An actual email from the “Are you now, or have you ever been a member of any anti-science organization?” department and Barack Obama’s “Organizing for Action” front.
Friend —
It’s tough out there for climate change deniers.
One by one, literally every argument and excuse they’ve been using for years is being proven false.
They’re still grasping at myths and conspiracy theories, but deniers are on the run.
Let’s keep them there — join the team that’s calling out climate change deniers.
In reality, the debate on the basics is over.
Not only do 97 percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is real and man-made, but new reports are showing climate and extreme weather impacts are affecting us right now.
Droughts, floods, wildfires, and storms are hitting communities from California to the East Coast, and we’re already spending hundreds of billions on climate-related disaster relief — no one is denying that.
Instead, what you hear from climate change deniers are mostly excuses for not taking action. Some have hidden behind foreign countries, saying America can’t or shouldn’t lead on climate until someone else goes first.
Let’s set aside for a minute that this isn’t actually how we solve global problems. The fact is, President Obama is leading internationally through agreements with China and India to cut carbon pollution and expand the use of clean energy. (So there goes that denier talking point…)
Another thing you might hear from a denier is that we simply can’t get serious about cutting carbon pollution without destroying the economy. That’s just false. For example, the climate and public health benefits from President Obama’s Clean Power Plan outweigh the costs by at least six times.
Maybe deniers doubt we have the will and ingenuity to take such a huge problem on. Well, the American people are proving them wrong: Since 2009, we’ve increased solar power ten-fold and tripled wind power. Hundreds of thousands of Americans work in clean energy today.
The arguments from deniers are getting more and more ludicrous.
We have the facts on our side — and we have to drive that message home. Because as long as deniers and polluters are blocking progress, we’re not doing all we can to combat climate change.
Say you’ll help take them to task — join the team that’s calling out climate change deniers:
http://my.barackobama.com/Expose-Climate-Change-Deniers
Thanks,
Ivan
Ivan Frishberg
Senior Climate Advisor
Organizing for Action
[h/t to: TheLastDemocrat]
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
O M G
OMG OMG
It’s worse than I thought!
OMG, how scared and desperate they are.
They are getting really desperate. The Left want Abbott out of power before Paris and they want to replace him with Turnbull, who is what you would call a token right Winger on the outside, green on the inside. They’ve just voted out two right wing (in Australia its the Liberal Party) state governments and are gunning for a third. This will trigger a leadership spill in which they hope to depose Abbott.
This is politics, not science.
The only question you have to ask is … who will be the beneficiary of the government largess attached to the programs they envision ?
John Silver
February 20, 2015 at 3:46 pm
OMG, how scared and desperate they are.
—————–
If by they you mean guys and activists linked and associated with, Ivan Frishberg and with his organization, I really doubt they are desperate, they simply over opportunistic in resolving to reap-off the USA citizens falling for their scheming.
The only problem is that they have gone too far and also have associated the name of the President with it and turn the Presidential power in a symbol, a flag for their scheming camping.
That should make them really scared.
I am not an American, but I can’t fail and imagine, that as we at the moment over this issue, some FBI department is already asking who this guy, Ivan Frishberg, really is.
Is one thing to associate the name of the President with a way of fund-raising, and completely another when you get to the point of greed, cockiness and opportunity and associate the name of the President with some dirty scheme that propagates and imply division and hate through the citizens and the country, simply by thinking that the Presidents hands are and will be “tight” because of his overall position on the issue.
I would not wish to be in the Ivan’s position and his closed associates in this one.
Especially if I had not even the slightest credentials to call my self a climate adviser, let alone a senior climate adviser.
To bad that Ivan has ignored the technical shield of politics, by failing to attache it to his “senior climate adviser ” claim.
It would have been more careful and less cocky if only at least had considered him self officially as a “senior climate political adviser” in whole this mess.
Is a very fine and fiery, the walking line under the Presidential shadow.
Cheers
@whiten:
I am not an American, but I can’t fail and imagine, that as we at the moment over this issue, some FBI department is already asking who this guy, Ivan Frishberg, really is.
Nope. The entire apparatus of the federal government is thoroughly corrupt, through and through. They don’t care who he is; he’s spouting the party line and that’s all that matters. “Organizing for Action” is a propaganda organization attached to Obama.
Penncyl Puccer
February 21, 2015 at 12:14 pm .
Yes Penncyl, you totally could be right, but you see, when I see what this guy has done, and the way he has done it, I really think and believe that the system has already flagged him up for a check.
I maybe overestimating here, but the system has and does flag-up for much less, and better this guy is as you say, just a party liner, and hopefully he checks out clear, and we keep saying that he is another zealot at most.
Anyway, is just an opinion. Definitely you know your country much better than me.
But everywhere in this world, in any country, if there is a lot of money involved, made or to be made, lot of money exchanging hands in a possible racketeering outcome, there then will be all kinds of “sharks” circling it .
cheers
And if you don’t answer or reply or donate they’ll know who you are as well. Process of elimination.
I had never heard of Ivan Frishberg and had thought this was a spoof email.. He appears to be an advocate and activist.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/25/ofa-climate-change_n_3150383.html
tonyb
“No Pressure”
JEEZ!!!…my little, trusty B. S. Detector hasn’t spazzed out , like this, since the last time I got an e-mail from Nigeria!
Typical ham-handed, lefty pitch. I especially note that that Frishberg character can’t even get the “denier” talking-points, right. Moi, for example, I don’t “deny” that the United States could and/or should take the lead in noble endeavors, on behalf of mankind. Indeed, Americans have a long and distinguished history of that sort of thing. You know, like, how the United States led humanity in a noble and heroic crusade that ultimately defeated the mass-murdering scourge of International Communism (but I know the lefties feel left out of that big win–poor babies!).
Rather, my “denier” talking-point is that those most convinced of the carbon-peril, most in the public-eye, and most outspoken in their calls for carbon-reduction NOW!!!, should also be those to “go first” and LEAD FROM THE FRONT AND BY INSPIRING PERSONAL EXAMPLE IN MATTERS OF CARBON REDUCTION!!!should also be those who PRACTICE WHAT THEY PREACH!!!
But what do any of us see, instead? Well, what we see is that those, who are most prominently talkin’ up the demon-carbon scare, are, simultaneously, among the most extravagant, gluttonous, in-your-face carbon-piggies, in both their professional and personal lives, in the whole history of mankind–you know, like Al Gore; “environmentally-conscious” royals; private-jet, jet-set, Hollywood air-heads; bought-and-sold politicos; greenwashed crony-capitalists; tenured, Gruber-wannabe, ivory-tower parasites, jetting about the globe attending their little grab-ass, gas-bag eco-confabs, which could easily be held as carbon-free tele-conferences; and lefty NGO’s, tryin’ to bring back the good ol’ days of the Holodomor, “Great Leap Forward”, and the “Cambodian Killing Fields”, using the cover of Gaia. The end point being, of course, to pick my “little guy” pocket, gut my freedoms, and crush the quality of my life while, at the same time, preserving the CO2-spew good-times and feudal privileges of my pontificating betters undisturbed. Thanks but no thanks.
In other words, if there is really a menace to humanity posed by AGW, then what we most desperately need, at the moment, is not an effort to “call out” the “deniers”, but rather a major effort to “call out” the brazen-hypocrite carbon-oinkers who make up the nomenklatura of the “environmental” movement. And why? Well because those hypocrite, CO2 mega-spewers make the whole carbon-reduction business look like a RIP-OFF!!!SCAM!!!CON-JOB!!!HUSTLE!!! (the reading on my trusty, little B. S. detector (all caps in the original)).
And perhaps the estimable Ivan Frishberg could take the lead–“go first”–in “calling out” his brazen-hypocrite, carbon-piggie betters, even if it puts Ivan at risk of biting the hand that feeds him. I mean, like, I think Ivan is up to it. I mean, like, we can all be sure that Ivan doesn’t put his trough before “the kids” and the “polar-bears”. I mean, like, that’s just not Ivan!–am I right or am I right, Ivan?
That “Global Warming” thing is..well..maybe you should change it to “Global Freezing”..they (stupid {Gruber} public) won’t notice the difference..and..damn, man it’s like 8 degrees here in NYC with aboutumteen inches of snow..when can I come out of my apartment? Please advise … thank you … signed, Frostbite Freddy.
All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach. -AH
Here is my cartoon contribution Friday Funny:
A Cloud Over Humanity
http://www.maxphoton.com/cloud-over-humanity/
Sorry … “contribution to Friday Funny”
+ several million
Excellent, Max!
and it’s a very small one – nice
Good one Max!
Like! Say,are we allowed to use the picture, to spread the humor?
Excellent – thank you Max Photon. But beware! Remember … first they came for the cartoonists ….!
Seig Heil!
? … I think you are in the wrong blog. Try Skeptical Science.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Ivan_Frishberg
Edwards for President!
Pure, unadulterated Climate McCarthyism.
The arrogance and totalitarianism of this people is simply breathtaking…
I wonder, how they will defend their small-minded “denier” witch-hunt” in about 10 – 20 years when the absurd CAGW scare mongering will be “a thing of the past” at last?
By the way: They are still so proud of their faked “97% consensus” which is complete meaningless because of the stupid questions and categories used. But even if this 97% consensus would be real, that would have no scientific value at all, as history reveals again these last days: Did we not have an almost totally consensus in food science that cholesterol in our diet should be really bad for health during the last 40 years? And now this once so powerful consensus is simply gone with the wind:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/02/19/cholesterol-in-the-diet-the-long-slide-from-public-menace-to-no-appreciable-effect/
“I wonder, how they will defend their small-minded “denier” witch-hunt” in about 10 – 20 years …”
Assuming the second amendment is still valid then, it might be tough for them to do so..
Stay warm my friend,
Well, if past experience from Germany is anything to go by, almost nobody will even remember that they once were climate alarmists, just as there were no more Nazis to be found after 1945 and no more communists after 1990.
Gentle, if the world froze over tomorrow, they would still be clinging to their CAGW mantra. Can you imagine the sheer numbers of people who are responsible for this? Can you imagine the backlash if it is ever learned that these people were knowingly lying? Just think about all the money students have paid to universities to be taught this drivel. It’s staggering. Hopefully it becomes a class action lawsuit. How about all the leftist/fascists pushing for their Agenda 21/One World Government? They know they are close with this one.
These people are more than willing to break some eggs to get what they want. They’re too invested to stop now.
Paul,
the 2nd Amendment protects the 5 fundamental freedoms found in the 1st Amendment – speech, religion press, assembly to protest, and petition for edress of grievences.
Except, of course, for all that McCarthy was a demagogue, there really were Soviet spies placed in the U.S. government. So there was a case to be made. AGW does not have a case.
Pat: It has always amazed me that this piece of historical reality is completely overlooked. McCarthy did harm to the real effort of identifying and exposing actual and active Soviet spies.
M Stanton Evans book “Blacklisted by History,” presents the case that McCarthy had it right, but that his style and the active propaganda campaign against him successfully created the mythology that has become a “truth.” Not too dissimilar from the Climate propaganda of today.
The fact that we have the term McCarthyism demonstrates quite clearly that McCarthy was correct.
DesertYote, are you for real? ‘McCarthyism’ means the act of making an accusation of disloyalty that is unsupported by any evidence. McCarthy wrongly thought that the US had “large” numbers of Soviet spies within government. It did not. There were a few, as there were in other governments around the world. McCarthy wasn’t “right”, he was wrong. He was also an idiot, and anti-homosexual bigot, and an alcoholic.
He was secretly gay himself, spoke to plants, and ate wallpaper. You see, that’s ‘McCarthyism’!
You’re right, Bernie. McCarthy and his histrionics gave anti-communism a bad name.
Big Jim, whatever McCarthy got wrong or however he was an idiot, there were a large number of Soviet spies in the US government. The Venona papers make clear that there’d been an aggressive Soviet campaign of espionage against the US since at least the mid-1930’s. All the while that the Soviet Union was held in friendly regard by the US.
Christina Shelton’s “Alger Hiss, why he chose treason” gives a good account of some of these people.
It doesn’t take much investigation to realize that the whole AGW thing is just one more front of the continuing Progressive war against a free, constitutional, and entrepreneurial US.
The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
February 21, 2015 at 6:01 am
“He was secretly gay himself, spoke to plants, and ate wallpaper. You see, that’s ‘McCarthyism’!”
So I googled “Did McCarthy eat wallpaper”
The results are surprising, try it yourself, it’s fun.
Ghost: The term McCarthyism was created by Marxist propagandists in the media. By the time McCarthy tried to do something about the problem, Marxist had already become dominant in Academia, the media, and the Democratic party. Your response is an indication of how successful those Marxist propagandists were at controlling public opinion.
If you think CO2 heats the earth, do us ALL a big favor, QUIT EXHALING!!!!!!!!
Well, no ….. if you think CO2 heats Earth[*], burn fossil fuels. Exhaling just recycles and has no net effect. Warming has been demonised, but is actually beneficial in many ways, chiefly perhaps via increased plant growth and food production. It will be particularly beneficial over the next couple of decades if the global cooling occurs that some are now predicting.
[*]I think it does, but unfortunately not by much. 1 deg C per doubled CO2 if you’re lucky.
Don’t overlook temporary local effects. Multiplied 7 billion times they become significant.
Oh, and kidz, turn in your mom or dad and we’ll give you a brand new Xbox!
… a brand new solar powered Xbox with a cell either made in China in an ecologically unsound factory or a horribly overpriced solar cell made in the USA with massive government
kickbacks to donorssubsidies in a factory that has now shut down due to bankruptcy.Pep talks are usually given out when you are losing. Pretty much says it all. Nothing but lies they hope the flock will accept.
Click the link under the “join the team that’s calling out climate change deniers” text and you’ll get an opportunity to donate money. The choices are from $15 to $1000, although you can enter other amounts. I wonder if there is any chance of prosecuting under some kind of law against false advertising based on all the lies in the email.
I’ll quit tweeting links to actual data / graphs for $50/day.
🙂
I went with the $1000 to get that swell hemp, re-usable grocery bag for when I’ll soon need to ride the horse to the store and . . .
Rand Paul favors hemp.
Have you tried entering a negative amount?
You CAN enter any amount, but if you put anything under $3.00 it tells you that’s the minimum.
There’s a credit card processing fee regardless of the amount, so if they allowed a $1 donation, they’d actually be losing money.
I’d pay a dollar to help them lose–it would be worth it.
Donate 1 cent with the comment “I wouldn’t give two cents for the quality of your so-called ‘research’.”
Just further proof that the climate campaigners are getting more and more desperate. Their blatant use of lies and strawman arguments just keeps getting more and more laughable.
True.
They are clearly accusing thermometers of being deniers. The pause keeps on mocking the climate models.
That Mercury in the tubes must be in league with the CO2 in the atmosphere to kill us all!
They are both chemicals, you see.
Have you seen anyone consorting with chemicals, or with people who use chemicals?
Report them now!
More mercury gets to us from burning coal. Lungs direct.
No trafamadore, it is so much safer to follow government regulations and bring the mercury directly into your homes via the new light bulbs.
Actually, mercury is an element – CO2 is not.
“Denier” is such a loaded term. It is discouraging to have the President of the United States’ political committee call people who disagree with them, ‘denier.’ I get his OFA emails and this isn’t about science or even climate. It’s just propaganda attacking BO’s political opponents. ‘Discouraging’ is the politest term I could think of – we have to be respectful of others when we debate. Irving Frishberg has brought a nightstick to the debate and he is swinging it in Obama’s name.
The President of the United States has seldom been truthful. He’s one big disappointment.
It’s as if someone has distilled all the phony arguments, straw men, and misleading interpretations into one fund raising letter and aimed it at low-information voters. It’s a classic.
STILL the same old recycled junk. STILL pushing Manbearpig.
These guys are like… so NINETIES.
Still mindlessly reproducing
that has-been Al Gore’s stuff.
Pitiful.
Al Gore “I’m cereal” (youtube – South Park)
Thanks for the laugh, Janice!
Roger
My pleasure! #(:)) Thanks for saying so.
Thanks Janice, you just confirmed why (although could laugh at this) I don’t watch this complete idiocy at any time!
Hi, A Sybot — that’s good! — thanks! And you’re wise not to fill your mind with that stuff.
I don’t find this funny at all.
At best it’s simply one more front where real scientists and useful citizens have to direct their resources, instead of addressing real issues.
At worst it’s a witch hunt that will destroy lives.
Stupidity annoys me. And crass stupidity in high places is a crime against humanity. For a leader to undersign such a document is tantamount to a call for impeachment. He should be impeached.
He’s already impeared.
Thanks , I needed a new keyboard anyway !
Or impaired–yours makes him sound fruity, which could be accurate, too!
Add in “Net Neutrality” push and the FEC wanting to limit political speech do you think a site like this is even going to be allowed?
No, it won’t in its current form.
It’ll survive, with access limited. to starve it of influence.
Net Neutrality is too awkward an idea to be ignored by the powerful.
Especially after the Web is turned over to the WTU on 1 July?
Video Drone! The First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution still IS! Ivan can call us names (God bless him, heh) and we can announce truth boldly.
If “Net neutrality” or a “hate speech” or what-EVER anti-freedom of expression unconstitutional law is passed, IT WILL NOT STAND (for long).
Note: The U.S. Armed Forces do not swear to obey the POTUS, they pledge to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.”
Just a bit of clarification. I love your comments, and though I am a bleeding-heart liberal, I am not a Green, nor one of the more unfavorable types we have left of the aisle, any more than most of the posters and commenters here are radical anythings! So keep it up.
However, I can say as a veteran that the armed forces do swear to obey the POTUS, in that part of their defense of the Constitution involves the broad and deep body of military law (now under the Uniform Code of Military Justice) whose structural backbone is the chain of command. In the US, every member of the armed forces can be located in one of several chains of command, with the POTUS at the top of more than one of them, and in swearing their oath, armed forces members find themselves in a binding contract under that military law to obey every single person above them in any chain (except where tactical reasons would preclude it). So the words of the swearing-in oath do not contain all of the corollary oaths to which the new member is subjecting him- or herself.
Interestingly, once in that bind, the member also is not protected (in practice in the US) by the Bill of Rights to the extent that a civilian would hope to be. It is a very imperfect system (just ask all of us draftees during the Vietnam War), but it is a rational model of how to shape American libertarians into a fighting force. It requires the member to suspend his own expectation of American liberties during the tour of duty.
The US military is not the best in the world solely because of expensive weaponry. When they went into Iraq, our men and women were ready (except for the lack of armor on some boondoggle vehicles and other contractor atrocities) when their feet hit the ground; now, after nearly 14 years, the Iraqi Army “may not be ready to take on ISIS”, so the US will be there with air strikes and artillery, etc. The Army is not going to depose the POTUS in our lifetimes, I would expect, because our Army is very well trained to be revolution-averse, as it should be.
We do need to reel in the imperial presidency, but that will require rewriting a lot of laws to prevent Executive Orders that are clearly unconstitutional–but that involves changes in the SCOTUS as well as the POTUS, plus a Congress that is willing to pass rational laws (not sitting around shouting) and back them up with veto-proofing. Maybe a bit of wishful thinking.
Hi, Mr. Newkirk,
And I enjoyed YOUR thoughtful comment. You are correct, however, conflict of laws analysis puts POTUS where he or she belongs, second. When what the POTUS “commands” conflicts with the Constitution of the United States of America, the controlling legal authority is the legal document that also creates the office of POTUS, the Constitution.
No one, not Richard Nixon, not Barack Hussein Obama, no one is above the law.
While the members of the Armed Forces have temporarily restricted liberties, to honor their oath, they must not obey any order which illegally restricts the liberties of private citizens.
Thank you, so much, for your kind words to me. You and I (given that you are a “bleeding heart liberal”) disagree on much, but, I think we agree on more. Thank you for your generosity to someone on “the other side of the aisle.”
Re: unconstitutional Exec. Orders, it is often a slow process, but, civil litigation will take them to the SCOTUS where the Constitution will ultimately control. In the meantime, patriotic/liberty minded citizens can find creative ways to do a “slow down” of those anti-liberty orders… . Messages get garbled and sometimes supplies are mistakenly sent 1,000 miles in the opposite direction… and well…. :). We citizens are NOT passive and we will NOT take this (we just need to be careful in how we maneuver at times).
I am, to make myself clear here, NOT calling for the military to remove the current POTUS from office. I do not think this is necessary to preserve and protect our liberties (as bad as things are looking). America will outlive this administration and come back, stronger than ever. Just a matter of time.
Hang in there, everyone who cares about our great nation — good things, MANY good things, are ahead. The best is yet to be! (“… the last {centuries}, for which the first {were} made.” R. Browning.)
Your Ally for Truth in Science and FOR LIBERTY!,
Janice
From a time when Giants walk the earth The Newburgh Affair 1783
George Washington
He hesitated for a moment as he looked down at the letter before fumbling to retrieve a pair of spectacles from his pocket. Before reading the letter, Washington, in an almost apologetic tone said, “Gentlemen, you must pardon me. I have grown old in the service of my country and now find that I am growing blind.” The eyes of most of his audience filled with tears. The content of the letter became irrelevant as the assembled officers realized that Washington had given as much or more in the service of the new nation as any of them. Within minutes, the officers voted unanimously to express confidence in Congress and their country.
nuff said
michael
Enlistment Oath – “I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
The orders given by “the President of the United States and orders of the officers appointed over me” have to be lawful under the Constitution or the service person that follows them will be in violation of their oath. And that is, stated as simply as possible, is the bottom line. We who served swore our oath to the PEOPLE as represented by the Constitution and not the Government or the NCA (National Command Authority).
Based on some surveys done of service members this distinction is generally not understood by first term enlisted. But the majority of NCOs of Officers do understand it. The authority of the NCA is not absolute, but that of the Constitution which is in fact the representation of the people, is.
Well, hoo-rah, Rah! #(:))
Well put. Thank you for sharing that — and thank you for your service to our country! We owe you. Military life is hard, even if you never saw “action,” (and that you were willing to endure to the utmost for America was wonderful — thank you, thank you).
If you are RAH the truck driver — stay safe. I have a list of “professional drivers” I pray for DAILY. You (or “RAH,” anyway) are on it.
Take care, out there on those snowy roads!
Gratefully,
Janice
Yes Janice I’m the truck driver. And thank you for your prayers. This winter I’ve needed every edge I could get. Toughest in my 10 years of OTR driving. As for my service? It gave back to me every bit as much as I put into it.
You’re so welcome. Take care, rah. Janice
Janice; rah; I’m in ignorance please enlighten me. rah janice can vouch for me.
I study History… military history. also I’m also by trade a machinist. Most of my career I made things that go bump and slaughter in the night To drop a name Sikorsky aircraft. much of the family worked there.
michael
You know Mike, all one has to do to get a handle on it is to remember that the Government owes it’s existence to, and gets it’s Legal authority from, the same Constitution the military is sworn to protect and defend.
BTW Mike you and I have a similar interest. I to am an amateur Military Historian concentrating on primarily the wars our own country has fought but also on some others. I would judge my most extensive knowledge is of our Civil War and WW II. Will be returning to Gettysburg for the 6th time this summer. Have spent about a month there in total previously and still have things to learn. Have been to all the Major battlefields of that war and most of them from Germany to Normandy, France and a few in Northern Italy, studying WW II.
Oh, dear Mike, the dedicated, scholarly, machinist — of COURSE I will vouch for you!
#(:))
You and rah (thanks for sharing about yourself, O scholarly driver) oughta become pen pals!
“I, _____ , having been appointed an officer in the (Service) of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.”
One can not both support and defend the constitution and obey the orders of a criminal president, or any commander.
Not sure how one can be veteran or military man and vote into office a fraudulent law breaking, insecure, impotent, masochistic, and psychopath neurotic narcissist who openly “fears” veterans as part of his regimes enemy list. The same person who has militarized his puppet agencies with automatic weapons and hollow point ammunition to be used solely on its citizenry. The same person who has divided rather than joined.
highflight56433
Be assured I certainly did not either time. Last presidential election night I went to sleep in my sleeper in the Pilot truck stop in Waco, TX. Woke up early the next morning, heard the results, went in and filled my thermos with coffee and hit the road. Didn’t even unplug my head set from the charger. I was taking no calls. Did not stop until I got to the Flying J in Charleston, MO on I-57. Went in to the Huddle House there to eat and intending to take my next 10 hour break. Ordered a glass of chocolate milk while I decided. The girls working there were so exuberant with the election results I lost my appetite. While paying for my Chocolate milk another trucker paying at the register looked at me with his moist eyes, shook his head, and simply said “unbelievable”. I drove back to my home terminal in Anderson, IN from there without stopping. Yea, I violated the hours of service rules that day. That night when I got home I took the flag down from my 30′ pole in the front yard. The pole remained bare for 6 months until my wife told me: “Honey, that’s just not YOU!” She was right. It went back up but under it then still today flies a ‘Don’t Tread On Me’ flag.
Rah, rest assured my comment is pointed not at you, but at the bigots who talk patriotism, then vote for the anti-constitutional traitors liken to J Kerry; who single handedly with the help of Jane Fonda followers etc. turned veterans and active military personnel into murderous criminal thugs. Resulting in risking your life when wearing the uniform in public. I remember clearly those moments; not bitter, but cognizant of the wickedness in character of the socialist left. The post like this are another example of the creeps who seek to destroy rather than build. Stay vigilant. Keep those flags flying!
The debate is between those that have faith in climate models that cannot be validated by empirical data and those that look at the data. The issue is that the climate models do not agree with empirical data.
I wish it was.
In reality it is just a political argument, where facts have gone out the window
How do these people sleep at night?
In hydrocarbon fueled, government subsidized, 1st class hypocritical comfort.
On a bed of money?
If you join do you get a brown shirt and jack boots?
Green Shirt & hobnailed Birkenstocks.
heh. And a bamboo billy club.
ISIS affiliate
… and, pop quiz time, what fraction do wind and solar combined constitute of US energy use, in spite of spending an enormous amount of money on them compared to fuel-based alternatives?
Oh, wait, is that less than 2%? It is, isn’t it.
Which means what, exactly? If wind and solar were capable of supporting the base load in energy demand that is there at night, in the winter, and at times and places that the wind doesn’t blow even if they DO let companies place giant wind turbines in MBY’s across the country — which they are not — and we we added 2% every five years at the cost of around half a trillion dollars — then in 50 years we would be providing 100% of our energy from these sources, at a cost of 25 trillion dollars, except that if our economy actually grew over this time instead of collapsing as we tried to survive on energy that simply goes away or isn’t available in places where there is no wind or sufficient sunshine we’d still be only halfway there as our energy needs might reasonably double over 50 years otherwise.
Or maybe the intent is to cause the economy to tank in equal measure to the increase in “renewable” energy sources and meet somewhere in the middle, or maybe even back to the early 20th century levels so that only the wealthy can afford to turn on their lights at night.
But I digress. And don’t care. Only — this isn’t very funny, Friday or not…
rgb
Don’t you mean 100% of our energy for 7 hours a day if the sun is out and the wind is blowing fast enough (but not too fast) and it never, ever stops?
lol, yeah, Niel of the Zoo. 🙂
*********************************************
For proof that wind power is a big, fat, permanently negative ROI, l1e,
See Ruth Lea in “Civitas”: http://www.civitas.org.uk/economy/electricitycosts2012.pdf
Also see http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/10/theres-a-reason-the-modern-age-moved-on-from-windmills/
And see http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/26/bearings-the-achilles-heel-of-wind-turbines/
Re: The Myth of Solar Energy
Ozzie Zehner video: “Green Illusions” (youtube)
(I do NOT endorse ALL of its content — some is highly accurate, however)
[6:55] — As of 2012, less than ONE TENTH OF 1%, i.e., less than .001% (< .1 Quads), of total energy (114 Quads. for N. America) is supplied by solar. [7:11] — Graphic of N. American total energy v. solar (tiny dot v. big bucket).
Caveat re: Mr. Zehner: He is an irrationally anti-nuclear power, Church of Anti-consumption (albeit good-intentioned) religious zealot, BUT, he knows his stuff about solar power and makes a good point about the gross ineffectiveness and hypocrisy of solar/wind. They will NEVER be cost-effective and they promote not reduce fossil fuels/CO2 = not “green” = hypocrisy.
And excellent expose of the fallacy of windpower/solar power is found in Peter Huber’s book, Hard Green: Saving the Environment from the Environmentalists: A Conservative** Manifesto: http://www.manhattan-institute.org/hardgreen/
**”Conservative” means “conservationist,” not politically conservative (although, most “conservatives” would likely agree with Mr. Huber).
What always seems to be lost in this whole argument is that “wind mills’ were never ever meant to generate electricity even 6000 years ago people used the for the sole reason to pump water and to grind cereals . Even then those people were logical thinkers,
Good point, A Sybot.
Lol, come to think of it… why didn’t Western Telegraph… or American Telephone & Telegraph… or Thomas Edison & Co….. not hook their equipment up to windmills? Just think where they would be today if they had! 🙂
Because these are high tech windmills. Haven’t you ever heard of Moore’s law?
Harold,
I really hope.you’re being sarcastic…
Heh, heh, thanks for the laugh, Harold. #(:))
And, just in case someone currently being duped by the Enviroprofiteers takes you seriously (leaving aside the Moore’s law quip, lol), here’s why Boeing’s plants are not EVER going to be powered to any meaningful degree by windmills:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/26/bearings-the-achilles-heel-of-wind-turbines/
DOOMED to failure.
@ur momisugly All windmill venture investors: Sell now — while your stock is still worth anything at all.
When you don’t have logic, reason, or facts on your side, attack the person.
On the other hand, their list is a group of people we should support.
Fascists who demonize their opposition are . . . Nazis.
Wow, that “97 percent of climate scientists agree” lie just won’t die.
They don’t have anything else.
“
– Mike Hulme, Ph.D. Professor of Climate Change, University of East Anglia (UEA)”
{http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/12/19/97-articles-refuting-the-97-consensus-on-global-warming/}
The 97% l1e has been resoundingly refuted.
Hint to All the Gullibles:
That’s — why — Ivan — is — screaming — so — loudly.
97% is useful as it implies those whom you respect think this is true.
But “What is truth?”
Those who don’t know will always seek any answer that’s available.
And they will do anything – without morality – if they grab a convenient answer.
Uh, Mr. Courtney?
So…. their l1e is “useful.”
Your point…?
Sorry Janice, I thought you would know the reference.
The Lie is Useful. It serves a purpose. Yes, it does; it serves a purpose.
But the purpose is expedient – it helps the liar in the immediate term for obvious reasons.
Yet, it misses the big picture. It doesn’t see whole.
And the example I referenced with “What is truth”?
This, John Chapter 18 Verse 38.
Which was a rather bad crime to commit for good intentions.
And re: Pontius Pilate’s words: “What is truth?” He MEANT that truth is well and good, but politics and mob rule (such as that which he was dealing with at that moment) trump truth when cowardly leaders cave into them.
That quote is often misused to promote nihilism, so I took the opportunity to try to inform, here. Truth is fact. It may not be known (e.g., how many stars are there? why do people have only two eyes at most? what if …. :)), but it is knowable (by God, if by no one else). L1es sometimes win the day… but,
Truth is.
And, in the end, the truth Pilate sacrificed to the shouts of the crowd triumphed in spite of him.
The tomb is empty.
#(:))
Yes, Mr. Courtney (eye roll with a smile), I knew that reference. I just don’t see how pointing that out does anything to either support or refute the AGWers except to say: They l1e because it is useful.
So be it. 🙂
Truth WILL win!
#(:))
Janice
Truth hardly ever wins. I’m not quite sure why some people keep posting that “Truth will win.”
Perhaps “Truth will win for a season.” But the fight against dogmatic superstition based totalitarianism has been, is now, and always will be a battle. And by ‘truth’, I mean evidence based reasoning. The bible quotes and references are a huge turn-off for those of us non-religious science based people… or at least this one in particular…
‘Truth’ – meaning evidence based reasoning – has lost in almost every civilization during nearly every point in history. This very time moment, there are millions, perhaps billions, of humans being taught that the Sun revolves around the Earth, and that any thought against this ‘fact’ is a Western lie… truth doesn’t win. Guns, money, and violence win. Science and evidence based reasoning may win in times of peace, prosperity, and plenty, but the ‘win’ is usually rather short lived historically speaking. Eventually the hemlock is administered to the ‘truth.’
Dear Not Laughing,
Yes, the War for Truth is perennial. Truth, in the end, DOES win EVERY battle, nevertheless. Are we burning “witches”? Are slaves still being imported from Africa? Are we bleeding people to cure them? Can women vote? Did the Axis powers win WWII? Did their vile Superior Race (whether the Japanese or the German brand) propaganda enslave the world in perpetual hatred? Are we still treating stomach ulcers with a glass of milk? Is the Berlin Wall still standing?
That there are l1es being taught in obscure corners of the world’s battlefield about the Sun or other long-known science does not negate Truth’s triumph on main front.
So, too, with the AGW Gang, they — have — lost. The are fighting a war of desperation on the very fringes of the battlefield of ideas. We must keep up a permanent guard, however. Sites like this will be truth’s valiant outposts to keep the ly1ng rats in their holes.
Re: my passing reference to Jesus’ resurrection, just ignore it and other Bible texts. I manage to ignore a LOT of stuff that is said on this site in the interests of camaraderie and promotion of science facts. I’ll bet you can do it, too.
And try laughing — it helps keep things in perspective. #(:))
Your jolly ally for truth,
Janice
@Janice:
I admire your sunny disposition. However, it is far from reality. WWII or its like can and will occur again. The scientific method is not common sense. Evidence based reasoning is not a natural human tendency. In fact, humans, like most animals, are natural statisticians with a high tendency toward false positive response. We naturally see and assign ‘intent’ to disconnected events. This means that all evidence based knowledge is always at risk of falling prey to be discarded and disregarded by human society and civilizations.
In short, superstition is our ‘natural’ state – it is and always will be easier to convince a room full of humans that the burned toast was ‘meant’ to look like Jesus – rather than simply your brain assembling coincidental disparate splotches into a facial impression because that’s what brains do… And this is the heart of the problem of CAGW. Sure, there are ‘bad actor’ scientists and propaganda machines working to exploit the fear, uncertainty, and doubt — but the basic issue is one of a natural human tendency for anthropocentric thought and decision making. The same forces are at work in astrology as well as CAGW as well as in Cargo Cults and all religions. This is why name calling is always hypocritical. And it is always wrong to pigeon-hole individuals. Calling for conservatives to rise up and fight liberals is just as preposterous as the reverse. Not all conservatives are pro-science, not all liberals are CAGW propagandists — not all liberals are evolutions [which is pro-science] and not all conservatives are creationists [which is anti-science] — not all Ivy League college graduates are liberals nor even wealthy nor smart, and not all State-college graduates are poor conservatives nor not-smart.
Say instead – join in the fight against superstition where ever it is found — because as Dawkins writes – superstition is the enemy of reason. And the enemies of reason are enemies of science and ‘progress’ whatever that term might mean.
‘Truth’ is hard won and easily lost. Don’t underestimate the combined power of natural born human superstition, political strength and will, along with the wealth and means to control and deliver the message. And always remember that science and math are hard – it takes time and practice to understand these things – and very few actually wish to spend that time or work hard in practice.
@Janice:
” I manage to ignore a LOT of stuff that is said on this site in the interests of camaraderie and promotion of science facts. I’ll bet you can do it, too.
And try laughing — it helps keep things in perspective. #(:))”
Thank you Janice. As a commited atheist, I find it good to see someone with different ideas to my own still ready to ignor our differences and work together to fight the evil that is CAGW zealotry.
And have a laugh as well 🙂
Dear David Smith,
Thank YOU. And, oh, boy, I had to ignore a LOT of poor ol’ Not’s comment, as you can see! Thanks for taking the time to smile at me. Much appreciated.
Your Ally for Truth in Science,
Janice
P.S. You will consider it a waste of time, but I will (and just did!) be praying you will not only realize God is, but that God loves you and wants to be your Abba, not just your Creator. Okay! I won’t bring THAT up again! …. er… with YOU, I mean… heh. #(:)) Thanks for not spitting. Just got my sweater back from the cleaners… .
I believe it’a now 103% percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is real and man-made.
Of course.
Go for broke. 103% of climate scientists did not have sex with that … windmill.
Janice, that they lie because it is useful – that is the point.
We don’t lie, despite it being useful to do so, because the truth is important.
They do. They do lie.
And the impact of that call is immeasurably expensive.
It requires talk of the infinite and the eternal to encompass the value of truth.
Truth is real.
It’s worth stating this because the observers who visit here should know our values.
Although we are not in full Communion, I know.
It’s hard to know though what fraction truly, if lazily and naively, believes, and what fraction actually lies consciously and intentionally. I personally know quite a few highly educated people who believe every word of it and simply don’t take the time to check the facts, or even think, for themselves.
I know several scientists who mouth this stuff about AGW and when asked they will say “I don’t have time to research it so I have to believe the researchers who do.” It isn’t apathy per se, but rather that they know that they publish only real findings and find it very difficult to believe that another scientist might not put the same care into their methodologies and conclusions that they themselves do in a totally unrelated field. It is a real predicament to convince those who are very busy in another field of science to look at the data and spend the time to think about it. I don’t know what can be done to fix that either because their casual belief is misleading their students who tend to hang on every off-hand remark because that PhD behind the name means they know more…the students have no idea that these folks have never looked into it past the press releases.
“Although we are not in full Communion, I know.”
This sums up WUWT entirely. I know MCourtney has taken a lot of flack from other WUWT commenters for his left-leaning views, but I know we.respect him for standing by his convictions.
However, at SkS he would have been banned for not agreeing with the ‘concensus’…
Skills
Grassroots Organizing
Fundraising
Politics
Policy Analysis
Speech Writing
Legislative Relations
Nonprofits
Project Planning
Community Outreach
Leadership
Environmental Advocacy
Public Relations
Strategy
Political Consulting
Political Campaigns
Sustainability
Policy
Public Policy
Government
Program Development
Message Development
Coalitions
Strategic Planning
Political Communication
Grants
Crisis Communications
Public Speaking
Program Evaluation
Event Planning
Strategic Communications
International…
Higher Education
Environmental Policy
Social Networking
Press Releases
Volunteer Management
Community Organizing
Community Development
Political Science
Energy Policy
Grassroots
Research
Legislation
Media Relations
International Relations
Grant Writing
Climate Change…
Editing
Social Media
Imagine that. The only science I see on our Real School of Government Graduate of Genius is Political Science.
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/ivan-frishberg/3/a35/653
“Say you’ll help take them to task — join the team that’s calling out climate change deniers:”
So, if they are taking us “to task”, and “calling out” our “myths and conspiracy theories”, they should certainly be interesting in a PUBLIC DEBATE, where they can show how morally superior, their scientific methods are. They can expose our ” ludicrous arguments” for all to see.
I won’t hold my breath, because we know, and more importantly, THEY KNOW, how that would turn out.
Only the dead-enders are foolish enough to still be flogging this dead horse. Ivan Frishberg you have be Grubbered!
Skeptics have been doing the “Calling Out” for some time now. Still no debate.
Todd, a long way to say you have no real skills. It used to be called smoke shoveling. An engineer would probably list 3 or 4.
WHAT A DRIBBLER.
China has no plans on abating emissions under the agreement at all. They will continue until 2026 when they agreed to hold them at that level. In the meantime China is pushing on with developing new technology in their coal powered generators and further development of nuclear power. In other words Obama sold out a bit more sovereignty to China for nothing in return.
India flatly refused as they want to bring electricity to another 300million people. India have banned Greenpeace and or other climate activists as acting against India’s interests.
Even Canada has listed the worst of climate activists as dangerous.
Far from knocking down sceptical arguments, the warmists have fired all their bullets and are now releasing cartoonish repeats and combinations of failed models. It is like kicking a car that has run out of fuel. Not going to make it go one more inch but will show you up as an idiot.
They repeat the dismally wrong 97% figure. Really shows how desperate they are. Obama has seen his CCX membership decline to zero, so like any door to door encyclopaedia salesman he is knocking on email doors with any old thing he can cobble together.
Sad Sack redefined.