Good News: Biden Spending Billions To Make Military Climate Conformist

By William Teach April 24, 2022 – 8:30 am

Just another way to make the U.S. military, what had been the strongest military since WWII, the safeguard of freedom, the protector of American sovereignty, weak and ineffective

Biden says US spending billions to make military vehicles ‘climate friendly’

President Biden on Friday said his administration is working to make “every vehicle” in the United States military “climate-friendly.”

The president, delivering Earth Day remarks from Seward Park in Seattle, Washington, discussed his administration’s efforts to address climate change, and called on Congress to take action.

“One of the things I found out as President of the United States, I get to spend a lot of that money,” Biden said. “We’re going to start the process where every vehicle in the United States military, every vehicle, is going to be climate-friendly — every vehicle — I mean it.”

He added: “We’re spending billions of dollars to do it.”

The president said the transition is “going to matter.”

Yes, it will matter, much like washing your car in the rain. Replacing your guitar strings with knitting thread. Filling your car oil with vegetable oil. But, much, much worse.

It is unclear what steps the Biden administration is taking to transition U.S. military vehicles from their current status to “climate-friendly.”

As usual, Biden is long on dropping some random babble and short on details. Because he’s pretty much lost his faculties, and will just drop things out of the blue.

“You know, my view of this [climate] crisis, as I said, is a genuine opportunity, an opportunity to do things we wanted to do and only now become so apparent,” Biden said.

As for legislation to address climate change, the president signaled to Congress: “You know, my pen’s ready. My pen’s ready to sign. I’m anxious to sign this. Get some of these bills to my desk.”

Yeah, then he delved into regular autos being electrified. Did you notice where? Yeah, he took a long fossil fueled flight to Seattle, Washington. Which included a helicopter ride to the D.C. airport, a chase jumbo jet, bringing his massive limo, and a fossil fueled convoy of 18-20 vehicles to get him to Seward Park. If the GOP doesn’t screw it up and lose the mid-terms, they should pass legislation requiring that the White House and all the people who work there, including Biden and Harris, use only climate friendly means of transportation for business. No fossil fueled travel. If Joe wants to go to Seattle, or, Delaware like he does most weekends (he’s there yet again this weekend), he can take the train or an EV. Yes, it would be mostly inessential legislation, but, it would look great with Biden vetoing it.

Anyhow, perhaps one day EVs will be working well enough to have our military use them, but, that time is far off.

Read: Good News: Biden Spending Billions To Make Military Climate Conformist »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming, Joe Biden | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Which Cities Have Worst Air Quality? Six Of Top Ten Are In California

By William Teach April 23, 2022 – 3:00 pm

Congratulations, People’s Republik Of California, heck of a job

Best, worst cities for air quality: California ranks among worst, East Coast is cleaner

It isn’t West Coast best coast when it comes to air.

California dominated the worst-air rankings, with three of the state’s cities topping each of the categories for worst air. The Los Angeles-Long Beach area had the worst air by ozone, Bakersfield had the worst year-round particle pollution, and the Fresno-Madera-Hanford area had the worst air by short-term particle pollution.

The top 10 cities in each of the three categories were in Western states; the most eastern city was Houston. Here are the worst air cities:

Worst air by ozone:

  1. Los Angeles-Long Beach, California
  2. Bakersfield, California
  3. Visalia, California
  4. Fresno-Madera-Hanford, California
  5. Phoenix-Mesa, Arizona
  6. San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, California
  7. Denver-Aurora, Colorado
  8. Houston-The Woodlands, Texas
  9. Sacramento-Roseville, California
  10. Salt Lake City-Provo-Orem, Utah

Perhaps spend less time fighting climate crisis (scam), more on the environment. Though, I will admit that automobiles are a big driver of ground level air pollution, which is strictly an environmental issue. Funny, though, that all these Warmists in California, and Denver, aren’t live the life they want to force on everyone else.

When it comes to year round particle pollution, California has 7 cities. Warmist Oregon has one. Short term particle pollution features eight cities. The best for year round particle pollution?

  1. Cheyenne, Wyoming
  2. Wilmington, North Carolina
  3. Urban Honolulu, Hawaii
  4. Kahului-Wailuku-Lahaina, Hawaii
  5. Bangor, Maine
  6. Casper, Wyoming
  7. Bellingham, Washington
  8. Bismarck, North Dakota, Elmira-Corning, New York, Sioux Falls, South Dakota and St. George, Utah (tied)

I’m impressed on how hard California works to be the worst.

Read: Which Cities Have Worst Air Quality? Six Of Top Ten Are In California »

Posted in Environment, Global Warming | 33 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 23, 2022 – 1:00 pm

…are horrible carbon pollution clouds turning into Bad Weather, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Not A Lot Of People Know That, with a post Biden harming the military with his green push.

Doubleshot below the fold, check out 357 Magnum, with a post on media vs humor.

Read More »

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 21 Comments | Trackback URL

Exxon Bans All Flags At Headquarters, LGBT And BLM Employees Freak Out

By William Teach April 23, 2022 – 10:30 am

Perhaps politics should be left out of the workplace? And if you don’t like it you can leave

From the article

Exxon Mobil Corp. plans to prohibit the LGBTQ-rights flag from being flown outside its offices during Pride month in June, prompting a furious backlash from Houston-based employees.

Exxon updated company guidance on what flags can be displayed outside its offices, banning “external position flags” such as PRIDE and Black Lives Matter, according to the policy seen by Bloomberg News. In response, members of Exxon’s PRIDE Houston Chapter are refusing to represent the company at the city’s June 25 Pride celebration, according to an employee group email also seen by Bloomberg.

“Corporate leadership took exception to a rainbow flag being flown at our facilities” last year, Exxon’s PRIDE Houston employee group wrote in the email Thursday. “PRIDE was informed the justification was centered on the need for the corporation to maintain ‘neutrality.’”

Yeah, it probably was. But, what the people who run the company, who aren’t the Rainbow’s and BLM grifters, did was ban all political flags. It would stop anti-abortion and pro-gun flags. Would BLM/LGBT be fine with those? I’m betting they would complain and protest. Perhaps we should just keep the workplace work?

(National Review) But we’re beginning to see a shift in that dynamic. The Republican base is now demanding that their leaders show some backbone in the culture wars, and is making it politically unacceptable for party elites to cave to corporate interests. Conservatives — particularly those of the social-conservative variety — are realizing that big business is often not their friend, and responding in kind. As a result, the incentive structure is changing before our eyes: Remarkably, “Disney stock continued to fall this week after the Florida House passed a bill revoking the company’s autonomous governmental status,” Brittany Bernstein reported today. “While Disney stock reached an all-time high in March 2021 of nearly $200 per share . . . it has been declining ever since. When the market closed on Thursday, the stock was around $120 per share, a 33 percent drop from one year ago and an 8 percent drop from just two days earlier, prior to the passage of the bill.” On top of that, new polling shows that 68.2 percent of Americans say they’re “less likely to do business with Disney” after the recent controversies; 69.1 percent say they would “support family-friendly alternatives to Disney.”

Pinch me — are we . . . winning? It sure feels like it. Of course, the coming years will be an uphill battle: If the Right continues to notch victories, the Left’s response will surely become more hysterical and aggressive. (After all, they’re not used to losing on this stuff.) But still, it’s difficult to see Exxon’s symbolic withdrawal from the culture war as anything other than a reaction to the recent shift in the Right’s posture on these issues. And that’s a good thing — for Exxon, for conservatives, and for America.

Considering that the left, chock full of climate cultists, hate Exxon (but won’t stop using their products), why would Exxon comply? Unless it’s a company based on politics, just leave it away from the workplace.

Read: Exxon Bans All Flags At Headquarters, LGBT And BLM Employees Freak Out »

Posted in Barking Moonbats | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

We’re Saved: Twitter To Ban ‘Climate Change’ Disinformation Tweets

By William Teach April 23, 2022 – 7:15 am

I can’t remember ever seeing any paid tweet from any Skeptic or Skeptic group in all my years on Twitter, but, good news, they’re going to solve this non-existent danger!

Twitter bans ‘misleading’ ads about climate change

Follow the scienceTwitter levied a new ban today on “misleading” advertisements “that contradict the scientific consensus on climate change.”

“We believe that climate denialism shouldn’t be monetized on Twitter, and that misrepresentative ads shouldn’t detract from important conversations about the climate crisis,” the company said in a blog post today.

Its decisions about what’s legit content in regard to climate change will be guided by “authoritative sources,” it says, including the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC has published a couple of landmark reports on the crisis over the past few months that break down what needs to be done to adapt to the changes that are already unfolding as well as how to avert even more severe consequences in the future, like intensifying weather disasters and ferocious wildfire seasons.

Twitter also said that it will soon share more details about how it plans to “add reliable, authoritative context” about climate change on its platform. Those conversations have gotten much louder over the past year, according to the company. Talk about “sustainability” on the platform has grown by over 150 percent since 2021, Twitter says. Discussions on “decarbonization,” aka getting rid of greenhouse gas emissions that come from burning fossil fuels, are also up 50 percent. Other environmental conversations are heating up, too. Chatter about reducing waste grew by more than 100 percent over the same time period.

See, this is how science works: no one is allowed to question Authority. Ever. No one is allowed to offer different viewpoints, facts, figures. The Cult cannot stand up to scrutiny.

And you know that they next thing will be to ban all those who tweet in opposition to the climate cult’s beliefs.

(Credit Angel) Raffi Krikorian, a developer at Twitter once stated that each tweet consumes around 90 joules, equalling 0.02g of CO2 emissions. Hardly anything right? Correct, however there are approximately 8,000 tweets written and published every single second.

That works out to a carbon footprint of 5.046 billion grams per year. That’s 5,045.76 metric tons per year. The average American’s carbon footprint is 16 metric tons per year, the equivalent of 3,334 diesel cars. Further, that is a number from 2018, and people use a lot more GIFs, videos, and photos now.

Read: We’re Saved: Twitter To Ban ‘Climate Change’ Disinformation Tweets »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming, Web/Tech | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, How Do All These Young Folks Suddenly Identify As LGBTQwhatever?

By William Teach April 23, 2022 – 7:00 am

An interesting piece by Kevin Downey Jr from PJ Media. Remember when your mom would say “if all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you?” Well, you were a teen or younger. Of course you would!

Against All Odds: Mother Tells How Her Daughter and Every One of Her Friends Are Suddenly Trans

When I was a teenager, the cool kids smoked cigarettes. Today they cut off their weiners.

A mom writing for Substack’s “Parents with Inconvenient Truths about Trans” is claiming that her kid went full trans-tard after going to a new, woke, trans-happy school.

She starts her article with this: “My teenage daughter has decided that she is “trans”. So have all her friends. Not some of them. Not most of them. Every. Single. One.”

The anonymous mother also states that her daughter showed no signs of gender dysphoria and had never heard the word “transgender” before enrolling at her new school. That’s where she met a group of nerdy, artsy kids. They began looking into all things transgender on the internet.

Then, one day, sha-ZAM! They were all suddenly “trans.” They no longer had any desire to speak with the “cis” kids, (that means cisgender, i.e. normal, not trans, not interested in disfiguring their genitals to be cool).

I wonder how they learned all this?

How can a bunch of kids suddenly all be trans? It’s what we call a “social contagion,” which Oxford Reference defines as “The spread of ideas, attitudes, or behaviour patterns in a group through imitation and conformity. Also called behavioural contagion.”

It’s when a group of people all start imitating each other to fit in.

You wanted to do what your friends did. You became part of a group, and did what they did, right? And, these days, kids think teachers are cool, and when they’re teaching about all these cool, popular stuff, the kids want to do that. Maybe not all of it. While I smoke a lot of pot, did some hash and LCD, I never went in for cocaine in that group. I drank, but, not a lot (not till college). While I love metal, I hung with lots of the surfers, and dressed like that. These days, lots of kids are seriously all in 100% on this cool new thing of saying you’re trans, dressing that way, taking the pills and stuff, wacking their sexual organs.

I’d recommend reading the piece in full, followed by

Gainesville residents need to step outside the liberal echo chamber

We all need to get out more and seek views from numerous sources, especially those with which we differ. We shouldn’t believe the “groupthink” that what we and our friends believe reflects the will of the people. And we need to stop ascribing evil motives to those with whom we disagree.

I take part in a weekly dialogue with other retirees. They are bright, well-spoken, generally courteous and very liberal. I am a conservative and enjoy the dialogue. It has taught me a lot but, at times, the discussions get a little frothy, despite a moderator, and reflect the tendency to extrapolate one’s views to voters at large.

For example, we had a discussion about the Parental Rights in Education bill. I support the bill. My view may have induced tachycardia in some and was described by some liberals as transphobic, bigoted, mean-spirited, anti-gay and worse.

My critics believed that nobody supported the bill, other than, to be kind, the evil folks. However, recent polling by Public Opinion Strategies showed strong support among Americans who actually read the bill, and did not rely on characterizations and the screeds of the pundit class.

Again, read the rest. The thing is, so many of these elitists, or think they’re elite, leftists see zero shades of gray, and are unwilling to entertain anything outside their bubble. Not even willing to listen. They want alternative viewpoints shut down. They find them to be evil.

Read: Say, How Do All These Young Folks Suddenly Identify As LGBTQwhatever? »

Posted in Unhinged Tools | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

Hey, What If We Treated ‘Climate Change’ Like A Child Or Something

By William Teach April 22, 2022 – 3:00 pm

These people are wackadoodle

Could we save Earth if we treated it like a child? We are in crisis and need to heal the planet.

As mothers, we have often felt engulfed by the gnawing worry of climate change, the jagged feeling akin to that moment when you, as a mother, drop off your child in the care of someone who hasn’t yet earned your trust. You see your child’s bright, observant gaze. Their nerves express concern to you with quiet messages designed to tug at your unique receptivity – a tight squeeze, a shifted foot, a tear in the corner of the eye. And you ask yourself: What if they are imperiled and unprotected when I am not present?

So, because a few of you are bat guano loopy, the rest of us must comply? Piss off.

The three of us (Kealoha Fox, Maya Soetoro-Ng and Zelda Keller, the screed writers) form the backbone of the Institute for Climate and Peace, a nonprofit organization based out of Hawaii focusing on the intersections between climate change and peace. We know how precarious the situation is. And we know that many of our leaders – well-intentioned as they may be – are ignoring the truest solutions to bring about peace and climate resilience. Central to our climate justice work is helping to frame the conversation about what peace is.

Would this be the same Hawaii that wouldn’t survive without fossil fuels, which bring in food, goods, and vacationers?

Historically, peace has been too often confused with the topic of security and defined simply as an absence of war and violent conflict, otherwise known as “negative peace.” However, there is another type of peace: “positive peace,” which means the presence of active systems and processes that allow human potential to flourish.

 

Many systems that led to positive peace were integral to ancestral communities but dissipated during the industrial revolution. Indeed, technology has provided many boons to civilization, but it has led directly to our climate crisis, and now technology alone cannot get us out of this emergency.

Positive peaceful climate solutions present the greatest opportunity to build social cohesion, create lasting commitments that survive beyond partisanship, and are sustained beyond each of us. Our work, which complements broad efforts to reduce emissions, focuses on locally rooted, more tailored measures. This includes things like the preservation or restoration of cultural assets on our coastlines, just and dignified migration, democracy building and gender inclusive leadership.

????? Does anyone understand this Climaspeak?

That is why our institute is dedicated to a new narrative: Climate science and social science are integrated, collaborative fields helping to advance community-based climate solutions for thriving, cohesive communities.

So, basically this is all politics.

Despite the demonstrated successes of locally based efforts like these, governments and philanthropies invest most climate finance in top-down and technology-centric approaches. An International Institute of Environment and Development assessment of climate finance between 2003 and 2016 estimated that less than 10% went to locally led climate change projects.

One of the biggest reasons that gatherings like the U.N. Climate Change Conference or publications like IPCC reports fail to achieve large goals, or inspire global change, is because too few of the solutions they promote invest robustly in communal infrastructure that fosters healthy communication, compromise and the realization of shared goals.

Give us money.

We must invest in positive peaceful climate solutions around the world. In essence, dividing the planet into smaller canoes where people come together to build stronger vessels that navigate even the most unknown reality beyond the horizon – beyond the doldrums.

Good grief. Here’s a question: why must we? What if the rest of us aren’t interested? Why do we have to comply? Why can’t you just leave the rest of us the hell alone?

Read: Hey, What If We Treated ‘Climate Change’ Like A Child Or Something »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 22, 2022 – 1:00 pm

…is the flag of an Evil carbon polluting nation, you just might be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lid, with a post on Disney saying Tinker Bell and Captain Hook aren’t Woke enough.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

White House Upset That Courts Get To Decide On Lawful Chinese Coronavirus Responses

By William Teach April 22, 2022 – 10:30 am

They don’t seem to like that the Constitutionally created Judicial Branch can hold the Executive Branch to account

W.H. COVID Response Coordinator: Decisions on Protecting Health Shouldn’t Be Decided by Courts

On Thursday’s broadcast of “PBS NewsHour,” White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha commented on the CDC’s transportation mask mandate being struck down in court by stating that “decisions like how we protect the health of the American people should be decided by public health scientists and our public health agencies like the CDC and not by a federal judge.”

Jha said, “I think there are a couple of points here that are worth mentioning: First, decisions like how we protect the health of the American people should be decided by public health scientists and our public health agencies like the CDC and not by a federal judge. In terms of legal strategy and legal issues, the Department of Justice, their lawyers felt very clearly that the CDC had acted within its powers, and that’s why they appealed. And the administration and the legal experts around the country are confident that the CDC was acting lawfully and that, eventually, the CDC will win this case.”

He added, “[I]t is absolutely essential that CDC have this ability, whether it’s for the rest of this pandemic or for future health crises. It is essential that CDC have the ability to put in rules that are going to protect the traveling public. They’ve had that rule for — that authority for decades, and it’s essential that we continue that. That’s one of the reasons why the Department of Justice filed this appeal, to preserve that authority for the CDC.”

They may feel that they have that power, but, a member of the federal court said they do not. Not without going through proper rule making steps. And maybe not even then. They do not have the power to arbitrarily impose mask mandates on American citizens, especially not while also claiming that it’s fine to remove Title 42 and allow illegal aliens to pass into the United States.

But, see, this isn’t about the killed off mask mandate, this is about being to arbitrarily impose future measures. The pandemic is over. It is almost always a low level bit of news now. Go to the Washington Post, NY Times, LA Times, CBS News, CNN, and so many others, and COVID is way, way down the page. Other than perhaps a piece on Philly killing it’s mask mandate days after reinstating it, some have no news. Nothing at ABC News. NBC News has a COVID link on the top bar still. It’s just not a big deal anymore. But, the CDC/White House want the ability to dictate how people live if anything happens.

Slavitt is Biden’s former Wuhan Flu advisor, and, beside the reality that the DOJ cannot simply repeal a judge’s order (was this a misstatement, or, do these people really think the Executive Branch can simply do whatever the hell they want?), he believes the CDC should be able to do whatever they want whenever they want, regardless of the law, regardless of the Constitution.

Read: White House Upset That Courts Get To Decide On Lawful Chinese Coronavirus Responses »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus, Liberal World | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

It’s Now Or Never Again For Climate Action On Earth Day Or Something

By William Teach April 22, 2022 – 7:15 am

Why, yes, it’s Earth Day

Was it now or never in killing and composting her?

This Earth Day ‘it’s now or never’ for action on climate change

This Earth Day, like many recent ones, can be seen as a time for despair: the Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate and its inhabitants — us —  aren’t doing enough to stop it. That’s one conclusion from the latest report by the world’s climate scientists. Despite this gloomy outlook, there are some reasons for optimism. For example, the costs of renewable energy are declining and the generation and use of this cleaner energy is increasing.

1.5 in 170 years is not unprecedented, nor much of a big deal.

“We are at a crossroads. The decisions we make now can secure a liveable future. We have the tools and know-how required to limit warming,” IPCC Chair Hoesung Lee said in a statement earlier this month. “I am encouraged by climate action being taken in many countries. There are policies, regulations and market instruments that are proving effective. If these are scaled up and applied more widely and equitably, they can support deep emissions reductions and stimulate innovation.”

But, the scientists stressed, action to further reduce the emissions of greenhouse gasses, which trap the earth’s heat, are needed now. Without emissions reductions, temperatures would continue to rise, they warn.

Just, wondering, what if we do all this stuff they want and nothing changes? Why does the Bangor Daily News not practice what they preach? Have you ever noticed that those pushing this cult almost never mention the changes in their own lives and businesses?

That means actions on a large scale: Incentivizing the production and use of renewable energy, adhering to national and statewide emissions reductions targets, for example, while also taking action as individuals — like considering fuel-efficient vehicles, using public transportation, recycling.

In other words, forcing citizens to do this.

(Vox) The IPCC isn’t arguing that global governments should reengineer the dramatic shutdowns of the early pandemic that brought travel to a standstill. But the science body noted that the pandemic is proof that broad, structural behavioral change can and does happen.

Policy plays a big role in nudging people into making more climate-friendly decisions, basically making it as easy as possible to lessen one’s footprint. The IPCC authors write that “judicious labelling, framing, and communication of social norms can also increase the effect of mandates, subsidies, or taxes.” Interventions that change the “choice architecture” so people have an easier time taking the cleaner option include: default enrollment in green programs, increasing taxes on carbon-intensive products, and substantially tightening regulations and standards.

The IPCC may not be arguing it, but, climate cultists sure are, hence, the “nudging”, which means legislation, rules, and regulations, coming from people who, again, won’t practice what they preach.

Read: It’s Now Or Never Again For Climate Action On Earth Day Or Something »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 6 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove