Trump Considering Travel Ban On California And Washington

By William Teach March 13, 2020 – 3:36 pm

I was hoping to avoid more Covid 19 news, but, this is just too funny

Trump considers travel restrictions to California and Washington in attempt to stop coronavirus spread

President Trump said Thursday that travel restrictions to California and Washington, two states hit hard by the coronavirus outbreak, were possible “if an area gets too hot.”

One day after announcing a 30-day suspension of travel from the European Union to the United States, Trump was asked by a reporter in the Oval Office whether domestic restrictions were also possible.

“Is it a possibility?” Trump responded. “Yes, if somebody gets a little bit out of control, if an area gets too hot.”

Trump canceled his own trip to Nevada and Colorado minutes after announcing the EU travel restrictions.

Of the more than 1,400 cases of coronavirus confirmed in the United States, the largest number, 341, are in Washington state. New York has reported 327 cases, the second-highest, and California currently has 201.

Trump’s use of international travel bans has been criticized by public health officials who say the virus is already in the United States and spreading rapidly.

Well, of course Trump is being criticized. No matter what he does the Democrats and their compliant Credentialed Media will criticize him. The Washington Post and NY Times, among others, of course panned his Oval Office speech as Bad. Anyhow, maybe it’s time to build a wall around California and Washington, and New York, or at least the parts run by Democrats? Democrats were screaming for travel bans, and then when Trump puts them in place, they screech about that. There’s just no winning with these people. It’s almost like this is about politics.

Read: Trump Considering Travel Ban On California And Washington »

Posted in Donald Trump | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 13, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is a word turning to desert due to carbon pollution that can be solved with a tax on Other People, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Chicks On The Right, with a post on the media meltdown over saying Chinese coronavirus.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Global Warming Totally Wasn’t Rebranded As Climate Change Or Something

By William Teach March 13, 2020 – 10:30 am

And all you people making this claim are crazy and wrong

There is no evidence that ‘global warming’ was rebranded as ‘climate change’

Climate change denial is a moving target. In the past, it consisted of a fully fledged denial of any scientific evidence that the world was warming. More recently, it has evolved into a creative mix of strategies. Deniers today often contradict part of the scientific basis for climate change, while pinning the blame for the rest – anything completely undeniable, even to them – on developing countries, particularly India and China.

Interestingly, the people who Believe in anthropogenic climate change are utter hypocrites and refuse to modify their own lives. What does that say about them?

Over the past few weeks, a new figure has emerged: Naomi Seibt. Seibt, the so-called anti-Greta Thunberg, a 19-year-old from Münster in Germany, rapidly gained media attention for her call for “climate realism”, claiming that climate change science really is not science at all, and for this reason, there is no need to panic. The young activist immediately caught the eye of the lively US denier scene and was – just months after publishing her first YouTube video – invited to speak at the high-profile Conservative Political Action Conference 2020 (CPAC) and made a member of the Heartland Institute, a thinktank known for its ties to the fossil-fuel industry.

What was perhaps most interesting, was her use of a recurrent argument on the supposed “historical rebranding” of climate change. The theory goes as follows: in the past, everyone used the term global warming to describe this phenomenon, but seeing that the planet was, in fact, not heating, global warming was “rebranded” to climate change in a sophisticated cover-up.

Clearly, this hypothesis is flawed, as the Earth is unequivocally warming. Despite this, the idea appears to be widely held in the denialist scene – to take one prominent example, Donald Trump tweeted it more than 20 times in the two years before he became president.

Except, they did use to primarily call it global warming, as in anthropogenic global warming, where the initials AGW came from.

To find out whether there is some truth underlying the “rebranding theory”, I analysed 30 years (1990-2019) of data containing the terms global warming and climate change from five sources: the academic literature repositories Scopus and Web of Science, the British newspapers The Times and The Guardian, and the articles published by the Heartland Institute itself.

This conveniently leaves out the scaremongering of the late 1980’s, but, check out his charts: they clearly show a marked increase in the use of climate change in the early 2000’s, at a point where the Great Pause was occurring, and people had been tuning out to global warming. The use of climate change allowed the Cult of Climastrology to blame everything on carbon pollution and Mankind.

Climate change deniers are known to often misrepresent innocuous facts and use them to their advantage, and this case was no exception: a simple evolution in language was transformed into an unfounded conspiracy theory. While the latter was easy to debunk by looking at the data, these sorts of arguments are dangerous smokescreens, designed to shift the focus of the debate away from the need for decisive measures to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Whatever we decide to call it, climate change is happening, and it calls for urgent action.

Oh, this totally convinces me! I need to give up my freedom and money in order to stop carbon pollution created earthquakes and volcanoes.

Oh, hey, you know what’s missing as usual? Any proof that the minor climatic changes are caused mostly/solely by Mankind.

Read: Global Warming Totally Wasn’t Rebranded As Climate Change Or Something »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 34 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Coronavirus Poses A Threat To Doing Something About Hotcoldwetdry

By William Teach March 13, 2020 – 7:11 am

The sheer amount of articles about ‘climate change’ that include something about the Coronavirus are continuing to rise, because the doomsday Cult of Climastrology always has to include themselves in everything that happens. And they are not happy that this very real (though slightly overblown) virus could get in the way of the government taking over people’s lives and taxing them out the ying yang

Coronavirus poses threat to climate action, says watchdog

The coronavirus health crisis may lead to a slump in global carbon emissions this year but the outbreak poses a threat to long-term climate action by undermining investment in clean energy, according to the global energy watchdog.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) expects the economic fallout of Covid-19 to wipe out the world’s oil demand growth for the year ahead, which should cap the fossil fuel emissions that contribute to the climate crisis.

But Fatih Birol, IEA’s executive director, has warned the outbreak could spell a slowdown in the world’s clean energy transition unless governments use green investments to help support economic growth through the global slowdown.

“There is nothing to celebrate in a likely decline in emissions driven by economic crisis because in the absence of the right policies and structural measures this decline will not be sustainable,” he said.

The virus has stoked fears of a global economic recession and helped to ignite one of the sharpest oil price collapses in the last 30 years, wiping billions of dollars from the world’s largest energy companies.

The economic contagion is likely to stall many infrastructure projects, including the multibillion-dollar investments in clean energy needed to avert a climate catastrophe by the end of the decade.

See, the first thing members of this doomsday cult think about is how an issue will effect their cult.

“We should not allow today’s crisis to compromise the clean energy transition,” Birol said. He said global governments should use the economic stimulus packages which are being planned to help countries weather the downturn to invest in clean energy technologies.

He added: “We have an important window of opportunity. Major economies around the world are preparing stimulus packages. A well designed stimulus package could offer economic benefits and facilitate a turnover of energy capital which have huge benefits for the clean energy transition.”

See, what we could do is to offer everyone a $3,000 check, but, instead of sending them the check, we’ll tell people that the government is going to invest it in RightThink approved green companies and do stuff in their name. Hey, it’s for their own good.

The IEA head also urged policymakers to use the downturn in global oil prices to phase out or scrap fossil fuels subsidies, which could be used to boost healthcare spending.

Read: Bummer: Coronavirus Poses A Threat To Doing Something About Hotcoldwetdry »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 26 Comments | Trackback URL

Republicans Oppose Parts Of Democrat “Coronavirus” Bill, Which Includes Abortion Funding

By William Teach March 13, 2020 – 6:55 am

Never let a good crisis go to waste, right?

Republicans oppose Pelosi’s coronavirus legislation, flagging ‘major’ problems

The White House and congressional Republicans have poured cold water on the House Democrats’ coronavirus legislation to provide economic relief to Americans, signaling there won’t be immediate broad bipartisan support for the pending bill unless it undergoes changes.

One senior administration official said the White House has “serious concerns” with the measure put forth by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., late Wednesday to help families deal with the economic hardships of the pandemic.

And House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said the legislation “comes up short.” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., panned the bill as an “ideological wish list,” putting the legislation in limbo.

President Trump doesn’t support the legislation in its current form and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin continues to work with Pelosi on changing some language, White House officials told Fox News Thursday morning.

Among the White House concerns are increasing spending on Medicaid, which provides health care for low-income families, without structural reforms, and not including language to ban federal funds for abortion, the official said.

McCarthy said there’s two “major problems.” First, creating a paid sick leave program through the Social Security Administration that would take six months to set up and hamper the agency’s normal functioning of disbursing checks to senior citizens. The second is forcing permanent paid sick leave “for all businesses without exemptions and no sunsets,” McCarthy said.

A lot of what Democrats have in their bill are things that won’t work right now, things in the future, and things that will never end. Did you know that the bill is 124 pages long? And, it was enough for MSNBC’s Joy Reid to opinine

MSNBC host Joy Reid appeared bewildered over reports that the proposed emergency spending bill from House Democrats to combat the coronavirus outbreak was halted over a dispute involving “abortion.”

Reid took to Twitter and reacted to one of her colleague’s reporting on the dust-up between Democratic and Republican lawmakers.

“Wow… @kasie just reported that Republicans’ objections to the House Democrats’ emergency coronavirus bill include issues related to abortion. What does that have to do with COVID19…?” Reid asked.

The Daily Caller reported on Thursday that Pelosi sought funding as what was described as a “loophole” around the Hyde Amendment, which outlaws taxpayer-funded abortions, among other things included in the bill.

No matter what, the Democrats seem to want to include abortion. Did they do this on purpose in order to attempt to get the bill spiked so they could blame Republicans?

Read: Republicans Oppose Parts Of Democrat “Coronavirus” Bill, Which Includes Abortion Funding »

Posted in Current Affairs, Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Californian’s Vote Down A Whole Bunch Of New Taxes

By William Teach March 12, 2020 – 3:00 pm

Seriously, how dare they! Aren’t they super progressive and want to help the less fortunate and save the planet? Oh, right, right, they’re good with Other People getting taxed out the wahoo

Had enough? Californians turn down higher taxes, debt

Everyone knows that living in California comes with a price: Its residents pay some of the nation’s highest taxes on the money they earn, the gas they pump and the clothes they wear. But for the moment, at least, it appears voters have had enough.

The defeat Tuesday of the largest borrowing proposal in the history of California schools — $15 billion for repairs — has opened the question of whether voters put a temporary halt to the growth of government debt because of the unsettled political scene, or because they are on the cusp of a tax revolt akin to one in the 1970s that brought landmark changes to property taxes.

By itself, the crash of the question on the March 3 primary ballot was striking — it’s been a generation since a state school bond failed and there was no telling moment prior to the election indicating voters had soured on it.

But it didn’t stop there. Voters rejected more than half of the 237 local tax and bond measures on that ballot, with several dozen contests still undecided as California authorities wade through hundreds of thousands of uncounted ballots, according to a tally by the California Taxpayers Association.

This was a wide range of taxes, things like school bonds, cannabis taxes, parcel taxes, sales tax, transient occupancy taxes (which will increase costs for hotels and other things), and even a vacancy tax on unused 1st floors in San Francisco

A final tally of votes remains incomplete, but there is agreement on both sides that no single reason explains the downfall of the big bond. It looks like a mix of factors, not the least of which was jitters over the staggering stock market, the presidential race and the coronavirus outbreak sweeping the globe.

There also was confusion over precisely what the proposal would do and uncertain voters tend to vote no. Polling also shows voters believe taxes are too high.

Additionally, there is widespread anger over soaring housing costs, a troubled and vastly over-budget high-speed rail project and a homelessness crisis in the state’s major cities.

“There is a sense that California isn’t working,” Claremont McKenna College political scientist Jack Pitney said. When a fresh request came from Sacramento for billions in new debt, voters said: “We’ve been taxed enough.”

Yet, the same people will keep voting in state, county, and local lawmakers who will keep costs and taxes high. So, don’t feel bad for them.

Read: Californian’s Vote Down A Whole Bunch Of New Taxes »

Posted in Democrats, Taxation | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 12, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is a sea made rough from carbon pollution driven waves, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on whether it’s time to panic yet.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 30 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Cult Scientists Say They Won’t Know How Bad Doom Will Be Despite Always Proclaiming Doom

By William Teach March 12, 2020 – 10:30 am

They won’t know how bad doom will be till the crisis is already here, you know

We climate scientists won’t know exactly how the crisis will unfold until it’s too late

When we hold on to things for too long, change can come about abruptly and even catastrophically. While this will ring true for many from personal experience, similar things can happen at large scales as well. Indeed, the history of Earth’s climate and ecosystems is punctuated by frequent large-scale disruptive events.

When the air warmed and the last ice age was coming to an end, the continent-size glaciers – or ice sheets – stayed around for much longer than the climate would allow. Then parts of them collapsed in spectacular fashion. One such collapse – we still don’t know of which ice sheet – caused at least four metres of sea level rise per century and possibly also the following abrupt transition to a much warmer climate, only to be followed by an equally abrupt flip-flop between warm and cold conditions, before the onset of the stable climate we have enjoyed until recently.

This long period of stability seems to have ended already. Australia’s climate had been warming rapidly for many decades, and eventually the moment came when record-breaking extreme heat coupled with an exceptionally dry period created the conditions for a series of mega fires.

See, climate used to be natural, but now it’s totally manmade, especially those fires which were mostly set by humans. But, we’re going to blame carbon pollution

Predictive models are the lifeblood of climate science, and the foundation upon which political responses to the climate and ecological crisis are often based. But their ability to predict such large-scale disruptive events is severely limited.

Computer models: doomsaying in, doomsaying out

We know quite well that the climate we are about to create resembles that of millions of years ago, but we are mostly ignorant about how fast this will happen and what it means for humans and ecosystems. Yet scientists rarely point out the uncertainties in their predictions – in particular worst-case scenarios that are beyond the capability of models – and prefer to stick to the conservative but firm conclusions that can be drawn from well-established models.

Doom!

We must have the humility to accept how much we do not know – including at what point it is too late to prevent catastrophic tipping points and the consequent large-scale disruption. Only then can we free the political response from operating according to conservative assumptions and mid-range scenarios, and base it firmly on preventing a worst-case scenario.

“We know doom is coming, just not how bad, so, give the government your money and freedom. Oh, and us more money to scare you into giving up your money and freedom.” Funny how they keep telling us this isn’t about politics then proving it is about politics.

Read: Climate Cult Scientists Say They Won’t Know How Bad Doom Will Be Despite Always Proclaiming Doom »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

UN General Secretary Claims ‘Climate Change’ Is Bigger Threat Than Coronavirus

By William Teach March 12, 2020 – 8:57 am

Because, this silly virus is a distraction from the Really Important Issue, which is why lots of global big wigs took long fossil fueled flights and limo rides

Climate change is a bigger threat than coronavirus, says UN Secretary General

The UN Secretary General, António Guterres, is worried that the coronavirus panic will distract people from the fight against climate change, which he says is far more important. Speaking in New York at the launch of a new UN climate report published on March 10, Guterres said, “We will not fight climate change with a virus.”

He was referring to a question about the coronavirus’ impact on the planet, and how there has been a drop in global greenhouse gas emissions due to the sudden economic slowdown. China’s CO2 emissions have dropped by a quarter, equal to 100 million metric tons. While this may have short-lived benefits for the planet, Guterres insisted that we cannot lose sight of the big picture.

“The disease is expected to be temporary, [but] climate change has been a phenomenon for many years, and will ‘remain with us for decades and require constant action’… Both [COVID-19 and climate change] require a determined response. Both must be defeated.” (snip)

Guterres said, “I call on everyone ― from government, civil society and business leaders to individual citizens – to heed these facts and take urgent action to halt the worst effects of climate change.” What’s interesting is that everyone is doing precisely this to deal with the spread of the coronavirus, which goes to show that governments, individuals, and businesses have the global capability to take rapid and strong action, but have lacked the will to do so until now. Now if only this momentum could be funnelled toward fighting climate change with the same dedication.

Except, Coronavirus is real. It may be very overblown in the scare factor, but, it is real, and more deadly than the flu, at least for older folks and those already sick. ‘Climate change’ is simply a way to scare people into allowing government to control their lives and take their money.

“While coronavirus has resulted in a very sudden scale down in industrial production due to a public health emergency, living through this spasm may allow citizens to imagine, and policy-makers to plan, how it is possible to live differently in response to the ecological emergency. Reducing economic activity and industrial output is a means to enable global ecosystems to regenerate.”

So, all you people out there, are you enjoying the lower economic activity? Do you want to be unemployed and dependent on the government? Do you want your earnings reduced? Maybe people should imagine all this. And see how their lives are negatively affected by supporting the Cult of Climastrology.

Read: UN General Secretary Claims ‘Climate Change’ Is Bigger Threat Than Coronavirus »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

Supreme Court Allows Trump’s Remain In Mexico Policy To Stand

By William Teach March 12, 2020 – 8:41 am

What will the Open Borders advocates do now? Will they start this lawsuit all over, working up to the Supreme Court, thinking the outcome will be different? Will they be willing to wait till the full court proceedings are over?

Supreme Court gives Trump win by allowing ‘remain in Mexico’ policy to continue

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a win to President Trump on Wednesday by allowing his administration to enforce the “Remain in Mexico” asylum policy as litigation surrounding it continues.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had said a week earlier that it would block the policy in Arizona and California, the two border states where its authority extends. The Trump administration then turned to the Supreme Court for relief.

“The application for stay presented to Justice Kagan and by her referred to the Court is granted, and the district court’s April 8, 2019 order granting a preliminary injunction is stayed pending the timely filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari,” the Supreme Court said in an order, which noted that Justice Sonia Sotomayor opposed the Trump administration’s stay application.

The high court action came a day before the lower court order was to have taken effect. Instead, the “Remain in Mexico” policy will remain in force while a lawsuit challenging it plays out in the courts.

The Justice Department responded Wednesday by saying the high court’s order restores “the government’s ability to manage the Southwest border and to work cooperatively with the Mexican government to address illegal immigration.”

If people are serious about wanting asylum, they should be applying at embassies and designated areas outside of the U.S., rather than just showing up and demanding entrance. And attempting to illegally cross the border. Too often, these people who claim to want asylum are released in the U.S. interior while waiting for a court date, and never show up. And then they start demanding citizenship and money and education and housing and healthcare and etc, and the Open Borders advocates support them.

And, a very small portion of those applying fit the designation for asylum. Once they are in the U.S., though, it is hard to get rid of them, thanks in part to Open Borders advocates, who file suit after suit to keep those people here.

If you want a return to Open Borders, vote Biden. If you want to protect the sovereignty of the U.S., vote Trump.

Read: Supreme Court Allows Trump’s Remain In Mexico Policy To Stand »

Posted in Donald Trump, Illegal Immigration | Comments Off on Supreme Court Allows Trump’s Remain In Mexico Policy To Stand | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove