. House and Senate, gaining 12 governorships and regaining control in 20 state legislatures,” according to History.com.
Hence why The Hill article starts out
Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) is walking a tightrope on gun control legislation after two more mass shootings that have shaken the country and angered Democrats frustrated over inaction on guns.
While members of his caucus and progressive activists are pushing him to force the GOP to vote on an array of proposals, Schumer also wants to protect Democrats in tough races in purple states from taking tough votes.
I would hazard to guess that those election losses from the 2012 election weren’t just about guns, but, a continuation of the toxicity of Obama on Congressional and state elections for Democrats, but, pushing gun control sure didn’t help. And, voters this time may well see “gun control” as a distraction for the main issue, the economy.
You’ll have to repeal and replace the 2nd Amendment. Then you’ll have to repeal all 50 state constitutions because they protect the right to bear arms too. Then you’ll need to equip an army to confiscate all 400+ million firearms currently estimated to be in the U.S. https://t.co/Vgp14JAUf2
— Heather B (@BoulwareH2) May 25, 2022
There are lots and lots of Democrats yammering about repealing the 2nd, taking away all guns from private citizens. Voters see this from the extreme left, and will think about what comes next, especially when they see the extreme left trying to take away 1st Amendment rights.
The NRA is hosting a party in the backyard of a school shooting before 19 students and two teachers had even been laid to rest. Is this really an organization that people want to be a part of? pic.twitter.com/0zrg1ATipL
— Rep. Jake Auchincloss ???? (@RepAuchincloss) May 29, 2022
Yeah, that’s a federally elected Representative attempting to take away Freedom of Speech, freedom to petition for redress of grievance, and right of free association from private citizens just for Wrongthink. Which group is next?
More under the Read More tag:
Read: Chuck Schumer Knows Last Time Democrats Pushed Gun Grabbing They Lost Badly At The Ballot Box »
…is a cloudless sky causing high temperatures thanks to carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is 357 Magnum, with a post on carjacking only being a misdemeanor in Chicago.
It’s clearing out the folders week.
Read: If All You See… »
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.
