If All You See…

By William Teach March 25, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is an area flooded from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is neo-neocon, with a post on Democrats not being as dumb as you think, they have a plan.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Kamala Harris Seems Upset That GOP Is Saying Democrats Want To Ban Guns

By William Teach March 25, 2021 – 10:30 am

Kamala is rated 7% by the NRA. She wants to do away with all private ownership of “assault rifles.” She supports massive restrictions on the 2nd Amendment. Democrats have stated that they want to take away the firearms from private citizens. They’ve openly talked about the “Australian solution”, the “UK solution,” the “New Zealand solution”

VP Harris tells the GOP to ‘stop pushing the false choice’ that ‘everybody’s trying to come after your guns’ after series of mass shootings

Vice President Kamala Harris told Republican leaders on Wednesday to stop spreading the “false choice” that “everybody’s trying to come after your guns.”

In an interview with “CBS This Morning” two days after a mass shooting in a King Soopers grocery store in Boulder, Colorado, that killed 10 people, Harris said that “it has to be possible that people agree that these slaughters have to stop.”

“And this is, again, reject the false choice of – and stop pushing it for sure – stop pushing the false choice that this means everybody’s trying to come after your guns,” she continued. “That is not what we’re talking about.” (snip)

The House of Representatives recently passed two bills that would close loopholes in the background-check system and make gun transfers between people without licenses illegal. One of the measures was supported by eight House Republicans.

What’s the false choice when Democrats say this is what they want? We could probably get some real solutions in place, but, we know that if Democrats get those two bills, plus a scary looking rifle ban (which never really worked last time), they’ll want more, especially when they make zero difference, because criminals don’t actually follow the law. And even Democrat moderates in the Senate are backing away from those bills

Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas said during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on gun violence on Tuesday that Democrats were engaging in “ridiculous theater” and using mass shootings to take people’s guns away.

“Every time there’s a shooting, we play this ridiculous theater where this committee gets together and proposes a bunch of laws that would do nothing to stop these murders,” Cruz said. “What happens in this committee after every mass shooting is Democrats propose taking away guns from law-abiding citizens because that’s their political objective.”

Republican Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana, meanwhile, compared gun violence to drunk driving and gun owners to Muslims.

“We have a lot of drunk drivers in America that kill a lot of people. We ought to try to combat that too,” he said at the hearing. “The answer is not to get rid of all sober drivers. The answer is to concentrate on the problem.”

Why not go after the criminals who use firearms?

Is compromise possible? Republicans have gun control proposals too

…

“Thoughts and prayers alone are not enough. We need action,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said, echoing a line often used by Democrats after shooting tragedies. He called the House-passed bills “ridiculous theater” and said he and Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, would reintroduce their own bill. They say their bill would target those trying to buy firearms who were banned from owning them by creating a federal task force to prosecute them. It would also allow for the hiring of more Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco and Explosives (ATF) agents and implement other measures to strengthen existing gun laws. The bill received a majority vote when introduced in 2013 but did not meet the 60-vote filibuster threshold.

That’s because Democrats filibustered the bill. The same thing they want to scuttle. Why not enforce existing gun laws? I have zero problem with requiring a background check on every gun sale. Of course, what follows is Democrats pushing for gun registration, because that’s the only way to make sure, right? And they’ll want to know how many people have and where they are. No. Crack down on criminals.

Read: Kamala Harris Seems Upset That GOP Is Saying Democrats Want To Ban Guns »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 21 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Seems Pretty Upset That Riders Are Abandoning Public Transport, Which Hurts Climate (scam) Fight

By William Teach March 25, 2021 – 8:29 am

The NY Times was one of the ringleaders in pushing for COVID lockdowns, in everyone staying how, in isolating yourself from everyone else, in fearmongering contact with other people – I’m not saying that social distancing and no touching are not smart measures. They are. I do it. Don’t touch me, no handshakes, not fist bumps, stay back. The NY Times went way overboard in trying to scare people -, in pushing Government to lock people down (all while the Times’ employees were free to do their jobs), not too mention ignoring what Cuomo was doing in nursing homes. Plus, it was a pandemic. People started changing their behavior even before Government starting dictating all sorts of things, having seen what was going on in China, Italy, and on cruise ships.

And this whole worldwide pandemic is just so inconvenient for the Cult of Climastrology

Riders Are Abandoning Buses and Trains. That’s a Problem for Climate Change.
Public transit offers a simple way for cities to lower greenhouse gas emissions, but the pandemic has pushed ridership, and revenue, off a cliff in many big systems.

On the London Underground, Piccadilly Circus station is nearly vacant on a weekday morning, while the Delhi Metro is ferrying fewer than half of the riders it used to. In Rio, unpaid bus drivers have gone on strike. New York City subway traffic is just a third of what it was before the pandemic.

A year into the coronavirus pandemic, public transit is hanging by a thread in many cities around the world. Riders remain at home or they remain fearful of boarding buses and trains. And without their fares, public transit revenues have fallen off a cliff. In some places service has been cut, fares have gone up and transit workers are facing the prospect of layoffs.

That’s a disaster for the world’s ability to address that other global crisis: climate change. Public transit offers a relatively simple way for cities to lower their greenhouse gas emissions, not to mention a way to improve air quality, noise and congestion in the world’s busiest cities.

The last three, yes. Climate change? Scam. In a place like NYC, I prefer to use public transport. I took the train into NYC numerous times when I lived in NJ, and would take the bus or subway around the city. In the times since living in NJ, I’ve gone into the city several times while visiting NJ, and always on public transport. I want absolutely nothing to do with driving in. But, it’s about convenience, not saving the earth from climate apocalypse.

“We are facing maybe the most important crisis in the public transit sector in different parts of the world,” said Sérgio Avelleda, the director of urban mobility for the World Resources Institute and a former transport secretary for São Paulo, Brazil. “It’s urgent to act.”

But act how? Transit agencies that have been bailed out by the government are wondering how long the generosity will last, and almost everywhere, transportation experts are scrambling to figure out how to better adapt public transit to the needs of riders as cities begin to emerge from the pandemic.

Well, good luck with that. But, consider that they let people on airplanes, and seat them right next to each other (I’ll be hones, that was rather uncomfortable over Christmas, but, I wore long sleeves and made sure no direct skin contact), so, why not buses and trains? They don’t have to be packed. Just full seating. But, will people do that, especially when so many are basically locked down/being told not to travel except where necessary around the world in big cities?

The bigger challenge for all cities is to fix their public transit systems now so that passengers will return, said Mohamed Mezghani, head of the International Association of Public Transport. They could adjust peak hour service as telecommuting from home becomes more commonplace, expand bus only lanes that make commutes more efficient and comfortable or improve ventilation systems to ensure citizens that riding public transit is safe.

“Those cities that were investing, they will get out stronger,” Mr. Mezghani said. “People will feel more comfortable traveling in a new modern public transit system. It’s about perception in the end.”

What’s “a new modern public transit system”? It’s still buses and trains. Nothing else. And why would we need as many when so many are locked down, working from home, etc? Anyhow, there are good, real reasons to take public transport in big cities like NYC. The climate scam is not one of them. But, you know, this whole pandemic, with people losing their jobs, losing their money, lives upended, getting sick, dying, yeah, that’s so inconvenient for the Cult of Climastrology.

Read: NY Times Seems Pretty Upset That Riders Are Abandoning Public Transport, Which Hurts Climate (scam) Fight »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

China Joe To Open More Concentration Camps For Illegal Kids

By William Teach March 25, 2021 – 8:02 am

Why are so many coming? Because with Joe in the White House and Democrats controlling both the Senate and House (thanks, Never Trumpers), all these migrants think they will all be given free citizenship in the U.S. Meanwhile, homeless Americans, including military veterans, have to fend for themselves

Biden administration prepares to activate 2 military sites in Texas for migrant children

Americans before illegalsThe Biden administration is setting up two more emergency intake sites that combined will provide more than 5,000 beds to accommodate migrant children crossing the US-Mexico border alone.

It’s the latest move by the administration to try to alleviate overcrowding in Border Patrol facilities and transfer unaccompanied minors who have been held in those facilities, akin to jail-like conditions, for prolonged periods.

The Department of Health and Human Services is partnering with the Defense Department to use property on Fort Bliss near El Paso, Texas, and Lackland Air Force Base near San Antonio, with the potential capacity to accommodate up to 5,000 beds and around 350 beds, respectively.

On Wednesday, the Defense Department announced it had approved a request from HHS to temporarily house unaccompanied migrant children at two military sites in Texas.

“This support will be on a fully-reimbursable basis, and will not negatively affect military training, operations, readiness, or other military requirements, including National Guard and Reserve readiness. HHS will maintain custody and responsibility for the well-being and support for these children at all times on the installation,” Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said in a statement.

HHS oversees an expansive shelter network where those children are placed until they can be relocated with sponsors, like parents or relatives, in the United States. But amid Covid-19 constraints and the accelerated pace of arrivals, the administration has struggled to move unaccompanied children out of border facilities designed for adults into HHS care within the 72-hour legal limit.

If they’re unaccompanied, how are they going to be placed with their parents, who wouldn’t be in the country? Does this mean that China Joe will allow the parents into the U.S. in order to take care of the kids? The same parents that sent their minor children on a long, dangerous trek to the U.S.? Or, will they be sent back to their parents? I think we all know the answer, and China Joe isn’t going to send anyone away, prioritizing foreigners over U.S. citizens.

Meanwhile, Joe put Kamala in charge of the border, because, apparently, Joe isn’t capable of doing his job

(Breitbart) President Joe Biden announced Wednesday his plan to put Vice President Kamala Harris in charge of the migrant crisis on the southern border.

”I can think of nobody who is better qualified to do this,” Biden said after making the announcement at the White House.

Biden shifted the responsibility for the crisis to his vice president as it threatens to overshadow his achievements in fighting the coronavirus and his massive $1.9 trillion spending package. He delegated full power to her team.

“When she speaks, she speaks for me,” Biden said. “Doesn’t have to check with me. She knows what she’s doing and I hope we can move this along.” (snip)

Harris said she would also work with members of Congress to address the problem.

There’s no need to work with Congress. Congress has already passed laws that state that aliens should, in almost ever case, be removed from the nation if even let in temporarily. If they actually crossed the border illegally, then deported. Period.

Read: China Joe To Open More Concentration Camps For Illegal Kids »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration, Joe Biden | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

We Need To Rethink Capitalism To Solve The Climate Apocalypse Or Something

By William Teach March 24, 2021 – 3:00 pm

TIRACHOSII: This really isn’t about climate change or science, is it. Maybe that’s why it’s in the New Scientist, because it’s not about science

Mark Carney interview: Rethink capitalism to solve the climate crisis
The ex-governor of the Bank of England is now a key figure in international climate action talks. Progress requires radically reimagining how financial markets value nature, he says

MARK CARNEY made his name as a sound steward of money. He entered the public eye in 2008 when he was appointed governor of the Bank of Canada at the age of just 42, and his swift and decisive interventions there are credited with helping the country weather the storm of the global financial crisis better than any other rich nation. From 2011 to 2018, he was chair of the global Financial Stability Board, established in the wake of that crisis to strengthen oversight of the world’s banks and try to avoid a repeat. In 2013, Carney was appointed governor of the Bank of England, the first non-Briton to oversee the UK’s central bank since it was established in 1694.

So, he got his money, and damned sure isn’t giving up his big carbon footprint lifestyle. Anyhow

Since stepping down from the governorship in 2020, he has turned his focus to the tricky interface of economics and the environment. He has returned to the private sector as a vice chair and head of impact investing at Canada-based firm Brookfield Asset Management – a role that recently garnered some controversy for that firm’s definition of its net-zero climate investments. Carney is also the UN special envoy for climate action and the finance advisor for the UK government’s presidency of the UN’s COP26 climate change conference, a crucial point for the world’s climate plans, scheduled to take place this November in Glasgow. He has just written a book called Value(s): Building a better world for all about how we can and must rework capitalism to help solve the crises we face.

I think you have the idea, which is good, because the rest is behind a real paywall, one which cannot be gotten around by using something like Pocket.com (it’s a great workaround for most paywalls, like NY Times, Washington Post, Twitchy, LA Times, and more. Not WSJ and some others). Why do Warmists always want to change capitalism, especially when they’ve already made their money with it? Would be nice to see how far Carney goes in describing exactly how he wants to change it. Warmists usually avoid those details.

Along the lines of this isn’t about science

Scientists need to face both facts and feelings when dealing with the climate crisis

As a scientist, I was trained to be calm, rational, and objective, to focus on the facts, supporting my claims with evidence and showing my reasoning to colleagues to tear apart in peer review. I was trained to use my brain but not my heart; to report methods and statistics and findings but not how I felt about them. In graduate school, I was surrounded by brilliant, serious men who spoke in even, measured tones about the loss of California snowpack and crop yields; I tried to do the same.

My dispassionate training has not prepared me for the increasingly frequent emotional crises of climate change. What do I tell the student who chokes up in my office when she reads that 90% of the seagrasses she’s trying to design policies to protect are slated to be killed by warming before she retires? In such cases, facts are cold comfort. The skill I’ve had to cultivate on my own is to find the appropriate bedside manner as a doctor to a feverish planet; to try to go beyond probabilities and scenarios, to acknowledge what is important and grieve for what is being lost.

Only in the most recent decade of my life have I realised that feelings, manifested as physical sensations in the body such as my stomach clenching or my heart lifting, have their own wisdom. I don’t have to react to these feelings in any dramatic way if I don’t want to; all I have to do is make eye contact, wave, and not run away. Like all feelings, sadness is valid; it need not dictate my actions singlehandedly, but it deserves acknowledgment.

Science doesn’t care about your feelings.

Elsewhere

RI House approves climate change bill; goal is net-zero emissions by 2050

After a lengthy debate, Rhode Island House lawmakers on Tuesday night approved legislation that calls for reducing the state’s greenhouse-gas emissions and strengthening its clean-energy policies.

The Act on Climate bill, sponsored by Rep. Lauren Carson, builds upon the Resilient Rhode Island Act of 2014 by toughening emission reduction targets. Supporters say it also adds accountability to make sure the state’s emission goals are met by 2050.

Why almost 30 years from now? If they care they’d implement immediately, and give up their own use of fossil fuels.

Read: We Need To Rethink Capitalism To Solve The Climate Apocalypse Or Something »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 24, 2021 – 1:00 pm

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

The blog of the day is House Of Eratosthenes, with a post wondering when it all ends.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

CNN Seems Pretty Upset That States Are Relaxing Their COVID Rules

By William Teach March 24, 2021 – 10:30 am

It’s easy for people who were considered essential workers and never missed a paycheck to complain, eh?

A top health official warned relaxing Covid-19 measures threatens progress. A day later, more states said they were easing restrictions

A top health official warned the US could see an “avoidable” Covid-19 surge if Americans let up on mitigation measures now. A day later, two more states unveiled plans to loosen restrictions.

“The continued relaxation of prevention measures while cases are still high and while concerning variants are spreading rapidly throughout the United States is a serious threat to the progress we have made as a nation,” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said Monday.

It wasn’t the first time Walensky brought up concerns about the easing of safety measures. And a chorus of other health experts have made a similar point: While vaccination numbers continue to climb, safety measures will be critical in the coming weeks to help curb another possible surge as a dangerous variant spreads across the country.

“It’s really very much a race,” Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, told CNN on Monday. “If we can continue to accelerate the number of people vaccinated in this country… I think we’ll be in a much better position. But you have unfortunately a lot of governors releasing restrictions, people are traveling… and this B.1.1.7 variant.”

It will always be something with these folks. Perhaps they should have been more forthright when the nation was mostly shutting down and mostly Democrat governors, along with those in charge of cities and counties, were going crazy with their restrictions. There really is little difference between those areas which put massive restrictions in place and those that didn’t. And you see those with massive restrictions, such as the UK and Italy, continuing to have big problems. There becomes a point where people are tired of this and thinking that the Elites are trying to over-scare us.

Since the start of the month, at least a dozen state leaders have eased Covid-19 restrictions. And a day after both experts’ remarks, two more governors announced plans to relax some measures.

Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb announced Tuesday that starting April 6, the state’s face covering mandate will become a state mask advisory. Face masks will remain mandatory in state buildings and facilities as well as at Covid-19 testing and vaccination sites, the governor said.

In Virginia, Gov. Ralph Northam announced that starting April 1, both indoor and outdoor gathering limits will increase and certain sports and entertainment venues will be able to operate with additional capacity.

At some point, all the restrictions have to relax and go away, right? If not, why? Why try and scaremonger?

Many state leaders — including those who have opted to relax restrictions — have in recent weeks expressed optimism about inching closer to the end of the pandemic, citing lowered Covid-19 numbers in comparison to the winter surge and increasing vaccinations.

So far, more than 83.9 million Americans have received at least one dose of a Covid-19 vaccine, according to data from the CDC. More than 45.5 million are fully vaccinated, according to the data. That’s roughly 13.7% of the US population.

So, over a quarter of Americans have been vaccinated, and you pair that with all those who have the antibodies after having COVID. As more become vaccinated, what rationale will the Elites use to keep restrictions in place?

Read: CNN Seems Pretty Upset That States Are Relaxing Their COVID Rules »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus | 19 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Marijuana Farms Contributing To Climate Apocalypse

By William Teach March 24, 2021 – 7:50 am

I wonder what this will do to the Democrats push to legalize marijuana all across the country: which push is more important to them, climate crisis (scam) or getting stoned?

Marijuana farms contributing to climate change, research shows

Growing cannabis indoors is racking up energy production, resulting in large amounts of damaging gases that warm Earth.

With cannabis farming surging on the back of deregulation efforts, researchers at Colorado State University looked at how much electricity and natural gas it takes to grow marijuana — and its carbon footprint is sky high.

According to researchers’ calculations, for every one kilogram of dried cannabis, or about 1,000 joints, indoor growing operations produce the equivalent of 2 to 5 tons of carbon dioxide.

To put this figure in perspective, a typical passenger vehicle emits about 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year, based on 22-mile per gallon fuel economy and a yearly driving range around 11,500 miles.

While farming cannabis indoors burns through electricity, shifting crops outdoors would help shrink the carbon footprint by 96%, researchers found. Using a greenhouse would cut emissions nearly in half.

So, to repeat, enough pot to make 1,000 joints is like a Warmist driving their fossil fueled vehicle all year long, especially if they’re driving something that gets crummy gas mileage. Realistically, more people are driving vehicles that get vastly better fuel economy. But, that’s a separate subject.

In Jacksonville, the need for dehumidifiers and air conditioning adds about 1,500 kilograms of emissions to every kilogram of product.

That would be Jacksonville, Florida, where medical marijuana is legal, but not recreational

As it turns out, Southern California’s moderate climate and renewable power makes it a prime location for the lowest emissions.

Would that be the renewable power that has caused planned brownouts and blackouts? Regardless, it still causes emissions, so, do we keep it or kill it off to save the Earth from turning into a hothouse like Venus? Anyhow, most states would be less than prime locations with their weather. New Jersey, which is pushing hard, has some pretty hot, humid summers and very dry, cold winters. Most states would have issues, and they aren’t going to grow it outside.

Also, wouldn’t making recreational use cause people to have the munchies, and eating all that food is Bad for climate apocalypse, right?

BTW, and once again, I really do not care if people use pot. I did long ago, it just started to bore me. No longer fun. But, I have no problem with others smoking, as long as it is away from me. Let’s make tax money off it.

Read: Bummer: Marijuana Farms Contributing To Climate Apocalypse »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

After Colorado Shooting, The Usual Suspects Push Gun Control/Grabbing And Filibuster Reform

By William Teach March 24, 2021 – 7:28 am

Many people were wondering what was going to happen now that we know that the shooter is not a white, Christian, Conservative. Well, we aren’t hearing about white supremacy or nationalism, the phrase “hate crime” is not being thrown around, and pretty much anything about the shooter is being ignored. It’s all about gun control/grabbing

In fact, it was a Ruger AR-556 Pistol, per USA Today. Not technically a rifle at all. Not that much difference, though. But, the Usual Suspects do not care, and they’re going double time after guns because they can’t complain about white people and conservatives (of course, the notion that a goodly chunk of the assaults against Asians was occurring from Black people, and primarily in Democratic Party run cities, was ignored as the media blamed whites, Trump, and Conservatives).

You have Biden, along with so many others, pushing for an assault weapons ban and other gun restrictions. Let’s say we do this: what will Democrats push when it makes no difference in criminals using guns (especially as they take advantage of law abiding citizens being disarmed)? And, their other big push

What has to happen after the Colorado killings

(many paragraphs about previous shootings and attempts to gun grab, which is actually a setup as we learn about gun grabbing legislation offered by Democrats being either watered down or killed because Republicans refuse to gun grab)

Despite former President Donald Trump’s “big lie” that led to the attempted coup on January 6, President Joe Biden, who ran on a strong gun-control platform, is in the White House and has signaled that he is ready to sign gun violence prevention bills into law.

Had to have some TDS in there, right?

On March 11, the House passed Thompson and Clyburn’s background check bills once again. Sen. Chris Murphy who introduced S.529, the companion bill to Rep. Thompson’s bill, is tasked with passing the bill in the Senate.

Without eliminating the filibuster, this legislation will require 10 Republicans to join 50 Democrats to support the bill, a herculean challenge in so partisan a political environment that 43 Senate Republicans refused to convict Trump for inciting unprecedented insurrection against our nation.

Well, write better bills. Don’t make them intrusive. Don’t make them violate the Constitution. Don’t make them punish the law abiding because criminals are criminal

The Brady background check and the assault weapons ban bills were signed into law more than 27 years ago, the last time Congress passed a meaningful gun control bill. With 253+ voter suppression bills in 43 states, Republicans are only interested in regaining power that serves the interest of the corporate gun lobby.

When you go hyper-partisan, why are you surprised when Republicans won’t work with you? And the Brady bill was supposed to fix all this. Weird it didn’t, eh?

The gun violence prevention movement worked tirelessly to secure a Democratic majority in the House, the Senate and the White House. It’s time for Democratic senators to reform the rules to force an up-or-down vote on lifesaving gun violence prevention measures. They must not squander this opportunity to take meaningful action to end the gun violence crisis in our nation.

Without ending the Senate filibuster, public safety policies with broad American support will not make it onto President Biden’s desk. That means we can expect more than 100 Americans to keep dying by guns every single day. And that we’re likely to see more of the tragic deaths that we’ve just seen in Atlanta and Boulder.

Never let a good crisis go to waste, eh? The bodies aren’t even cold and Democrats are using that to push gun measures and killing the filibuster (which they will immediately want reinstated when they next lose the Senate, right?).

Oh, and perhaps liberals should be looking at their politicized, left leaning FBI

That’s right, he was known to the FBI. Yet, was allowed to pass a lawful background check, and the conditions for gun ownership are much more burdensome in Colorado.

Read: After Colorado Shooting, The Usual Suspects Push Gun Control/Grabbing And Filibuster Reform »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Cult Pretty Upset That Conservatives Continue To Say There’s A Debate On ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach March 23, 2021 – 3:00 pm

We’re back to “the debate is over.” Because that’s apparently how Science works for climate cultists. Second, conservatives are not the same from country to country. US conservatives are more of Classical Liberals, per Political Theory 101, while Canadian European Conservatives are more Classical Conservatives, and, yeah, there’s a difference. Third, it’s strange that one of the preeminent college institutions, Harvard, wants to shut down debate. Isn’t that part of what education is about?

Global Conservatives and the Myth of a Climate Change Debate

On Saturday, the Canadian Conservative Party voted down a recent proposal for the party to become more green-friendly, rejecting stances such as “Canadian businesses classified as highly polluting need to take more responsibility” and “climate change is real.”

Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole was seen Friday urging his colleagues to be more open-minded, believing that the party’s failure to recognize the scientific consensus behind human-caused climate change would hurt their chances to challenge the Liberal Party coalition and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in the next election. But the 54 to 46 percent vote is the latest affirmation of the enduring conservative trend to reject modern climate realities.

If you have to use “consensus”, it’s not science.

The Canadian decision is the latest development in a much larger problem. Conservatives across the globe are continuing to rally behind a scientifically debunked claim that climate change isn’t happening. In the United States, conservative politicians — none of whom are scientists themselves — discredit and question prominent and reliable climate change researchers. In Germany, right-wing party officials pass out scientifically inaccurate pamphlets at student activist rallies.

Alas, no. Skeptics will tell you again and again that the debate is not that the climate has changed. It has. It’s warmer than it was in 1850, when the Little Ice Age ended. No, the debate is on causation, and the Cult of Climastrology cannot prove, using the Scientific Method or anything other than supposition, that the changes are mostly/solely caused by Mankind. They surely do not act like it in their own lives, right?

The “debate” over climate change is a myth that conservative leaders must cease to perpetuate. Overwhelming scientific consensus affirms that the earth is warming at historic rates. Claims to the contrary are not a valid political opinion — they are an alternate reality that is incompatible with basic fact.

And that’s where we get into their “just shut up and take it” mode. The “how dare you speak!” mode. Wrongthink. They are very unhappy with Free Speech and Free Thought.

Groundbreaking studies on historic atmospheric carbon levels found that over the past 800,000 years, carbon dioxide in our atmosphere has never surpassed around 300 parts per million, even in Earth’s warmest periods. However, since 1950, CO2 levels have risen dramatically to over 400 ppm, levels never before reached in observable history.

Which means exactly zero, as the Earth has experienced multiple warm periods during the Holocene period, many warmer than the current Modern Warm Period. Heck, what caused the world to warm, ending the last glacial period? Sure wasn’t fossil fueled vehicles and people eating burgers. What they’re proposing is a supposition. An “uncertain belief.” Not science. Why don’t they try explaining why there were multiple warm periods when CO2 was much lower? “That was then this is now” is not a scientific explanation.

The time to deny humanity’s role in our warming earth is long over, and conservative leaders who continue to perpetuate the myth of a debate are lying to themselves and their constituents. This is different from a debate around which policies provide the best pathway forward. Countries like France, Germany, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and the U.S. —  with  large populations that continue to subscribe to the anti-climate-change narrative — should put tax dollars to use by discussing action, not by trying to ignore extensive scientific evidence.

Why would we spend money on something that is clearly not a proven scientific reality? If you want to argue that, yes, the climate has changed, it has gotten warmer, we could do with protecting infrastructure and such, sure, OK, I’ll agree. If you want to propose taxing the hell out of people and private entities while taking away their freedom, liberty, and choice, well, nah, you won’t get that agreement. Because that’s what they want. Just look at how they frame this: taking away people’s Free Speech and Thought. And that’s what they’ve been pushing for over 30 years.

When I started pointing out that this was all about pushing Progressive (nice Fascism) (you can call it Marxism, Socialism, Communism, etc) political doctrine around 16 years ago, even Skeptics said I was off base. And every day, month, and year proves me correct.

Read: Climate Cult Pretty Upset That Conservatives Continue To Say There’s A Debate On ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in 1st Amendment, AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 10 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove