Advertisements
Home

Dem. Governor Literally Says We’ve Got Just 59 Days to Save Children from Global Warming Democrat Governor Literally Says We’ve Only Got 59 Days To Save Children From Global Warming

Leave a comment

H/T Conservative Tribune.

This reminds me of Albert Arnold Ziffel Gore Jr claiming the polar ice cap would be melted by yet the ice cap is thicker than it has ever been.

Dem. Governor Literally Says We’ve Got Just 59 Days to Save Children from Global Warming

Democrat Governor Jay Inslee of Washington state told his Twitter followers that we only have 59 days left to save future generations from climate change, a.k.a. global warming.

In a series of tweets on Tuesday, the governor railed about the devastating effects of climate change and did his part to strike fear into the heart of anyone willing to buy into the notion that human existence has little time left on planet Earth.

 

“We have just 59 days to do our part to save our children from an endless cycle of crop-killing droughts one year, and rivers spilling their banks the next. To save salmon from dying in ever warming rivers, and our forests from being reduced to plumes of ash,” Inslee tweeted.

Advertisement – story continues below

9 Jan

Governor Jay Inslee

@GovInslee
Replying to @GovInslee
While this session is short, our legacy on climate change must be long and lasting.

Governor Jay Inslee

@GovInslee
We have just 59 days to do our part to save our children from an endless cycle of crop-killing droughts one year, and rivers spilling their banks the next. To save salmon from dying in ever warming rivers, and our forests from being reduced to plumes of ash.

3:49 PM – Jan 9, 2018
435 435 Replies 26 26 Retweets 45 45 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
TRENDING: Convicted Traitor Manning Running for U.S. Senate

Nice try.

It is more likely that Inslee was attempting to draw attention to his carbon tax plan, which coincidentally enough he also unveiled Tuesday. This tax would raise an estimated $3.3 billion over the next four years, according to KING-TV.

Advertisement – story continues below

Former Vice President Al Gore praised Inslee’s plan, proving that birds of a feather flock together.

Al Gore

@algore
I applaud the leadership demonstrated today by my friend @GovInslee & Washington state with the announcement of a plan to reduce carbon emissions & embrace the Sustainability Revolution through carbon pricing. #WeGotThis

4:55 PM – Jan 9, 2018
141 141 Replies 344 344 Retweets 1,661 1,661 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Speaking of crazy environmentalists, Gore has made some outlandish predictions that should make him ashamed to show his face.

For example, in 2008, Gore suggested that that Arctic sea ice could be completely gone during the summer by 2013.

Gore is not alone in his dire miscalculations.

 

Professor Peter Wadhams, head of the Polar Ocean Physics Group at Cambridge University, predicted in 2016 that Arctic ice could disappear by the end of that year. Spoiler alert: it didn’t.

Moreover, projection models these alarmists use to predict global warming are simply wrong.Global warming advocates have been incorrectly predicting one climate change disaster after another for decades, and yet none of them have materialized.

It is astounding to think that people still believe any cockamamie climate change predictions that people like Inslee make.

Just wait. In 59 days, the governor will have a new global warming scare tactic to throw at the public.

Share this story on Facebook and Twitter to spread the word about Gov. Inslee’s absurd comments.

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

NAACP Says MLK’s Vision Can’t Be Achieved Without Fighting Global Warming

Leave a comment

H/T The Daily Caller.

I seriously doubt if Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.would care at all about globull warming he would be more concerned about how Obama eroded race relations.

This Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, the NAACP wants man-made global warming to be seen as a civil rights issue, arguing King’s vision of a society free of racial injustice can’t be achieved without addressing warming.

“We see climate change as a civil rights issue,” Jacqueline Patterson, head of the NAACP’s environmental and climate justice program, said in an online radio spotfor the Yale Center for Environmental Connection.

Environmental activists have been increasingly framing global warming as a matter of “environmental justice,” since “minority and low-income populations are disproportionately affected by global warming,” Patterson told Yale’s online radio Climate Connections.

Traditionally, such concerns focused on traditional pollutants from factories or vehicles, but the NAACP is expanding it to carbon dioxide, which scientists blame for warming the Earth in recent decades.

The environmental movement has fretted in recent years that it’s not diverse enough, and groups, like 350.org, have tried to draw parallels between global warming and alleged police brutality that sparked riots in Ferguson, Mo., in 2014.

Environmentalists say poor, minority communities are the least able to adapt to rising global average temperature and more frequent and intense extreme weather — despite there being little to no evidence for the extreme weather bit.

The Obama administration used “environmental justice” concerns to promote its Clean Power Plan, which aimed to cut carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants.

“Carbon pollution standards are an issue of justice,” former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy told activists in a teleconference call in 2014. “If we want to protect communities of color, we need to protect them from climate change.”

The Trump administration has proposed repealing the Clean Power Plan, largely on the grounds it would cost billions of dollars for little benefit to the global climate.

However, critics say promoting climate policies championed by Democrats will hurt minority communities, not help them. Regulating carbon dioxide could raise energy prices, which disproportionately affects poor families.

A 2014 Pacific Research Institute report found the Clean Power Plan could result in an extra $408 a year in energy costs for African American families in Ohio.

“Households in lower-income African-American neighborhoods would be hardest hit with the cost of electricity equaling 26 percent of household income, or even higher,” according to the study.

NOW WATCH:

NAACP Says MLK’s Vision Can’t Be Achieved Without Fighting Global Warming

GOP AGs warn Dems that if climate skeptics can be prosecuted for ‘fraud,’ so can alarmists 

Leave a comment

Maybe this will stop the leftist drive to sue people who disagree with them on globull warming.

If Democratic attorneys general can pursue climate-change skeptics for fraud, then also at risk of prosecution are climate alarmists whose predictions of global doom have failed to materialize.

Source: GOP AGs warn Dems that if climate skeptics can be prosecuted for ‘fraud,’ so can alarmists – Washington Times

Supreme Court puts Obama’s power plant regs on hold

1 Comment

This is from Fox News Politics.

Will Obama use his pen to push this agenda?

Will the GOP have the gonads to stand up to him?

 

A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday abruptly halted President Obama’s controversial new power plant regulations, dealing a blow to the administration’s sweeping plan to address global warming.

n a 5-4 decision, the court halted enforcement of the plan until after legal challenges are resolved.

The surprising move is a victory for the coalition of 27 mostly Republican-led states and industry opponents that call the regulations “an unprecedented power grab.”

By temporarily freezing the rule the high court’s order signals that opponents have made a strong argument against the plan. A federal appeals court last month refused to put it on hold.

The court’s four liberal justices said they would have denied the request.

The plan aims to stave off the worst predicted impacts of climate change by reducing carbon dioxide emissions at existing power plants by about one-third by 2030.

“We disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision to stay the Clean Power Plan while litigation proceeds,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in a statement.Earnest said the administration’s plan is based on a strong legal and technical foundation, and gives the states time to develop cost-effective plans to reduce emissions. He also said the administration will continue to “take aggressive steps to make forward progress to reduce carbon emissions.”

Appellate arguments are set to begin June 2.

The compliance period starts in 2022, but states must submit their plans to the Environmental Protection Administration by September or seek an extension.

Many states opposing the plan depend on economic activity tied to such fossil fuels as coal, oil and gas. They argued that power plants will have to spend billions of dollars to begin complying with a rule that may end up being overturned.

Attorney General Patrick Morrisey of West Virginia, whose coal-dependent state is helping lead the legal fight, hailed the court’s decision.

“We are thrilled that the Supreme Court realized the rule’s immediate impact and froze its implementation, protecting workers and saving countless dollars as our fight against its legality continues,” Morrisey said.

Implementation of the rules is considered essential to the United States meeting emissions-reduction targets in a global climate agreement signed in Paris last month. The Obama administration and environmental groups also say the plan will spur new clean-energy jobs.

Environmentalists were stunned by the court’s action, which they stressed did not reflect a decision on the relative strength of the Obama administration’s case.

“The Clean Power Plan has a firm anchor in our nation’s clean air laws and a strong scientific record, and we look forward to presenting our case on the merits in the courts,” said Vickie Patton, a lawyer for Environmental Defense Fund, which is a party to the case.

California Gov. Jerry Brown called the decision an “arbitrary roadblock” that “undermines America’s climate leadership.”

To convince the high court to temporarily halt the plan, opponents had to convince the justices that there was a “fair prospect” the court might strike down the rule. The court also had to consider whether denying a stay would cause irreparable harm to the states and utility companies affected.

The unsigned, one-page order blocks the rules from taking effect while the legal fight plays out in the appeals court and during any further appeal to the Supreme Court, a process that easily could extend into 2017.

Kerry: Doubters of Global-warming Apocalypse Must Be Silenced

Leave a comment

This is from the New American.

Lurch Kerry is using the tactics of his best bud Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals.

* RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

In a speech delivered November 10 at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia, Secretary of State John Kerry (shown) appeared to be intentionally amping up the already incendiary rhetoric aimed at those scientists and citizens who express doubt or skepticism about — or opposition to — the wild, apocalyptic claims of the climate-change choir. “The science tells us unequivocally, those who continue to make climate change a political fight put us all at risk,” Kerry said. “And we cannot sit idly by and allow them to do that.”

This was not the first time Secretary Kerry has made comments that lightly veil an implicit threat aimed at climate realists. Kerry, who has been beating the anthropogenic (manmade) global (AGW) warming drum loudly all year long, in preparation for the imminent UN Climate Summit in Paris, made a similar comment before the Atlantic Council in March. “When an apple falls from a tree, it will drop toward the ground. We know that because of the basic laws of physics. Science tells us that gravity exists, and no one disputes that,” Kerry said, in statement of supposedly unassailable logic that should end all debate. “Science also tells us that when the water temperature drops below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, it turns to ice. No one disputes that,” he continued. Then came the “logical” clincher: ”So when science tells us that our climate is changing and human beings are largely causing that change, by what right do people stand up and just say, ‘well, I dispute that, or I deny that elementary truth?’”

Yes, by what right? After all, they are “putting us all at risk,” right? “And we cannot sit idly by and allow them to do that,” can we?

Kerry doesn’t say what “we” can do to stop these doubters who put us all at risk, but he is playing to a powerful global choir that has already been salting public opinion with invective, the purpose of which is to demonize and criminalize those who challenge the “elementary truth” or the “settled science” of the AGW alarmists.

Recently, as we have reported, U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) called on the Obama administration earlier this year to use the anti-mafia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to persecute heretics who cast doubt on the AGW dogma.

That tyrannical proposal, which should have earned Senator Whitehouse an immediate recall effort, was echoed shortly afterward when a group of 20 so-called climate scientists sent a letter to President Obama urging him to use the federal RICO statute to prosecute their fellow scientists who disagree with them and publicly expose the fallacies and fraud underpinning the “settled science” of cataclysmic climate change.

Talking Points Memo (TPM)  infamously published an article (which has since been removed from its website) entiled, “At what point do we jail or execute global warming deniers.”

Posted under the pseudonym  “The Insolent Braggart,” the profane incitement to violence and intolerance of diverse opinion stated:

What is so frustrating about these fools is that they are the politicians and greedy bastards who don’t want a cut in their profits who use bogus science or the lowest scientists in the gene pool who will distort data for a few bucks. The vast majority of the scientific minds in the World agree and understand it’s a very serious problem that can do an untold amount of damage to life on Earth.

So when the right wing f***tards have caused it to be too late to fix the problem, and we start seeing the devastating consequences and we start seeing end of the World type events — how will we punish those responsible. It will be too late. So shouldn’t we start punishing them now?

Very prominent voices in the climate-alarmism choir have been priming the lynch mob.

James Hansen, the discredited NASA climateer and “grandfather” of the AGW lobby, called for prosecution of climate-catastrophe skeptics for “high crimes against humanity.”

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who is notorious for his environmental extremism, has said of climate realists who doubt the UN IPCC dogma: “This is treason, and we need to start treating them as traitors.”

Joe Romm, a former Clinton administration official who now runs the influential alarmist ClimateProgress website, published a commenter who ominously threatened climate skeptics: “It is not my wrath you need fear when there’s an entire generation that will soon be ready to strangle you and your kind while you sleep in your beds.” This may not be an idle threat, as millions of school kids are being brainwashed with emotional AGW propaganda in classrooms across the nation, and around the world. Romm later took the comment down, but defended it by claiming it “was clearly not a threat but a prediction,” and those who detected a threat had “misread it.”

Bill Nye, of TV fame as “The Science Guy,” recently appeared on the Huffington Post’s TV program, where he called on the host to stop using the term “skeptic” and use the more hateful term “denier” when referring to climate realists. “We just don’t like to use that word [skepticism],” Nye told host Josh Zepps. “These people are deniers.”

In a November 6, 2015 interview with Salon, Nye again hit the theme of tarring opponents with the “denier” label, censoring them, and denying them a place at the “debate” table. “Part of the solution to this problem or this set of problems associated with climate change is getting the deniers out of our discourse,” said Nye. “You know, we can’t have these people — they’re absolutely toxic.”

Nye was one of the signers of a letter sent to media organizations last December calling on journalists to stigmatize AGW skeptics as “deniers.”  Among the dozens of academics who signed the letter (which was larded heavily with psychologists and social “science” professors) were, notably, the two academics most responsible for concocting thefraudulent claim that “97 percent” of scientists endorse the “overwhelming  consensus” that AGW is a serious danger: John Cook and Naomi Oreskes.

 

 

CLIMATE CHANGE: THE HOAX THAT COSTS US $4 BILLION A DAY

Leave a comment

This is from Breitbarts Big Government.

This article is one of the best explanations of the  economic costs of the Climate change  globull warming hoax.

Polar-Bear-Global-Warming-Warning-Oli-ScarffGetty-Images-640x480

Oli Scarff/Getty Image

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!” Upton Sinclair.

The global climate change industry is worth an annual $1.5 trillion, according to Climate Change Business Journal. That’s the equivalent of $4 billion a day spent on vital stuff like carbon trading, biofuels, and wind turbines. Or — as Jo Nova notes — it’s the same amount the world spends every year on online shopping.

But there’s a subtle difference between these two industries — the global warming one and the online shopping one. Can you guess what it is?

Well, it’s like this. When you go to, say, Charles Tyrwhitt to buy a nice, smart shirt, or Amazon to buy the box set of Game of Thrones, or Krazykrazysextoy.com to replace your girlfriend’s worn out rabbit, no one is holding a gun to your head. You are buying these things of your own free volition either for yourself or for someone you love. You have paid for them, out of your own money, because you have made the calculation that they will make your life that little bit better. Better than it would, say, if you’d kept the money in your bank account or spent it on something less desirable — a novelty dog poo ornament, say, or a handknitted sweater with Jimmy Savile’s face on it and “I HEART paedos” picked out in gold lamé lettering.

When, on the other hand, you buy stuff from the climate change industry, you have no choice in the matter whatsoever. It’s already priced into your taxes, your electricity bills, the cost of your petrol, the cost of your airfare, the cost of every product you buy and every service you use. It is utterly inescapable, this expenditure. Yet unlike your online shopping — which, remember, costs roughly the same as you spend each year on the climate change industry — you get precisely nothing in return.

No, it’s worse than that. You get less than nothing. You get stuff forced on you that you really don’t want: bat-chomping, bird-slicing eco-crucifixes looming on your horizon, keeping you awake, trashing  your property values; fields of solar panels where they used to grow wheat or you used to walk your dog; prissy missives from your local council expecting you to be grateful for the fact that now you’ve got to separate your trash into seven different recycling bags rather than the previous five, and that they’re only going to collect your rubbish once a fortnight instead of once a week; teachers filling your kids’ heads with junk science propaganda; free parking slots for electric cars you don’t own but which you subsidise for richer friends who do; feel-bad nature documentaries about how it’s all your fault that this stuff “may” soon disappear; energy-saving lightbulbs that take your nocturnal home back to the kind of sepulchral gloom Western civilisation thought it had bade farewell to in the 1890s; the Prius, the car which recalls the style and comfort of the cars the fall of the Berlin Wall was supposed to have ended; yawning gaps where used to grow the woods which have been chopped down and chipped to create biomass for burning in power stations which used to run more cheaply and efficiently on coal…

Then there are the people who benefit financially from this $1.5 trillion climate change industry: the carbon traders; the dodgy academics; the vulture capitalists pecking on the bloated carcass of renewable energy; the environmental NGOs; the environmental consultancies who specialise in giving “expert” testimony at planning appeals, arguing on the most spurious grounds that no the bats and birds in this area aren’t going to be affected by this new wind turbine they’re going to be happier than ever no really; the sustainability officers at every level of local government; the green advisers attached to every business who advise them how to reduce their CO2 count; the PR companies that specialise in green awareness; Dale Vince….

These people do not deserve your money. Not a penny, a cent, or a sou of it.

Look, I don’t begrudge anyone the right to earn a living — just so long as they’re providing someone, somewhere with something they actually need. Not a single person working in the climate change industry fulfils this criterion. Not one. If you scrapped Michael Mann’s job tomorrow the world would not suffer the slightest loss and science would be all the better for it.

Sure, you might argue, there’s some kind of trickledown effect as the money we’re force to pay these shysters and bludgers and charlatans and scroungers via various taxes and tariffs feeds back into the economy. But you could make the same argument were these people paid the same amount of money by the government to dig holes in the ground and fill them up again — which would be a vastly preferable use of tax payer money because then these utterly useless parasites would be reminded every day how pointless the “work” they do actually is, whereas as things are, many of them suffer under the delusion that their green non-jobs are somehow virtuous and important.

In the headline I call the climate change industry a hoax. That’s because, on any objective level it is. I don’t mean that all the scientists and businesses and politicians promoting it are abject  liars — just most of them, even if it means that in order to keep earning their living they have to be dishonest with themselves about something they know in their hearts not to be true.

Alex Epstein, author of the Moral Case For Fossil Fuels, sets out the fundamental problem with the climate change industry here:

..Increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from 0.03 per cent to 0.04 per cent has not caused and is not causing catastrophic runaway global warming. Dishonest references to “97 per cent of scientists” equate a mild warming influence, which most scientists agree with and more importantly can demonstrate, with a catastrophic warming influence – which most don’t agree with and none can demonstrate.

That’s it. If you accept the validity of that statement — and how can you not: it is unimpeachably accurate and verifiable — then it follows that the $1.5 trillion global warming industry represents the most grotesque misuse of manpower and scarce resources in the history of the world.

 

Obama Warns About Global Warming-Induced Extreme Weather; No Major Hurricane in Almost a Decade

Leave a comment

This is from The Last Resistance. 

The Obama bull shit just keeps piling up about globull warming.

There a has not been any globull warming in Indiana the last two winters.

This is another one of those things that baffles scientists. They all know that burning fossil fuels causes global warming, and that global warming causes more extreme and frequent weather patterns. But in the same way we’ve experienced an inexplicable pause in global warming despite record carbon emissions, we’ve also witnessed a pause in major hurricanes. So much so that this pause is called a “hurricane drought.” It leaves scientists baffled, perhaps because their premises and presuppositions are wrong. But they would never consider that as a possibility. They start with their conclusion and then work their way backwards to find a possible explanation for their predetermined conclusion. The Daily Caller reported:

It’s been nearly a decade since a major hurricane has made landfall in the U.S., but that hasn’t stopped President Barack Obama from claiming that more global warming-induced “extreme weather” will pummel Americans every year.

Obama is set to tour the National Hurricane Center Thursday where he is expected to mention that man-made global warming will increase the risks of major hurricanes hitting the U.S. and costing causing billions of dollars in damages. Obama has frequently claimed that hurricanes and other weather events will get more severe as humans emit more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

But the facts aren’t on the president’s side when it comes to hurricanes. NHC experts will likely report to Obama Thursday they expect a relatively weak hurricane season this year, possibly continuing the U.S. “hurricane drought” even longer.

It’s been 3,503 days since a Category 3 or greater hurricane has made landfall in the U.S., according to storm data. The last major hurricane to make landfall in the U.S. was in 2005 when Hurricane Wilma hit Florida. Experts have dubbed this nine-year and seven-month period as a “hurricane drought.”

The lack of major hurricanes hitting the U.S. in the last decade has baffled scientists, and some have attributed the hurricane “drought” to dumb luck. A recent study by NASA found that the U.S. has just been lucky this past decade when it comes to major hurricanes.

“When we looked qualitatively at the nine-year drought, they aren’t inactive seasons,” lead author Timothy Hall with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies said in a statement. “I don’t believe there is a major regime shift that’s protecting the U.S.”

So far, the consensus among scientists is that global warming will cause fewer hurricanes, some of which will be made more intense as humans increase carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere. But even that’s been elusive so far as major storms seem to be bypassing the U.S.

It doesn’t matter what ends up happening with the weather patterns; it’ll be portrayed as negative and caused by GOP-induced global warming. Even if there’s a slowdown in extreme weather, they’ll find a way to make it sound like that’s actually a bad thing, and it’s all because of fossil fuel consumption.
Read more at http://lastresistance.com/11896/obama-warns-about-global-warming-induced-extreme-weather-no-major-hurricane-in-almost-a-decade/#HdyPMfjXPKIxfMyt.99

Bozell & Graham Column: Hollywood’s Climate Hypocrites

Leave a comment

This is from NewsBusters.

These HollyWeird types spend so long pretending to be someone else and living in their fantasy world they have no clue what reality is.

 

Hollywood and global-warming panic have always been a natural match. After all, who can tell you better to cut back on your wasteful ways better than a high-flying multi-millionaire movie star with the carbon footprint of a Tyrannosaurus Rex? It’s never mattered that the stars have all the scientific expertise of Pee Wee Herman. They’re just so good-looking and famous, who cares? PBS broadcast a ten-hour series in 1990 entitled Race to Save the Planet. The show’s host was Meryl Streep, who proclaimed: “By the year 2000…the Earth’s climate will be warmer than it’s been in over 100,000 years. If we don’t do something, there will be enormous calamities in a very short time.” Oops.

It’s bad enough that they don’t know what they’re talking about. It’s worse that they’re sheer hypocrites while preaching their nonsense. A private jet burns as much fuel in an hour as a car does in a year. The 48,000-pound Gulfstream G550, which can fly from Chicago to Rome with 15 passengers, burns through more than 400 gallons of fuel per hour.

Exhibit A is Leonardo DiCaprio, who lectures “If we don’t act together, we will surely perish.” Radar Online reported in April that DiCaprio boarded a private jet six different times within six weeks last year. But the charade continues. A partnership between DiCaprio and Netflix was announced in March to create yet another series of propagandist environmental documentaries.

The Media Research Center has a new report on “Climate Hypocrites and the Media That Love Them.” Take Julia Roberts, who recently made a video for Conservation International playing a big role: “Some call me nature. Others call me `Mother Nature’ I’ve been here for over four and a half billion years. 22,500 times longer than you. I don’t really need people, but people need me. Yes, your future depends on me. When I thrive, you thrive. When I falter, you falter. Or worse. But I’ve been here for eons. I have fed species greater than you, and I have starved species greater than you.”

The loathing of the human race is a constant green theme. But it’s not hard to find photos of Roberts climbing in and out of private jets. In fact, for a while she even co-owned a private jet.

 Woody Harrelson is such a tree-hugger that he told CBC News in Canada that “I’d like to see it get to the point where we never use trees to make paper because to me it’s just a barbaric way to make it…It’d be nice to just stop using the forest.” But at the Cannes Film Festival in 2008, when Harrelson realized that he had left his vegan belt and shoes behind, he had them flown to France from California.

At least John Travolta offers self-awareness, that when he said global warming is a “very valid” issue, he added  “I’m probably not the best candidate to ask about global warming because I fly jets.” Travolta owns five jets and has flown tens of thousands of miles in the air. He thinks the answer may be “other planets,” a natural suggestion for a Scientologist.

These celebrities don’t take tough questions well. When asked about DiCaprio’s hypocrisy, actor Mark Ruffalo shot back “Oh brother, that is a question you shouldn’t be asking here today because that defies the spirit of what this is about.” He added that anyone who attacks DiCaprio is “a coward or an ideologue” because “Leonardo DiCaprio’s voice carries farther than any one of those politicians, even the President.”

If that’s true, blame a star-dazzled media elite that never cares one whit about hypocrisy.

– See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2015/05/09/bozell-graham-column-hollywoods-climate-hypocrites#sthash.PK47dngV.dpuf

Biden says of Obama Move Against Coal – “A Lot of People are Going to Get Hurt”

Leave a comment

This is from Freedom Force.

Obama promised to destroy the coal industry and yet the union supported him for president.

Now we will pay the price for his war on coal with higher electricity prices and power outages.

The video below is his promise about coal.

Remember when then candidate Obama and his choice for VP, Joe Biden, travelled coal country telling all those nice people how they weren’t going to hurt their jobs or their futures? Well, they may have misspoken. At least that’s the case if we are to believe what Joe Biden is NOW saying.

“Us moving away from coal because it’s such a polluter, there’s a lot of people going to get hurt, good people who worked their whole life,” Biden told VICE, a documentary series that premiered on HBO last Friday.

“It’s a national responsibility, in our view, to help them make that transition,” Biden said. “We all have an obligation. When fundamental alterations in a generation of energy are up in play, there’s winners and losers.”

Sadly, coal country, while they were lying before… they’re telling the truth now. The Obama administration is looking to end coal-produced energy, forever.

Vice President Joe Biden is at it again, this time telling HBO viewers that federal regulations to move the U.S. away from coal-fired power is going to hurt a lot of Americans.

“Us moving away from coal because it’s such a polluter, there’s a lot of people going to get hurt, good people who worked their whole life,” Biden told VICE, a documentary series that premiered on HBO last Friday.

“It’s a national responsibility, in our view, to help them make that transition,” Biden said. “We all have an obligation. When fundamental alterations in a generation of energy are up in play, there’s winners and losers.”

It turns out Biden’s right. Federal regulations clamping down on coal-fired power plants have cost thousands of jobs across the country as power plants and coal mines shed workers to stay in business.

coalIn the new season of VICE, filmmakers try to link man-made global warming to sea level rises across the world. The film says that the ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting faster than ever and are causing flooding in places like Bangladesh.

“Our oceans are rising,” the filmmakers write. “With human use of hydrocarbons skyrocketing, waters around the globe are getting hotter and, now, this warm sub-surface water is washing into Antarctica’s massive western glaciers causing the glaciers to retreat and break off.”

“Antarctica holds 90% of the world’s ice and 70% of its freshwater, so if even a small fraction of the ice sheet in Antarctica melts, the resulting sea level rise will completely remap the world as we know it – and it is already happening,” the filmmakers add. “In the last decade, some of the most significant glaciers here have tripled their melt rate.”

(For the record, Antarctica is not melting as sea ice extent has increased rapidly over the last few decades despite predictions to the contrary. It should also be noted that Greenland’s ice sheet reached its highest levels in four years.)

The film sets up global warming as an irreversible catastrophe in the making. Cue Joe Biden who is featured in an exclusive interview at the end of the first episode of VICE’s latest episode. Biden not only advocated for getting off of coal power — which Obama administration regulations currently in the works aim to accomplish — the vice president also said denying man-made global warming was akin to “denying gravity.”

“It’s almost like denying gravity now,” said Biden. “I mean wait a minute, ‘c’mon … Look what superstorm Sandy did right here in New York.”

VICE asked Biden why he thought the U.S. political system was gridlocked on global warming and so many other issues. Biden said it’s because of the “way in which we fund our elections” allows a small number of critics to gain power and control the political system.

“The public is ahead of their elected officials. We’ve been in this wilderness now for about 7 to 8 years in terms of not able to reach a consensus,” Biden said.

But Biden may be slightly overstating the public’s support for government regulations to combat global warming. A CNN poll from January found that 57 percent of Americans said global warming is not a threat to their lives.

 

Thursday’s flurries set Florida record

Leave a comment

This is from News 4 Jacksonville.

I thought there was globull warming, climate change or whatever the latest thing it is being called.

 

Ocean-effect snow creates buzz from Jacksonville through coastal Georgia.

http://www.news4jax.com/news/snow-flurries-in-jax/30612830

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – Snow-way! Call it a miracle! Snow danced over the streets of Jacksonville Thursday for the first time in five years and tied the record for the day of a trace set 57 years ago.

Granted it’s not a Buffalo type record where the only way of escape out of your house after a snow event is out the second story window. But this is Florida and any flurry, whether one or a dozen is a BIG deal.

Snow is exceedingly rare in these parts. It was enough to drive adults and kids alike from high rise offices downtown and out of schools to witness this “great white rain,” a term coined by explorer’s through this area in the late 1700s when snow fell over the region, according to meteorologist-emeritus George Winterling, that was falling from the sky.

So how rare is snow in Jacksonville really? According to NWS meteorologist David Shuler, unofficially Jacksonville has recorded 18 winters since 1910 with at least one trace snowfall event. This only accounts for the months of December, January and February. Not November or March. Therefore the number of events may be a bit higher if those two months are accounted for. According to meteorologist Jason Hess, only three snowfalls have actually accumulated officially in Jacksonville in 103 years (1956, 1986 and 1989) with the greatest 24 hour accumulation of 1.9 inches in February 1899 — before records officially began.

Thursday’s snowfall was a rare phenomenon known as ‘ocean effect snow.’ It’s the same idea as lake-effect snow except it occurs over the ocean.  The idea here is that the water is warmer than the land this time of year allowing moisture to rise and condense to form clouds and rain or snow.

When our winds shifted to the northeast, the moisture began moving towards land. Even though the surface temperatures were above freezing near the surface, the air just above the boundary layer (basically the first few hundred feet above the surface) was below freezing allowing the snowflakes to make it to the ground before melting. Voila! Snow.

It nearly didn’t happen though. A powerful arctic front pushed through Florida late Wednesday powered by a mega-high pressure system over the mid west. That high drove in a lot of dry air, evidence by our dew points (measure of moisture in the air) into the teens meaning any flakes would have evaporated before reaching the ground. Through the process of evaporative cooling (wet-bulbing), our atmosphere cooled and moistened just enough to allow for the flakes to hit the ground.

Snow was last observed officially, a trace, in Jacksonville the day after Christmas in 2010 with measurable snowfall in southeast Georgia.

“Today’s forecast looks cold and…and I just want to point out the ever so slight possibility of a few light flurries across our area today. A small chance but a chance nonetheless,” meteorologist Richard Nunn said Thursday on The Morning Show. Many thought that statement to be the joke of the day — until it happened!

The Weather Authority ran with the idea and thus ‘#FlurryWatch2015’ was underway with Blake Mathews out in the field scanning the skies for what was sure to be a bust.

Around 10 a.m. Thursday, multiple reports started pouring into the newsroom of flurries around Jacksonville, then spreading north to Fernandina Beach, Yulee and into coastal Georgia in the afternoon. By late in the evening, the event was over. However, in the minds of all of those in our area, the event rages on bringing a palpable excitement unknown even to kids at a toy store!

Flurry-watch 2015

Thursday’s forecast was for a chance of snow. By late morning, furries spread across northeast Florida and southeast Georgia. Here are some of our viewers photos. Share yours on our StormPins app or upload at share.news4jax.com.

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: