Friday Funny: Liberals are in such disbelief/shock on Myron Ebell appointment for EPA transition, he has a Snopes page

This is hilarious. Over the past couple of days on Twitter and Facebook, I’ve seen dozens, perhaps even hundreds of meltdown tweets like this:

ebell-freakout

There’s some others far worse that are in full meltdown mode:

 

https://twitter.com/wantedalex101/status/796888758742175744

It even made Scientific American, who even seemed incredulous as they wrote the article:

sciam-ebell

There is so much incredulity, that Snopes had to make a page saying that it was in fact true. Screencap follows:

ebell-snopes

In September 2016, candidate Donald Trump announced his intention to appoint Myron Ebell to lead his administration’s transition team at the Environmental Protection Agency. Ebell currently serves as the director of the Center for Energy and Environment at the libertarian think tank the Competitive Enterprise Institute. He also chairs an initiative named the Cooler Heads Coalition, which, according to Ebell’s official bio:

…comprises over two dozen non-profit groups in this country and abroad that question global warming alarmism and oppose energy rationing policies.

Ebell openly declares himself to be a climate change skeptic who disputes the severity of human activity on Earth’s climate. On this point, Ebell has been extremely consistent: He argues that anthropogenic global warming, if it happens at all, is a minor issue that has been usurped by liberals to expand the federal government. He has stated in many different venues that he intends to dismantle the scientific consensus around anthropogenic global warming, as discussed in this October 23 2012 interview with PBS Frontline’s John Hockenberry:

EBELL: […] What we’re fighting is the expansion of government. And there are many pretexts for expanding government.

HOCKENBERRY: Opposing government action on climate change to defend American freedom is a perfect fit.

EBELL: We felt that if you concede the science is settled and that there’s a consensus, you cannot— the moral high ground has been ceded to the alarmists.

HOCKENBERRY: So you had to go to work and break down this consensus.

EBELL: Yes. And we did it because we believed that the consensus was phony. We believed that the so-called global warming consensus was not based on science, but was a political consensus, which included a number of scientists.

More here: http://www.snopes.com/trump-taps-outspoken-climate-denier-to-oversee-epa-transition-team/

We live in interesting times.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
366 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Hugs
November 11, 2016 9:20 am

This is hilarious, or would be if it wasn’t him being character assasinated.

Latitude
Reply to  Hugs
November 11, 2016 9:47 am

comment image

J McClure
Reply to  Latitude
November 11, 2016 12:17 pm

Latitude,
Isn’t this the moment to invite Mann et al to the table?
To share in a new beginning.
One without all the “notions” – a table ….

Latitude
Reply to  Latitude
November 11, 2016 1:22 pm

I was thinking more chair..than table

J McClure
Reply to  Latitude
November 11, 2016 5:59 pm

No chairs – they’d just throw them around 😉

Reply to  Latitude
November 11, 2016 6:31 pm

And get the same tired 12 year old Manniacal presentation?
I’ll bet his pages are sticking together too.

Hlaford
Reply to  Hugs
November 11, 2016 10:01 am

Proper spelling is Hillarious, with capital H and double l.

Reply to  Hlaford
November 11, 2016 10:35 am

Wikipedia entry
“Myron Ebell serves as the Director of Global Warming and International Environmental Policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). He is also the chairman of the Cooler Heads Coalition, a coalition built to “question global warming alarmism.” In September 2016, Ebell was appointed by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump to lead his transition team for the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).[5][6] While not himself a scientist, he is a longtime climate change denier”
Hi Hlaford
Hillaryous indeed !

Hugs
Reply to  Hlaford
November 11, 2016 11:06 am

Hil-liar-ous?

afonzarelli
Reply to  Hlaford
November 11, 2016 2:13 pm

i like that hugs! Hilliary…

yarpos
Reply to  Hlaford
November 11, 2016 3:07 pm

She’s gone , how about we get over it and look at whats next

afonzarelli
Reply to  Hlaford
November 11, 2016 5:57 pm

Oh no she isn’t… she’ll be rearing her ugly head when (ag) rudy goes after her for lying and obstruction of justice (etc). And if we don’t put her in an orange jump suit now, then she’ll be back out on the campaign trail in 2020. Clintons don’t go quietly in the night…

MarkG
Reply to  Hlaford
November 11, 2016 11:45 pm

No, I heard Trump has decided to be nice to Hillary.
And make her Ambassador to Libya.

Reply to  Hlaford
November 12, 2016 6:07 pm

The best punishment for the Clintons is to ignore them. We have bigger fish to fry.

Hlaford
Reply to  Hlaford
November 13, 2016 2:40 am

@pyeatte I heard that good life is the best revenge and punishment. Perhaps the best punishment in this case would be to show how the world is a better place without CAGW nonsense.
There are many worthy goals to fight for, say eradication of poverty. CAGW lot were all about eradication of the poor.

Mike Smith
Reply to  Hugs
November 11, 2016 11:38 am

The gravy train just hit the buffers!

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Mike Smith
November 11, 2016 1:52 pm

The sudden deceleration is causing heads to explode!

jones
Reply to  Mike Smith
November 11, 2016 3:08 pm

Pop,
Explode you say? Oh noes…the AGW crowd were right then?…. Build more windmills immediately.
.

Reply to  Mike Smith
November 11, 2016 3:45 pm

This is good news. The EPA is going to go into meltdown when reason and reality finally hits them between the eyes. Hopefully Ebell will be able to replace as much of the senior staff as possible and cut their budget at least in half.

Editor
November 11, 2016 9:23 am

My strong and sincere congratulations to Myron Ebell as well as to President-Elect Trump for the choice. He is an excellent pick for the position.
w.

Bob Boder
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
November 11, 2016 9:32 am

OMG not a libertarian!
Now I have at least one government official that just maybe I can root for

Antero Jarvinen
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
November 11, 2016 9:33 am

I agree! Antero from Finland

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
November 11, 2016 12:07 pm

Well said!

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
November 11, 2016 1:02 pm

America has bottomed out now… one should never lose confidence, America is ahead of its time.

MRW
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
November 11, 2016 2:22 pm

He argues that anthropogenic global warming, if it happens at all, is a minor issue that has been usurped by liberals to expand the federal government.

No, it hasn’t. Everyone needs to get off this insular, circular argument (and the idiotic misuse of the word ‘socialism’) and see what’s happening with clear eyes.
It’s been usurped by multinationals (read: their global owners/investors and shareholders, while we’re busy arguing over bathroom signage at home) who want to act outside the purview of our federal government.
That’s why they rushed to enact the necessary global legal structure ASAP after their failure at Copenhagen 2009 to establish “Global Governance.” The young David de Rothschild articulated on TV at the time that Global Governance was the purpose of Copenhagen 2009. If they couldn’t get the whole umbrella passed in 2009, at least they had to set up the legal spokes by the time Obama left office.
The legal structures of ‘Global Governance’—to be adopted by the UN as binding treaties—are:
(1) The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)
(2) The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) [UNFCCC’s baby]
(3) The Trade In Services Agreement (TISA)
These three agreements will provide the legal framework for NGOs and multinationals (aka, transnational companies and international banks) to act with impunity across all borders without jurisdictional control, and if passed, these agreements give NGOs and those acting in concert with multinationals/international banks the right to change the laws of this country without any interference from the US Supreme Court, or the people of the USA. Treaties trump local laws in this country; remember that! Treaties are laws enacted by the country as a whole, and therefore hold a federal and legal status above the rights of individual citizens.
This legal framework is spelled out in the 3rd agreement/treaty, TISA—Wikileaks or some group leaked this part of it—currently being negotiated in secret in Geneva by the US Trade Representative, Michael Froman, who was Obama’s Special Assistant in charge of passing the failed Copenhagen 2009.
Any Congressman (Representative or Senator) who demands to see the TISA today has to meet Michael Froman in a guarded room in DC (when he deigns to return to the US) without a phone, camera, and or the ability to take notes, for a total of 45 minutes only.
And since we agreed in Citizens United–effing stupid US Supreme Court–to grant corporations ‘personhood’, and once we agree to the three treaties above, these multinationals can stand at the US Treasury/Federal Reserve’s door—not Congress’s door where they would encounter sunlight—with their hand out for interest-free US dollars, endless amounts of it. Trillions.
Using the excuse of saving us from the ravages of CO2 because our population has been primed to be none the wiser.
Why else do you think Maurice Strong and young David de Rothschild’s Swiss uncle (Baron Edmond) dreamt up Global Warming in 1984/5 with David Rockefeller?

JohnKnight
Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 2:53 pm

I agree, MRW . . this is more appropriate lingo, it seems to me;
*He argues that anthropogenic global warming, if it happens at all, is a minor issue that has been usurped by illiberals to expand the federal government.*
I want that word back too . .

MRW
Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 3:23 pm

John Knight,
Or…”upendthe federal government.” 😉

Duster
Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 4:01 pm

Mostly very much on point. There’s a bit of historical drift that you should take into consideration because it adds temporal perspective that is, well, disturbing. The “personhood” decision was made in a SC decision in late 19th century – or possibly the very early 20th, but definitely before WWI and IIRC, before the Spanish American War. CU reaffirmed that piece of stupidity and expanded it. The decision essentially asserts that “corporate entities” also have a right to “free speech.” Since this was in response to complaints about political spending by superPACs, funded by multinationals, it added new meaning to the term “money talks.” It is also highly worth remembering that CU is or was a “conservative” organization that sued the Federal Election Commission (FEC). Also worth noting is that the “target” of the expenditures prohibited by the FEC was Hillary Clinton. The SC held that the earlier decision which acknowledged “personhood” to corporate entities extended the right of “free speech” to corporations and labor unions.

Reply to  Duster
November 11, 2016 4:13 pm

Duster, you have bought into a Democratic Party theme of some antiquity, one pressed by that outstanding Democrat, “Pitchfork Ben” Tillman, also known for the KKK and gun control. So, if I and my fellow deplorables in the NRA use money collected in relatively small amounts to lobby and run ads against Hillary Clinton, we have fewer rights as a group than we do individually? Citizens United did not quite go far enough, as McCain-Feingold should have also been declared unconsitutional, and all the self-dealing incumbent protection laws passed after Watergate.

Moa
Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 4:31 pm

Are you under illusion that (State) ‘socialism’ is helping people, hence you blame the multinationals ?
Let’s have a look at who the mass murderers were in the 20th Century and see if we can spot anything in common ?
National Socialism
Soviet Socialism
Maoist Socialism
North Korean Socialism
North Vietnamese Socialism
East German Socialism
Ba’athist Socialism
Khmer Rouge Socialism
Cuban Socialism
Angolan Socialism
African National Congress Socialism
Ethiopian Socialism
Venezuelan Socialism
Columbian FARC socialism
etc etc etc
Did you spot what they had in common ? because SOCIALISM is about STATE POWER and NOT about helping people (that is called ‘charity’, and is voluntary). This is why socialists killed 100 million of their own people in peacetime.
State Socialism is not about helping people, it is about State Power, and ‘State Power’ actually means rule by the elites who use State Force and State coercion against people with less political power/resources.
Since governments have no power nor money except that which they take from the citizens involuntarily with the threat of force, socialism is simply this idea taken further – ROBBING the citizens and depriving them of Individual Liberty (which is the only way the State/elites gain POWER).
Socialism is involuntary which makes it IMMORAL. Charity is voluntary which makes it MORAL (as well as being more efficient that Socialism, since 60% of the donations don’t go to propping up a bureaucracy that serves to tell citizens what to do and collect the wealth taken at gunpoint by the government elites).
If you still do not understand the difference between involuntary socialism and voluntary charity then perhaps you might understand it in terms of rape versus romance. It is the same physical act, but the fact that one is involuntary is what makes rape and economic rape (‘socialism’) IMMORAL, and the people who force it on others EVIL.
Of course you attack the multinationals. They are not blameless, but they are the designated scapegoat so that the governments (which are abstract, the ‘elites’ are real and are control freak humans) can get off scot free.
Do you not understand that if the government is reduced in power then the multinational cannot use government power either.
If you attack the multinationals without limiting government power then government power grows (which the elites and bureaucracies actually want).
If you limit government power then both multinationals AND government stop interfering with the Individual Liberty of Free People.
Unfortunately so many Europeans do not understand this. Fortunately, approximately half of all Americans do.
Governments (which actually means ‘the people that run them’) only gain power and wealth by taking the earnings and liberty of citizens – using the threat of State Force.
DO NOT DEFEND INVOLUNTARY COLLECTIVISM NO MATTER WHAT IT CALLS ITSELF. International Socialism is immoral. National Socialism is immoral. Religious Socialism is immoral. Progressivism is immoral. Modern ‘Liberalism’ is immoral.
There must be Limited Government in order for citizens to have Individual Liberty. There is no other way.

Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 4:33 pm

MRW , thank you for that comment, you have provided us with the sunlight and I hope Trump understands . What you describe is clearly a scary situation. It’s no wonder Trump has been vilified ( and still is) by the elitists, the academia and the MSM. From what I have seen so far he seems to be surrounding himself with very capable people and I sincerely hope the American people give him all the support he so clearly deserves.

MRW
Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 4:41 pm

Moa,

Are you under illusion that (State) ‘socialism’ is helping people, hence you blame the multinationals ?

No.

Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 5:06 pm

@Moa November 11, 2016 at 4:31 pm
thank you a thousand times over–you need to write a book.

AP
Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 5:23 pm

Moa, one of the best comments I have read in ages. I am going to co-opt your analogy “rape vs romance”.

MRW
Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 5:29 pm

Thanks, Duster,
Didn’t know those extra historical points. Haven’t looked back that far. I’m at the point, however, where I’m digging into why ‘public corporations’ were originally created.
I was surprised to find that the notion that a corporation’s first duty is to its shareholders did not take hold until 1978, when deregulation first started.
William Lazonick, president of the Academic-Industry Research Network, and a leading expert on the business corporation, described the history in a report I read. Apparently,

Historically, corporations were understood to be responsible to a complex web of constituencies, including employees, communities, society at large, suppliers, and shareholders.

They were granted certain rights as public companies because they also had certain public responsibilities to fulfill to receive those rights. (Too long for here.) It was neither American law nor tradition that shareholder profits came first, quite the opposite, but even such Democratic stalwarts as the junior senator from Minnesota, Al Franken, seem to think so. Must have been what was going around on the set of Saturday Night Live during the 70s.
Tidbit:
Owen D. Young, twice chairman of General Electric (1922-40, 1942-45) and 1930 TIME Magazine’s Man of the Year, told an audience at Harvard Business School in 1927 that the purpose of a corporation was to provide a good life in both material and cultural terms not only to its owners but also to its employees, and thereby to serve the larger goals of the nation:

“Here in America, we have raised the standard of political equality. Shall we be able to add to that, full equality in economic opportunity? No man is wholly free until he is both politically and economically free. No man with an uneconomic and failing business is free. He is unable to meet his obligations to his family, to society, and to himself. No man with an inadequate wage is free. He is unable to meet his obligations to his family, to society, and to himself. No man is free who can provide only for physical needs. He must also be in a position to take advantage of cultural opportunities. Business, as the process of coordinating men’s capital and effort in all fields of activity, will not have accomplished its full service until it shall have provided the opportunity for all men to be economically free.”

Again, thank you.

tetris
Reply to  MRW
November 12, 2016 12:53 am

MRW
That is an interesting take on things, indeed, and I would appreciate following up on this off line. I might be able to add dimension. Our hosts has our particulars.
Note to moderator: could you pls facilitate comms. Thx.

Tim Hammond
Reply to  MRW
November 12, 2016 3:37 am

Sorry but that’s about as conspiracy theory nutty as the fake Moon landings. Governments can only be sued under the trade treaties in courts, and damages have to be shown as with any other case under any other law or treaty. What exactly do you think happens if any such case comes to court? That an NGO or a company just says the government has to give me money?
If a government usurps private property, the owner of that private property should be able to use the law to get redress. I am amazed that people on this site think that’s a bad thing.

ironargonaut
Reply to  MRW
November 12, 2016 4:51 pm

Go! citizens United now 2 people can get together and have the same free right of speech as an individual. without citizens united george soros could run as many tv ads as he feels about any subject he feels but if 2 people need to get together to buy a billboard for or against any political policy they could be banned by law. A Corporation by law is 2 or more people who get together for a common purpose. The government wanted to be able to regulate their right to free speech. Why are you so afraid of free speech?

MRW
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
November 11, 2016 6:40 pm

Moa,
I was walking around thinking about your comment for a while.

SOCIALISM is about STATE POWER and NOT about helping people (that is called ‘charity’, and is voluntary).

Places like the city-state of Singapore are a glaring exception to that. Singapore has got to be the most pro-business place I have ever been to. Grant you, a semi-dictator ran it for 31 years. He instituted death to drug-users, no exceptions, and I think gum-chewers as well (don’t hold me to the last). Prime Minister Lee, who died 18 months ago, took a sleepy backwater Asian swamp, newly released from British colonial power and anticipated to fail, and turned it into a worldwide business powerhouse. The NYT described it last year as “The nation reflected the man: efficient, unsentimental, incorrupt, inventive, forward-looking and pragmatic.”
Singapore is clean as a whistle. Go-go-go 24/7. Rich. Vibrant. Culturally sophisticated. Takes care of all its people. Since it’s tropical, they have strict environmental rules. They have the best airport in the world, imo. I could move in and never leave. I happen to be extremely partial to Lee’s pragmatism:

“We are ideology-free. Does it work? If it works, let’s try it. If it’s fine, let’s continue it. If it doesn’t work, toss it out, try another one.”

That’s Singapore. But they do something we would regard as unthinkable since 1980 because we falsely associate it with a backward verkakte medieval eastern European idea of “socialism” that has no relationship to the modern world. That’s why I was biotching.
The govt of Singapore invests in its country’s industries as shareholders. Some new industries get 90%. Others 1-10%. Then they put govt officials on the company’s Board of Directors. Singapore is ruled by British law, and God help you if you break the law there. God help you, in addition to your family being disgraced and shunned for generations.
But here’s what they do with that investment and corporate board presence. It’s a dynamic relationship. Because they are so legally rimrod, if there’s a law on the books preventing the company from achieving such-and-such, they can call up their govt board member(s) and say we need this law changed, it’s hampering us from doing X and earning $Y, and their govt guys will go into Parliament the next day and git ‘er done by noon. The only entities that have that power in the US Congress now are the Israel and gun lobbies, with the gun lobby being a distant second. (A foreign govt should never benefit from the power of the US federal government before American citizens do, no matter how much you swoon over that foreign govt’s existence. Or you ain’t a patriot, and you ain’t American.)
All Americans should think about that model. We are, after all, a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Why can’t it work for us? Why can’t we assume it works for us as the Constitution says it should? If we’re running the show for our own prosperity, why not? Make the civil servants work for us. That’s what they’re there for. And frankly, isn’t that what we want? I don’t give a damn what they call it. Git ‘er done.

Eliza
Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 7:16 pm

Singapore one of the most boring dull places on earth where you cant do anything. very much like Australia these days.

MRW
Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 7:47 pm

Eliza, wasn’t when I went there 10 years ago. But then, I was shepherded around by locals. I had a great time. Then I went to Melbourne. Loved it as well. I love you ‘strines’.

dudleyhorscroft
Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 8:39 pm

MRW – Perhaps you have summarized Singapore’s history too much. Singapore, a well developed trading power, obtained ‘self-governing’ status in June 1959, and became independent in August 1963. It voluntarily merged with Malaysia a fortnight later, in September 1963. However, disputes with the central government in Kuala Lumpur increased to such an extent that Singapore was expelled from Malaysia in August 1965. The Malaysian Parliament expelled Singapore by 126 votes to nil, there being no Singaporean members present. By then, Singapore had not been a “sleepy backwater Asian swamp” for nearly 100 years.

Bailey yankee
Reply to  MRW
November 11, 2016 8:41 pm

You are “da man”. Thank you.

Thomho
Reply to  MRW
November 12, 2016 2:12 am

In the early nineties I attended a conference in Singapore at which then retired former PM Lee Kuan Yu was guest speaker
His message was direct and simple
“Dont keep China out of the world community. Encourage them to come in join and play by the rules”
Mr Lee of chinese background was certainly no communist fellow traveller
In the early days of his country he had to fight off attempted takeovers by Singapore communists
His words still need to be heeded but getting them to play by the rules might be not so easy

Mayor of Venus
Reply to  MRW
November 12, 2016 4:09 pm

Not death penalty for gum chewing….only a lashing.

ripshin
Editor
Reply to  MRW
November 14, 2016 10:10 am

I think it’s a convenient canard to claim the superiority of Singapore based on some supposed pro-business environment they have. In the end, it’s about freedom under the rule of law. Your description of Singapore sounds like they forgot the “freedom” part of that.
Furthermore, you are woefully misinformed if you think that the gun lobbies are anywhere near the top of the list in terms of influence in Washington. In fact, it’s so far off, it borders on ludicrous. I have no idea about this mythical “Israel” lobby, so can’t comment on it, but perhaps you would be served by questioning your own beliefs and seeking contradictory evidence instead. Or not. You do you.
rip

Tom Williams
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
November 12, 2016 8:49 am

It HAS been a long time since the Cuyahoga River has lit up the night sky.

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
November 14, 2016 10:14 am

Ditto

Taphonomic
November 11, 2016 9:26 am

In 2009 a politician said: “Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.”
That holds true today.

clive
Reply to  Taphonomic
November 12, 2016 2:02 pm

The trouble with “Socialism”is eventually you run out of other peoples money.(Margaret Thatcher)

Jimmy Haigh
November 11, 2016 9:26 am

I love it! As you know Snopes is supposedly a hoax busting site so I thought I’d test it out with global warming. Surprise surprise, being liberals, Snopes is fully in the global warming tank. They banned me from their Facebook page. It’s been tough – but I’ll survive.

littlepeaks
Reply to  Jimmy Haigh
November 11, 2016 9:55 am

You ought to ask Snopes to confirm the rumor that you’ve been been banned from their Facebook page, or state that it is a hoax. 🙂

Jeff Hayes
Reply to  Jimmy Haigh
November 12, 2016 2:54 am

I’ve also been banned from a fb site- IFLS. It seems they took objection to my posting the link to the top 100 science blogs as a reply to everyone who was fed-up with their anti-Trump climate screed and said they were leaving for good. I was just being helpful, assisting them in finding some replacement science sites, and noting that IFLS didn’t make the cut. Or it could have been linking to the geocraft greenhouse calculations page showing how little water vapor swamps human-released co2. Ah well, there are plenty more pseudoscience sites where they came from.

Griff
Reply to  Jeff Hayes
November 12, 2016 5:51 am

Breitbart bans people who post who accept the science of climate change… seems they don’t want any contrary evidence…

Reply to  Griff
November 15, 2016 10:30 am

No they do not. Just ask all the alarmists posting there. They are tiring in their one trick pony, but unless they violate the TOU, they are free to keep beating the dead horse.

michael hart
Reply to  Jeff Hayes
November 12, 2016 2:04 pm

Griff, if you’ve managed to get yourself banned by Breitbart then I’m impressed, but it almost certainly wan nothing to do with your opinions about global warming.

rw
Reply to  Jeff Hayes
November 14, 2016 1:18 pm

Griff,
What you’re saying is nonsense. I’ve had several arguments with people on Breitbart – and read other back-and-forth arguments as well. I must say between you and some other people on this same thread (e.g. Maurice Strong did not dream up global warming in 1984/5 – Wigley and Jones were on about it in the early 80s – I’ve got some of their papers), one would almost give up hope regarding people’s ability to maintain any kind of genuine veracity. It doesn’t seem to be in the genes.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Jeff Hayes
November 14, 2016 5:19 pm

Griff’s the sort that pretty much throws anything he can and see if it sticks.

Dems B. Dcvrs
November 11, 2016 9:26 am

Should have put them in a complete tither by picking an ExxonMobile Exec to head up EPA!

Kevin Schurig
Reply to  Dems B. Dcvrs
November 11, 2016 3:55 pm

You are one evil person. 😉

AP
Reply to  Dems B. Dcvrs
November 11, 2016 5:35 pm

That would actually be a good idea. In my job, I am a “user” of government legislation and policies – there are so many inconsistencies, competing agendas, ambiguities and contradictions, it is almost impossible to navigate the system in my state now. Sometimes you read policies and legislation and you just shake your head imagining the idiots who wrote it. Often times, the government agencies don’t even understand their own laws and policies and our lawyers give us completely different (and legally sound) advice from the bureaucrats’ current interpretation and practice of their own policies and laws, which they seem to apply haphazardly anyway.

LOL in Oregon
November 11, 2016 9:28 am

Gasp!
How can the deplorables outside of Panem revolt like this?
“Pen and Phone” with no compromise!
….Citizens of Panem must read Bills before they are passed!

Harry Passfield
Reply to  LOL in Oregon
November 11, 2016 11:35 am

I’m beginning to like being a ‘deplorable’ (honorary status as a Brit, if I am allowed). It resonates in the same way that the BEF in WWI were called ‘contemptibles’ by Kaiser Wilhelm II. My Grandfather and his brother, both KIA one hundred years ago would have been proud to be ‘Old Contemptibles’. I shall be proud to be an ‘Old Deplorable’.

Reply to  Harry Passfield
November 11, 2016 2:56 pm

You do not have to be a US voter to be in her basket of deplorables. Welcome to the basket.

JohnKnight
Reply to  Harry Passfield
November 11, 2016 3:07 pm

(Of course you’re allowed . . IF you agree to “Briton First!”, Brit ; )

NW sage
Reply to  Harry Passfield
November 11, 2016 5:59 pm

ANYONE can be a ‘Deplorable’. It’s easy – all you have to do is think!

Reply to  Harry Passfield
November 11, 2016 7:48 pm

Jump on in Harry. We Deplorables have to hang together

Annie
Reply to  Harry Passfield
November 11, 2016 8:33 pm

I proudly consider myself to be an English/Aussie ‘Deplorable’!

NeverReady
Reply to  Harry Passfield
November 13, 2016 8:10 am

I’m deplorable, and so is my wife…

Reply to  Harry Passfield
November 14, 2016 8:08 pm

The inner city vote was to Hillarys liking the suburban and rural voter turn out was “just deplorable!”

Mark from the Midwest
November 11, 2016 9:30 am

I don’t have the direct citation but apparently Ebell is very adamant about tough enforcement of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, as they are written. Seems like the green blob should be overjoyed that someone will be looking at actual sources of emissions and pollution that violate those directives, rather than chasing after a politically popular non-issue.

PA
Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
November 11, 2016 12:34 pm

The left is interested in virtual pollution not real pollution.
The left isn’t very competent (at anything practical) so they like to solve non-problems since there is no way to fail and they can always claim success.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  PA
November 11, 2016 1:58 pm

Now they are faced with a real problem and their only course of action seems to be temper tantrums.

Richard G
Reply to  PA
November 11, 2016 7:09 pm

That’s what happens when a generation is raised with no discipline, no consequences and everyone gets a trophy.

afonzarelli
Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
November 11, 2016 2:21 pm

Yeah, i used to visit “cooler heads” years ago and found them to be a fairly rational bunch. (it ain’t like he picked anthony to lead his transition team… ☺)

brians356
Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
November 11, 2016 2:47 pm

So you must assume Ebell will undo the EPA’s declaration (and ratified by SCOTUS) that CO2 is a “dangerous pollutant”, thereby lumping CO2 in with all the actual dangerous pollutants. As it stands, the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts applies to CO2, so Ebell is in something of a quandary if your citation is accurate.

Felflames
Reply to  brians356
November 11, 2016 4:46 pm

“I have reviewed the issue and find no evidence CO2 causes any direct harm, therefore, as head of the EPA ,I have directed the department to remove it from the list of pollutants.”
Problem solved.

NW sage
Reply to  brians356
November 11, 2016 6:01 pm

SCOTUS ‘ratification’ merely said the EPA had the authority [right?] to so designate.

joelobryan
Reply to  brians356
November 11, 2016 10:08 pm

Felflames,
The ***BEST*** strategy is to have Congress amend the Clean Air Act and Trump to sign it into law, that is, statutory language mandating that CO2 and water vapor are not pollutants covered under the Act. That would prevent mischief from future Democrat Presidents.
And Blow up the Filibuster completely if Senate Democrats balk.

Doonman
Reply to  brians356
November 13, 2016 2:22 pm

Transition team members are in charge of administration transition, a task that ends upon inauguration. There is no reason to assume that Ebell will remain in the Trump administration as a nominee for any position. That remains to be seen.

MRW
Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
November 11, 2016 3:30 pm

very adamant about tough enforcement of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, as they are written.

Good. And while he’s at it, he can rain down on pipeline manufacturers, regulators, and the secure protection of pipelines from advocacy saboteurs. Europe’s maze of pipelines is far FAR more complicated and pervasive than ours are, and yet you never hear about those pipelines bursting in sensitive urban areas, or destroying environmental sanctuaries. Again, another infrastructure issue that has not been tended to by the federal government.

Duster
Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
November 11, 2016 4:17 pm

The EPA did most of its important jobs years ago and some really were important and needed doing. At present though, without a BIG issue it would be reduced to a basic enforcement and watchdog agency. As long no rivers caught fire, they would be a federal backwater. By redirecting attention to something as nebulous as CO2, the EPA continues to get a budget, doesn’t seriously step on ANY corporate toes, and (mostly) keeps the generic enviros happy. Little business? Well life might be harder for little guys, but anyone with money can afford the EPA decisions /sarc.
Controlling climate is a monumentally daunting task, and without even a sound theory of how it really works, lots of hand waving and black-guarding CO2 gives people something to “worry” about and politicians of all stripes an issue to hold forth on. Politicians on both sides of the aisle can yell and scream about whether CO2 needs to be controlled or not and both sides of the aisle appear to be doing the jobs that they were elected to do.

dennisambler
Reply to  Duster
November 14, 2016 9:08 am

Former EPA head, Lisa Jackson spoke at the 2009 “Power Shift” Rally (an Al Gore offshoot) and was introduced as “one of us” and a “scientist bringing back science to the EPA”. She paid homage to the Power Shift movement, saying that she was excited by its impact in bringing about social change:

“African Americans and women got the vote because of a power shift. We have the first African American head of the EPA and the first African American President; we have changed the face of environmentalism.
We have a $10.5 billion budget, the largest in EPA history, that’s a power shift, EPA is back on the job. (cheers, yelling).
Science has been resurrected and will guide our actions.”
“Lisa P Jackson, EPA Administrator – Fulfilling the UN Mission”
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/science-papers/originals/lisa-p-jackson-epa-administrator-fulfilling-the-un-mission
The new Administrator also promised the (2009) crowd, that she would seek to overturn the Bush administration “midnight regulations”. The most critical of these to the environmental lobby was the memorandum by outgoing EPA chief Stephen Johnson, which stated that carbon dioxide was not a pollutant to be regulated and officials assessing applications by utilities to build new coal-fired power plants could not consider their greenhouse gas output when approving power plants.
Jackson also revealed the administration’s pre-determined policy on CO2, when she said that:
“Our first steps on taking office were to resume the CO2 endangerment finding and to seek fuel efficiency standards to reduce carbon pollution. The Law says Greenhouse Gases are pollution.”
An analysis of the Endangerment Finding, showing the paucity of scientific input, how much of it was produced by IPCC authors working for the EPA, and the financial involvement of the EPA with IPCC, can be found here in the SPPI paper, “United (Nations) States Environmental Protection Agency”.
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/science-papers/originals/the-un-states-epa
“It has in fact, a major stake in the IPCC process, as former EPA officials, (non-scientists), have been heavily involved in the IPCC reports, with funding from the EPA. Those former employees are also consultants to EPA and have major input to their regulatory findings, including the endangerment finding.
The input of the EPA into the IPCC reports is demonstrated by the fact that they provide funding for one of the core climate models, MAGICC/SCENGEN
The EPA authors of the Endangerment Technical Support Document are mainly economists and environmental policy specialists, with qualifications like Masters in International Affairs or Public Policy and Management, although there are a couple of chemists, engineers and one meteorologist. Some are also IPCC authors and many are involved in the production of the proposed regulations.”
Reviewers of the Endangerment Finding Technical Support Document included Thomas Karl, director of NOAA’s NCDC. Dr Gavin Schmidt of NASA, and Susan Solomon, now at MIT: https://paocweb.mit.edu/index.php?q=people/susan-solomon/bio

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
November 11, 2016 4:36 pm

In that case, he could start by bringing the people responsible for the Gold King mine spill to justice.

Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
November 11, 2016 8:02 pm

Or the Flint water debacle.

November 11, 2016 9:34 am

Here is a simple question for every evil ebell attacker: where is the empirical evidence that atmos co2 is responsive to fossil fuel emissions?
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2862438

Javert Chip
Reply to  chaamjamal
November 11, 2016 9:39 am

Even better question:
What does the unadjusted data look like?

Reply to  Javert Chip
November 11, 2016 12:25 pm

Tony Heller went to Washington and personally briefed Ebell on that issue about three Saturdays ago. Used his Australian presentation given to Australian Senate Tues, Wed, Thurs this week down under at invitation of One Nation (Pauline Hansen’s party). That should be up on Youtube by now.

bit chilly
Reply to  Javert Chip
November 11, 2016 2:39 pm

that is great to hear ristvan . the climateriate must be apoplectic at that news .

MRW
Reply to  Javert Chip
November 11, 2016 3:32 pm

If you have the time, ristvan, put a link up for the record.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Javert Chip
November 11, 2016 4:33 pm

And nothing reported in the MSM Here in Aus about it.

MRW
Reply to  Javert Chip
November 12, 2016 1:23 am

Here’s the Tony Heller link that ristvan mentions at November 11, 2016 at 12:25 pm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkzQWCDl5eo

Hugs
Reply to  chaamjamal
November 11, 2016 11:15 am

chaam come on – not this again.
The question is not if but what, in detail, is the result.

ferdberple
Reply to  chaamjamal
November 11, 2016 11:27 am

where is the empirical evidence
===========
an interesting paper that deserves wider attention. clearly if there is no significant correlation between CO2 and fossil fuels, it cannot be fossil fuels that are driving CO2, irrespective of isotope ratio’s or other supporting evidence.
it would be interesting if someone like Willis could do a review of the paper on WUWT. From my quick review, if the math holds, it would appear to be a significant finding.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2862438

Reply to  chaamjamal
November 11, 2016 11:42 am

@chaamjamal.
I have been asking that self same question for years on various alarmist sites and am yet to get an answer.
There is no conclusive, empirical evidence whatsoever that CO2 causes Temperature rise. The green morons are/were (!) basing our futures, and theirs, on a shoddy, unproven theory.
The evil empire in the US will be eradicated. Now all we need to do is get the green nutters out of Europe as well!!!

Frank
Reply to  chaamjamal
November 11, 2016 11:57 am

The empirical evidence is in the long-term trend that you removed for no good reason from in your presumably-unpublished paper(s).
You do need to know some physics. Temperature is proportional to energy and heat capacity is the proportionality constant. Radiation is power – energy per unit time. For temperature to change, the power needs to be on for a significant period of time. If I turn my 100 W space heater on for one minute, will the thermometer on the other side detect a rise in temperature? No. If you look at the temperature change over the next minute, you won’t detect a change either. If you look at the temperature change over 1 hour, the temperature will be higher. Analyzing temperature data minute by minute prevents you from demonstrating that a heater warms your room – if you ignore the long term trend.
If I turn on my 100 W heater outside (larger heat capacity) for one year, will the local temperature rise? Of course not. The power output, the time and heat capacity are important.
Radiative forcing – the effect of CO2 on the rate heat escapes the Earth to space – is measured in W/m2. If you multiply this by the effective heat capacity of the Earth per m2 (which is mostly the depth of the mixed layer of the ocean), you will obtain a warming rate which is approximately 0.2 K/yr for a forcing of 1 W/m2. The increase in radiative forcing in the average year has been about 0.04 W/m2 or a little more than 2 W/m2 in the past half-century. That means we expect to see a warming of 0.008K from the change in radiative forcing in one year. It is no wonder you can’t find it in annual data. It can only be found in the long-term trend that you have discarded.
Since the response to radiative forcing doesn’t reach equilibrium in a single year, a proper analysis of the problem is far more complicated. As the earth warms, it emits more infrared radiation and negates some of the radiative forcing that caused the warming. However, warming is slow, so the planet has not fully responded to build up of radiative forcing over the last several years. Based on the rate at which the ocean is warming, we think we have seen about 75% of the forcing that has accumulated over a half-century converted to warming.
The other complication is that the temperature in any one location changes 10 degC in the average day and the average daily temperature changes about 10 degC between winter and summer. When you sum up all of those changes, temperature data is noisy. Many other factors – especially clouds cover – effect incoming an outgoing radiation. That is why the temperature data you see is so noisy, while the thermometer in a room with a heater will be stable from minute to minute. If I used a very sensitive thermometer, changes in air currents from the heater and the colder windows might cause the temperature to change by 0.01 degC warmer or cooler in one minute – analogous to the noise you see in your detrended plot.

TheLast Democrat
Reply to  Frank
November 11, 2016 12:41 pm

Frank: you are mixing observations with modeling/hypothesis to make your case.
You have to pick one.
Hypothesis > observations,
or
observations > hypothesis/model.
If regarded this way, something becomes very apparent:
there is a problem with the modeling:
the question is whether higher levels of CO2 cause heat to be retained in the atmosphere, raising planetary temps.
We (supposedly) can measure planetary temp, and can measure atmospheric CO2.
Now, we could substitute the main hypothesis with a very similar mathematical question:
does msmt of CO2 covary with msmt of planetary temp?
Here we run into a problem.
“Covary.”
Covary means that when one mathematical value goes up, another goes up (or down), as well. “Covary” = they vary together.
For two measures to vary together, each musy vary.
CO2 does not vary. It is monotonic.
While the FIRST question [“whether higher levels of CO2 cause heat to be retained in the atmosphere, raising planetary temps”] MAY be true, this cannot be determined by our mathematical process of assessing whether two measures covary.
For the reliable data available, CO2 is a constant.

John Harmsworth
Reply to  Frank
November 11, 2016 3:44 pm

Cogent analysis, Frank. Now flood your room a couple feet deep, cycle the heaters and open all the windows and punch holes in the roof and see what you get. Only recommended if you rent.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Frank
November 11, 2016 10:12 pm

“We (supposedly) can measure planetary temp,”
Nope. No such thing.

Germinio
Reply to  chaamjamal
November 11, 2016 1:15 pm

Jamal,
That paper is most likely nonsense since if it were correct then it would be the most amazing coincidence
that in the last 50 years mankind has massively increased the amount of CO2 that it produces and the amount
of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen by a comparable amount due to some other completely unknown source.
Plus it raises the question if the CO2 produced by human activity has not ended up in the atmosphere where is it? So for it to be correct there needs to be two completely new physical processes that no-one knows about. Alternatively there could be an error in the paper (like the fact that the detrending process removes the trend you are looking for) and in fact the rise in atmospheric CO2 is caused by human emissions.
And if this work were to be taken seriously it would need to be submitted to a scientific peer reviewed journal
rather than posted an a social science archive website.

Ian H
Reply to  Germinio
November 11, 2016 1:44 pm

You say it would be the most amazing coincidence. But really it wouldn’t be that much of a coincidence at all.
Temperature has been rising and falling by similar amounts and at similar rates since before roman times. Roughly speaking over given 20 year period the temperature seems to rise or fall or stay constant with roughly an equal chance for each outcome. So if we look at the 20 year period from the 1970s to the 1990s when CO2 was rising there is going to be a 33% chance that temperature will be rising to match just by pure chance. I wouldn’t call those odds “most amazing”.

Michael J. Dunn
Reply to  Germinio
November 11, 2016 5:22 pm

Consider this: the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is the result of a chemical equilibrium between the atmosphere, the land biosphere, and the oceans. If it changes, it is only because the equilibrium conditions (pressure, temperature) are changing. And if that is so…it literally doesn’t matter what humankind does with regard to CO2 production, because Le Chatlier’s Principle will always drive the system kinematics to restore the equilibrium. If shut down all hydrocarbon combustion, more CO2 would just emerge from seawater to meet the trending shift in equilibrium. How could it be otherwise? Is anyone going to argue that equilibrium chemistry is NOT governed by Le Chatlier’s Principle? (i.e., that systems do NOT want to remain in equilibrium?)

Geronimo
Reply to  Germinio
November 11, 2016 7:10 pm

Michael,
the lifetime for CO2 in the atmosphere is about 1000 years. Hence while Le Chatlier’s
principle is correct it doesn’t apply to non equilibrium conditions. And again you have replaced
a physically plausible explaination for a magical one. What is a “trending shift in equilibrium”
and what is it’s cause? You need to make a scientific case for that which is more plausible
than “rising human emissions of CO2 are causing increasing concentrations in the atmosphere”

Michael J. Dunn
Reply to  Germinio
November 14, 2016 7:45 pm

Dear Geronimo,
After analyzing the carbon-14 decay history from the period of atmospheric nuclear testing, it is very evident that the lifetime is short. It is removed at rates fast enough to show up as an annual variation presumably linked to the photosynthesis patterns of north hemisphere vegetation. According to what you are saying, there could never be a transient negative trend on time scales we could observe.
I guess you are forced to deny that chemical concentrations have equilibria, and that LeChatlier’s Principle is ineffective. Nothing magical about it. The real question is what is affecting the equilibrium. A warming ocean would explain it all (carbon dioxide outgassing).

Reply to  chaamjamal
November 11, 2016 7:53 pm

Cue Ferdinand in 3…2…1…
🙂

phaedo
November 11, 2016 9:44 am

Mr Ebell also has a brilliant write up on desmogblog
http://www.desmogblog.com/myron-ebell
My favorite comment is from http://docs.house.gov/meetings/GO/GO00/20131016/101409/HHRG-113-GO00-Bio-EbellM-20131016.pdf :
‘Business Insider’s Green Sheet named him third in its list of the Ten Most-Respected Global Warming Skeptics, after Professor Freeman Dyson and Dr. Bjorn Lomborg, and commented, “Myron Ebell may be enemy #1 to the current climate change community.’
I such illustrious company he is the perfect candidate.

Hugs
Reply to  phaedo
November 11, 2016 11:20 am

Ten Most-Respected Global Warming Skeptics, after Professor Freeman Dyson and Dr. Bjorn Lomborg

In that case, ‘the current climate change community’ is an enemy of sanity.

Reply to  phaedo
November 11, 2016 11:46 am

@phaedo
Hopefully desmog blog will be amongst the first in the crosshairs of the Trump administration.
A disgusting, odious, evil site. And I would say that if something like that were ever posted by sceptics as well.

bwryt
Reply to  HotScot
November 11, 2016 12:04 pm

To HotScot: I’ve no problem with someone stating their opinion. I have a problem with them hijacking my email and not allowing ‘unsubscribe!’

Reply to  HotScot
November 11, 2016 3:21 pm

HotScot November 11, 2016 at 11:46 am

@phaedo
Hopefully desmog blog will be amongst the first in the crosshairs of the Trump administration.
A disgusting, odious, evil site. And I would say that if something like that were ever posted by sceptics as well.

I don’t think you’ve thought this through. As someone who is mentioned no less than 27 times on desmogblog, I agree with your assessment of the site.
However, the idea that the government should attack it is also “digusting, odious, and evil”. That kind of government censorship is anathema in a free society. Next thing you know the pseudo-greens will be back in power with their followers looking to shut down websites …
The government having desmogblog in its sights is a Very Bad Idea™ …
w.

Tad
November 11, 2016 9:45 am

Snopes is fully SJW converged. Not to be trusted.

John bills
November 11, 2016 9:46 am

There is lots of email deleting going on right now 🙂

CheshireRed
November 11, 2016 9:48 am

This is gonna be better than Hollywood. Remember the Usual Suspects? What a film. Climate change establishment are the racketeers. The ‘scientists’ are the inside men. Trump and his team are gonna take ’em down.
‘Everyone got it right in the a*s, from the Chief on down. It was beautiful’.
And here’s the scene.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lPGChYUUeuc/VLhzJqwRhtI/AAAAAAAAAS4/ehDtihKNKIw/s1600/GISTemp%2BKelvin%2B01.png

Hugs
Reply to  CheshireRed
November 11, 2016 11:21 am

Use log scale.

Marcus
Reply to  Hugs
November 11, 2016 3:35 pm

…OMG…..Are you complaining about using Kelvin ?? I guess it is only OK when Liberals use it …LOL..NUTS !

Reply to  Hugs
November 11, 2016 11:29 pm

No, he’s suggesting you plot log(0).

Duygle
November 11, 2016 9:48 am

Now we need Judith Curry to run NASA and take over from Gavin

TonyL
Reply to  Duygle
November 11, 2016 10:14 am

Curry over at GISS would be fun, just to watch the meltdowns.
Bonus Points: Any lefty protests, we just scream at them Sexist, Misogynist!
Watch the heads explode.

Mark from the Midwest
Reply to  TonyL
November 11, 2016 10:40 am

Excellent!

Alasdair Burton
Reply to  TonyL
November 14, 2016 2:33 pm

One wonders if the leftist exploding heads could be put to better use (better than the already-excellent entertainment value) as the energy/motive source for a sort-of-Orion spaceship ?

patrick bols
November 11, 2016 9:48 am

Ebell is a perfect choice – he will bring back sanity in environmental matters. Everybody benefits from living in a clean environment and breathing clean air. The Obama administration has been fighting a hypothetical war against our ‘climate’, Don Quichote tried doing similar things, the only difference being that he was fighting wind mills while Obama is building them. No wonder our people have chosen to replace a defunct political class focussing to prevent imaginary catastrophes, rather than paying attention to the daily issues the world is struggling with.

CheshireRed
November 11, 2016 9:48 am

D’oh!!

David
November 11, 2016 9:50 am

To the young lady who said we are Fd. Why yes you are not just by this appointment, but also in your head.

Latitude
November 11, 2016 9:51 am

I see an opportunity for a two-fer….
Tell the global warming alarmists we can no long afford to finance them…
…because we have too many illegals to support
Bang….both problems solved and we didn’t have to spend a penny

CheshireRed
Reply to  Latitude
November 11, 2016 9:57 am

Nice line, but I ain’t for giving these dirt-bags any latitude myself. (Illegals have mitigation, climate corruptionists have none.) Watching them fall will be the culmination of a 25 years plus battle. It will be magnificent.

Latitude
Reply to  CheshireRed
November 11, 2016 10:00 am

…did it at least make you smile a little? 🙂

P. Walker
November 11, 2016 9:54 am

I’m glad it’s true. A great choice.

joelobryan
November 11, 2016 9:54 am

The Liberals are in for many, many shocks in the next 4 weeks as Trump’s appointments are announced, and not just climate relevant positions.
Liberals have been so dishonest for so long that they bought into their own dishonest GroupThink propaganda. Now the coming shocks to their belief system are going to be brutal.

joelobryan
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 9:56 am

Liberal butt-hurt is just beginning.
https://youtu.be/grD_IINiH9c

Pamela Gray
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 10:05 am

Now that is funny!!!!!

Greg
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 10:16 am

” I need an ambulance … ! ” LOL
Now, it’s not kind to laugh at grief of others, I’m sure they’ll all get better. Give ’em a hug and kleenex and talk about working together about real environment issues that we all share, even The Donald. 😉

Tom in Florida
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 10:17 am

I remember I also cried when I found out that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny weren’t real. Except that I was probably about 6 years old.

commieBob
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 10:56 am

I feel compassion for these folks. On the other hand I remember that a lot of these people are social justice warriors who don’t hesitate to try to ruin the careers of those who disagree with them. Fortunately, some folks fight back.

Catcracking
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 11:25 am

These buttercups should be drafted into the Marine Corp and taught how life can really be a challenge. Then they should do a tour in Iraq w/o boots since the president says no boots on the ground. Maybe sandals?

Gary Hladik
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 11:47 am

Discovered that clip yesterday, played it several times, never gets old. Election night I went to YouTube and played 6 encores of “Ding Dong the Witch is Dead”.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 11:49 am

Where’s a waahmbulance when you need one?

Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 12:15 pm

CatCracking, Maine Corps would not take them. No bedwetting allowed in boot camp.

Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 1:00 pm

Does a snowflake melt through their eyeballs ?

William Astley
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 1:09 pm

This is funny but a little sad too. I have two daughters.
The cult of CAGW and some liberal political parties have taken advantage of caring, trusting people. There is nothing wrong with woman or men who want to make the world a better place. There is nothing wrong with strong emotions.
Propaganda concerning ‘climate change’ has hurt this country and other countries.
The US has real problems that need to be addressed. The US and other countries do not have trillions of dollars to waste on to fight CAGW which is not a problem.

Resourceguy
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 1:25 pm

Coexist…..with deplorables

commieBob
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 1:30 pm

Catcracking November 11, 2016 at 11:25 am
These buttercups should be drafted into the Marine Corp and taught how life can really be a challenge.

Boot camp isn’t required. They should just grow up.
I remember reading about a court case in which a woman was charged with a relatively minor crime. Her excuse was that she had been victimized by circumstances.
The judge told her to grow some intestinal fortitude and learn to deal with the kind of crap that most people deal with on a daily basis.

JohnWho
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 1:43 pm

Obama’s comments are priceless and go directly into the “things Obama has said that aren’t exactly truthful” bin. LOL

joelobryan
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 1:53 pm

Bruce,
for you. Because you asked:
https://youtu.be/QqolWUgxz7E

Hot under the collar
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 3:10 pm

All that crying, don’t they know they’re contributing to dangerous sea level rise? ; )

billw1984
Reply to  joelobryan
November 11, 2016 4:53 pm

No, Greg. They need a Wambulance. My wife has used that term for years.

Gamecock
November 11, 2016 10:05 am

‘Sign this petition to prevent Myron Ebell, a climate denier, from heading the EPA transition’
A mere petition will stop Trump (!). How many signatures will it take? 50? A thousand? 600,000? Can dead people sign?

JohnWho
Reply to  Gamecock
November 11, 2016 1:44 pm

That petition will only serve to strengthen Trump’s resolve.

Doug
Reply to  JohnWho
November 11, 2016 2:19 pm

The petition goes to the White House, to be addressed by the president. By the time Trump can address it, the only answer can be “Too late!”.

Greg
Reply to  JohnWho
November 11, 2016 2:59 pm

the petition will go to be adressed by a lame duck who can only say: sorry not my job.
These bed-wetters are so dumb.

JohnWho
Reply to  Gamecock
November 11, 2016 1:46 pm

Wait, missed this:
Gamecock November 11, 2016 at 10:05 am
Can dead people sign?

Only the ones who voted, ’cause only those that voted have exercised their right to complain.
/grin

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  JohnWho
November 11, 2016 10:22 pm

So one has to make a bad choice in order to have the right to complain? Silly.

Flyoverbob
Reply to  Gamecock
November 11, 2016 3:18 pm

Let’s see a billion signatures from China, another billion from India and more from elsewhere ought make quite a bonfire for Trumps Inauguration.

jones
Reply to  Gamecock
November 11, 2016 3:35 pm

“How many signatures will it take?”.
.
The last time I looked around 60,000,000 at least.

Kevin Schurig
Reply to  jones
November 11, 2016 4:09 pm

More along the line of 270. 😉

Greg
November 11, 2016 10:08 am

this is faster and better than I thought.

TheLast Democrat
Reply to  Greg
November 11, 2016 1:26 pm

And under budget

Reply to  TheLast Democrat
November 11, 2016 2:59 pm

Just like Trump promised.

Not Chicken Little
November 11, 2016 10:13 am

Wow, the sky really is falling…onto the left! It’s worse than they thought, the end of their world is coming soon!
One can only applaud a skeptical approach – aren’t scientists supposed to be skeptical by nature? Or are we to believe every wild claim and every video we see without question? People used to say, “believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see” but even that is far too generous nowadays…

jones
Reply to  Not Chicken Little
November 11, 2016 3:36 pm

Has mann commented anywhere yet on this travesty of a catastrophic tragedy?

gnome
Reply to  jones
November 11, 2016 4:44 pm

Chicken Little has left the henhouse and is out looking for an honest job.

ShrNfr
November 11, 2016 10:16 am

My prediction is increased hissy fits with potential of total meltdown.

Owen in GA
Reply to  ShrNfr
November 11, 2016 11:28 am

Should have made it a forecast to fit the meteorology theme, but I’d wager your prediction will be a good deal more accurate than the average two week forecast.

SAMURAI
November 11, 2016 10:17 am

This is the beginning of the end for the biggest and most expensive Leftist hoa-x in human history….
It’s so refreshing living in a world of logic, science, reason, rational and critical thought again.
Life is good and the earth is doin’ just fine.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  SAMURAI
November 11, 2016 10:24 pm

“It’s so refreshing living in a world of logic, science, reason, rational and critical thought again.”
Thank God!
Oh, wait.

Tom Judd
November 11, 2016 10:21 am

Now that Hillary has lost, the DNC has cranked up the blame game and is lining sacrifices up to throw under the bus. I guess one of the first bus splats was Donna Brasile (or Brazil, or Brasille, or, … you know who I mean) who, in a meeting, was literally screamed at by a young man who was angry … ready for this? … that now he wouldn’t live to see forty because unaddressed (by Trump) climate change would now take his life.
Ok, now (I use that word too much) let’s not mock that young fatalist too severely. There actually might be an element of truth to his fears. You see, I’ll bet he lives in his parent’s basement. And, they probably have a house right up to the coast on Malibu. Wouldn’t take much of a sea level rise to flood out the only shelter he’ll ever know. Then he’d have to make his way in the world. If so, he’s done for.
Be ready for this for the next four years. I think the best thing to do will be to take away their allowances (I’m somewhat serious here, and I’m not talking about welfare) and tell them to go to bed early. And call out temper tantrums when you see them.

Michael J. Dunn
Reply to  Tom Judd
November 11, 2016 5:29 pm

Nah. These people are mentally deranged, the result of a diet of lies, wishful thinking, and self-glorification. If you look closely at the lives of those who seek power (Hitler and Stalin come to mind), there is a process of increasing detachment between what one thinks is true and what the truth actually is.

Bob Denby
November 11, 2016 10:23 am

“This is no time to go wobbly…” — Margaret Thatcher

Latitude
November 11, 2016 10:32 am

Cities are getting trashed, people are getting attacked
Where is the DNC, Obama, Clintons, ……..all these so called organizations that have been accusing republicans of being “dangerous”..
Telling them to stop!

SAMURAI
Reply to  Latitude
November 11, 2016 10:52 am

Latitude-san:
These silly AstroTurf “spontaneous demonstrations” are being organized and paid for by Obama’s king maker George Soros through his NGOs: Media Matters, MoveOn, BLM and ANSWER.
i actually hope these fake demos continue for awhile (providing no one gets hurt) to show the American people just how crazy and “deplorable” these loony Lefties are, and to show the world America made the right choice in electing Trump.
There is already a backlash brewing from this insanity…

Latitude
Reply to  SAMURAI
November 11, 2016 11:40 am

That’s just it…people have already been sent to the hospital….
Kids in school have been attacked….elderly people have been attacked..etc etc

MarkG
Reply to  SAMURAI
November 11, 2016 11:51 pm

Look on the bright side. Every person they attack, every building they burn, every car they smash… means another thousand votes for Trump at the next election.
The left are demonstrating that they’re nothing but a bunch of vicious, spoiled brats. I’ve seen a number of people today posting online along the lines of ‘if I’d known Clinton supporters were like this, I’d never have voted for her’. They won’t make that mistake in 2020.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Latitude
November 11, 2016 11:36 am

Don’t forget the false flag “hate speech”, made to look like it’s being done by Trump supporters. Yes indeed, the tactics on the left amount to nothing less than pure evil. They actually want to see blood in the streets.

Resourceguy
Reply to  Latitude
November 11, 2016 1:29 pm

They are all at the beach, where the rising seas scare tactic made it a buyers market for a brief time in history.

urederra
Reply to  Latitude
November 11, 2016 2:39 pm

I have read that some protesters are being paid by George Soros, Some confessed having responded to a Craiglist Ad asking for actors to perform at a political rally.

urederra
Reply to  urederra
November 11, 2016 2:55 pm

I am sorry, I did not read Samurai´s post.

November 11, 2016 10:44 am

It’s been proven they LIED about the number of Climate Change! It’s called weather.

Paul Westhaver
November 11, 2016 10:47 am

You will soon hear cries of “let’s work together” and “compromise” the last refuge of the corrupt left.
ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES
I Hope Trump uses this enormous sledge hammer to obliterate all funding to the EPA et al and the attack on CO2.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
November 11, 2016 12:39 pm

Simple one sentance amendment to Clean Air Act. CO2 is not a pollutant for all,purposes of this act.
EPA has done good (and bad, Gold King mine) work on cleaning up true air and water pollution. Let them continue that at a reduced funding level.

David in Michigan
Reply to  ristvan
November 11, 2016 1:27 pm

Good and bad……
And speaking of bad, don’t forget Flint, Michigan where the EPA knew the lead levels in the water were high but did nothing.

Ernest Bush
Reply to  Paul Westhaver
November 13, 2016 2:29 pm

They have already started this through the usual news agencies.

Greg
November 11, 2016 10:52 am

I think they should all stop crying because rising sea levels is already a major issue, not only threatening the future generations but is putting lives and property in danger as we speak.
NOAA already have a map showing how tear driven flooding is affecting YOUR county, today.
Kleenex shares were up 15% at close of trading.

November 11, 2016 10:53 am

But schadenfreude makes me feel vaguely dirty, but so do several other things I enjoy. Squirm, snowflakes!

RayG
November 11, 2016 10:58 am

How many can source this quote:
“Elections have consequences. It’s the political way for winners to tell losers: Tough luck, you lost. Get over it.”
Give up? It is from Barak Obama’s 2009 inaugural address!

Paul Westhaver
Reply to  RayG
November 11, 2016 12:03 pm

oh dat be makin it mo sweet

JohnWho
Reply to  RayG
November 11, 2016 1:56 pm

That phrase does not show up in Obama’s 2009 inaugural address. Reportedly, he said it to Republicans in a meeting with Congressional Republicans shortly after taking office. I suspect he regrets saying it now, especially after what he’s said about Trump.

MarkG
Reply to  JohnWho
November 11, 2016 11:54 pm

Obama’s enduring legacy will be eight years of President Trump, and Democrats crying and rioting in the streets.
He’s probably wishing he’d spent more time playing golf, and less time annoying the right.

Reply to  MarkG
November 15, 2016 8:08 am

The folks in Benghazi wish he would have spent less time playing golf and more time doing his job.

Bill Powers
Reply to  philjourdan
November 15, 2016 11:12 am

Add insult to injury he was playing in the Ayatollah Classic with Khamenei, Ahmadinejad, and Ahmed Jannati in his foursome.

drednicolson
Reply to  RayG
November 11, 2016 2:08 pm

And now Obama is eating his own words.

November 11, 2016 11:02 am

Is it too late for me to get my bid in? I’ll gut the EPA for free … OK, OK, I give in: I’ll pay USA my life savings if you put me in charge of streamlining it.

November 11, 2016 11:03 am

Michael Mann: “A Trump presidency might be game over for the climate.It might make it impossible to stabilize planetary warming below dangerous levels.”
Kevin Trenberth: “This is an unmitigated disaster for the planet.”
Benjamin Schreiber: “Millions of Americans voted for a coal-loving climate d-e-n-ier willing to condemn people around the globe to poverty, famine and death from climate change”
I wonder what will become of Elon Musk’s Tesla cars and the battery storage depository.

Reply to  vukcevic
November 11, 2016 12:41 pm

Pull all federal subsidies from renewables and EVs and you will find out in less than 12 months. Won’t be pretty.

Latitude
Reply to  ristvan
November 11, 2016 1:26 pm

I would think you’d find out immediately…
They can’t operate on a day to day without them

Greg
Reply to  vukcevic
November 11, 2016 1:09 pm

“A Trump presidency might be game over for the climate”.
OMG there will be no more climate ? That sounds pretty bad, what will do if we don’t have a climate any more? The weather will be able to do anything. That’s frightening.
Yes, Mickey it will be game over for your gravy train, Mickey Mouse, pseudo-science.
Jolly hockey sticks!

jones
Reply to  Greg
November 11, 2016 3:43 pm

Yup Greg, all the climate…gone…The Mann has spoken…
Just a hard vacuum down to sea-level….
This crowd deserve everything that’s coming.

PaulID
Reply to  vukcevic
November 11, 2016 4:29 pm

actually these climate change huxters are the ones who want the poor to suffer.

AllyKat
Reply to  PaulID
November 11, 2016 8:15 pm

I think he meant to say “[WE are] willing to condemn people around the globe to poverty, famine and death from climate change [policies]”.

Eugene WR Gallun
November 11, 2016 11:04 am

“Compromise” is what can destroy the Trump Triumph. Voices will soon be whispering —
Take it easy, we need to work together. Give them a little of what they want and it will go easier for you. etc.etc. etc.
The proper course for Trump to follow is very simple. Kill your enemies quickly right at the beginning and get it over with. Peace will then reign.
Eugene WR Gallun

Bill Illis
November 11, 2016 11:05 am

The good thing is that Trump actually has a chance to fix climate change.
What will happen to climate change when the records are fixed and the money provided for fake studies stops ??
Threat over ??

November 11, 2016 11:07 am

Since the CAGW crowd so frequently quote that 97% fraudulent survey, perhaps Trump could set up a team to carry out an honest survey of the same material and give the result suitable prominence.

rogerknights
Reply to  mikelowe2013
November 11, 2016 4:00 pm

Yes, a new survey similar to the non-alarmist ones we rarely hear of (von Storch and the early George Mason U. surveys) would be good.

John Harmsworth
Reply to  mikelowe2013
November 11, 2016 4:15 pm

We don’t care how many supporters this load of hooey has! The facts don’t support it!

arthur4563
November 11, 2016 11:08 am

I wonder who these people are going to send their petition to and why they think it has any significance?

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  arthur4563
November 11, 2016 9:21 pm
TomRude
November 11, 2016 11:19 am

As usual, morally superior Canada’s CBC lectures the world once again and Trump in particular.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/trump-science-bob-mcdonald-1.3845535
Their resident global warming pseudo journalist starts with:

Donald Trump needs a science education: Bob McDonald
A president wrongly informed about science can take us down a dangerous path

Yet it is this Bob McDonald, who never allows comments on his little agitprop edicts, who should get an education since featuring this classical illustration:
blockquote>Smoke billows from smokestacks and a coal-fired generator at a steel factory in the industrial province of Hebei, China. Trump has pledged to end ‘the war on coal.’ (Kevin Frayer/Getty Images)
Yes Bobby, water vapour is what’s coming out of these smoke stacks…
Be afraid, be very afraid…

AndyG55
Reply to  TomRude
November 11, 2016 11:49 am

I have heard that Roy Spencer will be Donald Trump’s climate advisor.
As I have said.. Trump KNOWS how to put the right people in the right places.

Gandhi
Reply to  AndyG55
November 11, 2016 12:21 pm

You’re absolutely right. The lefties think he’s crazy…but he’s crazy like a fox.

TA
Reply to  AndyG55
November 11, 2016 6:13 pm

It’s the Lefties that are crazy, not Trump.

Mike Smith
November 11, 2016 11:36 am

The big question now is… now fast can Donald shut down all of those climate politics research grants?

Dave Fair
Reply to  Mike Smith
November 11, 2016 1:17 pm

Existing grants may have to stay in place. FY 2017 monies may be sequestered. Future grants may be curtailed. Lots of work, no matter what.

November 11, 2016 11:40 am

I know I shouldn’t take such joy at the psychological distress of others, but having read so many tweets and articles where it is obvious people are on knifes edge of sanity, I can’t remember giggling so much. What fun.
A lot of people need to get over themselves. And on Veterans Day they should remember millions have faced greater adversity in their lives.

Reply to  cerescokid
November 11, 2016 12:08 pm

This Army vet is admittedly enjoying the Schadenfreude today.

Reply to  ristvan
November 12, 2016 3:14 pm

“I’ve never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure.” – Mark Twain
DSW

November 11, 2016 11:47 am

When you lie all the time, you begin to believe your own lies. That is the problem with the alarmists.

TA
Reply to  philjourdan
November 11, 2016 6:15 pm

A recent article says when you lie, it changes your brain, and makes it more likely that you will lie in the future. I guess it’s like getting addicted to lying.

Marcus
November 11, 2016 11:49 am

Trump’s Cabinet: Speculation mounts over president-elect’s team…..
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/11/trumps-cabinet-speculation-mounts-over-president-elects-team.html
Green liberal heads are exploding across America….

Svend Ferdinandsen
November 11, 2016 11:51 am

The negative comments and their arguments show that EPA is not about science as it is/was.

RWturner
November 11, 2016 11:54 am

The good news just keeps pouring in this week. And with sue-and-settle tactics of the ecoterrorists in the crosshairs, where are the current EPA admins going to “work”?

Felflames
Reply to  RWturner
November 11, 2016 5:37 pm

Well, they are going to need laborers to clean up some old gold and silver mines
A few years on the end of a shovel might do them some good..

Bill Powers
November 11, 2016 11:57 am

“Trump has selected Myron Ebell to lead the EPA…An outspoken global warming denier. WE ARE FUCKED”
Translation: I am about to lose my great paying taxpayer funded bureaucratic position and now have to go out and find a real job unfortunately Bullshite is not in great demand these days.

November 11, 2016 11:59 am

Ebell leads EPA transition team. A very good start. Trump’s written ‘Contract with America’ expressly says will leave the COP22 accord, which he can do by executive order triggering the exit provision. CwA also expressly says eliminate CPP as unconstitutional. No funding for Green Climate Fund. No funding for UNFCCC, as it has recognized the Palestinian State as a member and funding would violate existing US law. Together with Congress he can repeal all the renewable subsidies that were extended as part of the last budget 9 months ago. All in all, a good first 100 days on the climate front.
Trudeau of Canada already publicly offered to reconsider NAFTA.
And, with Kellyann Conway, Peter Thiel, and Dr. Ben Carson assured senior administration positions, so much for the mysogenistic, homophobic, racist media garbage.
Next few months are going to be much fun.

Reply to  ristvan
November 11, 2016 12:26 pm

And Ken Blackwell of Ohio as “domestic transition manager”. Another Republican on the outs with the party establishment.

Kevin Schurig
Reply to  ristvan
November 11, 2016 4:17 pm

Mexico has also said it is open to renegotiation of NAFTA.

TA
Reply to  ristvan
November 11, 2016 6:18 pm

“No funding for UNFCCC, as it has recognized the Palestinian State as a member and funding would violate existing US law.”
An important point. Something to watch for in the future because Trump is a BIG supporter of Israel, so the action by the UNFCCC might be all the excuse he needs to cut them off.

PiperPaul
November 11, 2016 12:05 pm

Meh. I used to be a snopes regular. I left because of their groupthink discussion board / mailing list attitude on ClimateChange™. Couldn’t get over the fact that they fell for it. Skeptics indeed – on just about everything but the biggest scam of all.

Greg
November 11, 2016 12:08 pm

Guardian and Telegraph writer calls for assassination:
http://16004-presscdn-0-50.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/monisha-rajesh.jpg
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/11/347278/
Oh dear , not too PC any more are we ??

Greg
Reply to  Greg
November 11, 2016 12:56 pm

send comments to : guardian.readers@guardian.co.uk

Greg
Reply to  Greg
November 11, 2016 1:18 pm

Oops, looks like she’s deleted here twitter account.
http://images.google.fr/imgres?imgurlcomment image&imgrefurl=https://twitter.com/monisha_rajesh&h=2176&w=2176&tbnid=P0dZiIu0c6Gf2M:&vet=1&tbnh=93&tbnw=93&docid=eH_1ZFF4H6LCwM&client=firefox-b&usg=__Nfv7jvrlD-Rz12pf-z4Q6RPKVn0=&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj349v4waHQAhVjB8AKHZD2A_sQ9QEIPzAF
Too late Google and the web will not forget you in time to save your dumb ass.
I suspect you may find it rather difficult to get published in any respecable newpaper now and you may have the plod knocking at your about hate speech and incitement to violence and/or terrorism.
People have done time in the UK for far less than that.

TA
Reply to  Greg
November 11, 2016 6:20 pm

You can get arrested in the U.S., too, if you threaten the president.

MarkG
Reply to  Greg
November 11, 2016 11:57 pm

Apparently she’s been sacked. And, with that reputation, will have a hard time find a job flipping burgers.
Hopefully she’ll now be extradited.

guereza2wdw
November 11, 2016 12:12 pm

the only good thing about the trumpeters! But I am not keen on killing alternative energy research on such things and network scale power storage and long distance elec power transmission.

Dave Fair
Reply to  guereza2wdw
November 11, 2016 1:24 pm

There have been no proposals to curtail such funding.

Reply to  guereza2wdw
November 11, 2016 1:53 pm

No one is advocating cessation of renewables research as far as I’m aware.

Bryan A
Reply to  guereza2wdw
November 12, 2016 12:25 pm

If funding is cut, it wouldn’t spell the end of research though, t would merely mean that funding for further research would necessarily have to come from private sector sources.

Ernest Bush
Reply to  Bryan A
November 13, 2016 2:43 pm

Which means that if renewable energy sources could make a profit, they would be put into place without government subsidies.

Thomas Homer
November 11, 2016 12:15 pm

Myron Ebell sounds quite promising to counsel our President.
Much more so than DiCaprio and Nye.

Gandhi
Reply to  Thomas Homer
November 11, 2016 12:24 pm

You mean Bill Nye the Mechanical Engineering Guy?

Thomas Homer
Reply to  Gandhi
November 11, 2016 12:30 pm

“You mean Bill Nye the Mechanical Engineering Guy?”
Indeed – was he chosen so that President Obama could remain the ‘smartest guy in the room’?

Greg
Reply to  Gandhi
November 11, 2016 12:59 pm

Bill Nye the science deNyer guy is a TV clown scientist for amusing children.
He was part of Al Gore frawdulent CO2 “experiment”.

phaedo
Reply to  Thomas Homer
November 11, 2016 12:27 pm

DiCaprio and Nye, Tweedledum and Tweedledee

JohnWho
Reply to  phaedo
November 11, 2016 1:59 pm

Wait! Is the DiCaprio/Nye coalition called, …
Di-Nyers!?

Michael C. Roberts
Reply to  phaedo
November 11, 2016 4:31 pm

Lest we forget Bill Nye started on a Seattle TV post-prime time comedy called ‘Almost Live’ as a bumbling, comedic mad-scientist type. PBS took him seriously (why I don’t know ) and gave him his own kiddie-science show for school age children. When the new POTUS was elected in 2009 Nye was stood up as a valid voice of glow bull warming science. All true.
MCR

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  phaedo
November 12, 2016 10:06 am

“Lest we forget Bill Nye started on a Seattle TV post-prime time comedy called ‘Almost Live’ as a bumbling, comedic mad-scientist type.”
He was on the show, but I don’t recall any “mad-scientist” stuff at all. He was famous for his “super hero” character Speed Walker, or something like that.

Gandhi
November 11, 2016 12:20 pm

I love it!! Al Gore is about to have a conniption fit.

Resourceguy
Reply to  Gandhi
November 11, 2016 1:56 pm

Frat boy style

Kevin Schurig
Reply to  Gandhi
November 11, 2016 4:19 pm

Will need to have his shakras realigned.

Freedom Monger
November 11, 2016 12:30 pm

I have posted this before, and it seems appropriate to do so again.
By using the word “denier” the advocates of AGW are attempting to do what Robert Jay Lifton referred to in his book, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, as “Loading the Language.”
“The language of the totalist environment is characterized by the thought-terminating cliché. The most far-reaching and complex of human problems are compressed into brief, highly reductive, definitive-sounding phrases, easily memorized and easily expressed. These become the start and finish of any ideological analysis. In thought reform, for instance, the phrase “bourgeois mentality” is used to encompass and critically dismiss ordinarily troublesome concerns like the quest for individual expression, the exploration of alternative ideas, and the search for perspective and balance in political judgments. And in addition to their function of as interpretive shortcuts, these clichés become what Richard Weaver has called “ultimate terms”; either “god terms,” representative of ultimate good; “devil terms,” representative of ultimate evil. In thought reform, “progress,” “progressive,” “liberation,” “proletarian standpoints” and the “dialectic of history” fall into the former category; “capitalist,” “imperialist,” “exploiting classes,” and “bourgeois” (mentality, liberalism, morality, superstition, greed) of course fall into the latter. Totalist language, then, is repetitiously centered on all-encompassing jargon, prematurely abstract, highly categorical, relentlessly judging, and to anyone but its most devoted advocate, deadly dull; in Lionel Trilling’s phrase, “the language of nonthought.”” -Robert Jay Lifton: Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism (1961)
Source:
https://archive.org/details/ThoughtReformAndThePsychologyOfTotalism
The word “denier” is a thought-terminating cliché, designed purely to terminate the discussion and denigrate any opposition. It is hurled by an ideology when it cannot make a rational, intellectual, or valid defense of its position against its critics.
Mind Control Cults and Leftists use these kinds of terms extensively. Think: “racist”, “homophobe”, “hater”.

Gamecock
Reply to  Freedom Monger
November 12, 2016 5:04 am

This is important knowledge.
Thank you, Mr. (Ms?) Monger.

Slacko
Reply to  Freedom Monger
November 14, 2016 9:42 am

Freedom Monger November 11, 2016 at 12:30 pm
You might add to that list “conspiracy theorist,” a term used to dismiss a critical thinker.

November 11, 2016 12:44 pm

this could be interesting:
Congress should have no problem finding the money to pay for Donald Trump’s proposed border wall once the president-elect is sworn in, Rep. Louie Gohmert said Friday morning.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-wall-congress-funds-louie-gohmert-231230

William Astley
November 11, 2016 12:46 pm

Trumps’ surrogates need to move the ‘climate change’ discussion from rhetoric (emotional, name calling, appeal to authority, sarcasm and so on) to high level scientific (graphs, data, logic, no subject changing).
The US and other countries do not have trillions of dollars to waste on green scams that do not work, to address a problem that does not exist. The cult of CAGW surrogates do not need to riot in the streets to fight ‘global warming’.
It is win-win for all countries, if there is no CAGW problem to solve and we do not waste money on green scams that do not work.
The IPCC reports did not include the long term paleo record. All of the media reports talks about ‘record’ warming which is the warming that has occurred in the last 150 years (i.e. Highest warming in ‘recorded’ history, i.e. human measured temperature in the last 150 years as opposed to the paleo record, for a longer period, say 11,000 years).
The paleo proxy data (temperature for the current interglacial period, last 11,000 years) shows the planet has warmed and cooled cyclically. The cyclic warming and cooling in the paleo record is the same high latitude warming which we are currently observed.
The earth was roughly 1C to 1.5C warmer than the current ‘record high’ temperatures during this current interglacial.
The data clearly shows the IPCC models are not correct (IPCC models show too much warming and predict that the warming should be global, rather than high latitude). The IPCC models were created (tuned) to justify CAGW, not to accurately model the atmosphere.
General Circulation Model Predicted Warming Vs Observations (Temperature Data from Satellites and Weather Balloons)
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT-5-yr-means1.png
There is no CAGW problem to solve. There is not even observational support for LAGW (Lukewarm anthropogenic warming).
Observations support the assertion that the majority of the warming in the last 150 years is due to solar cycle changes (Solar high latitude warming) SHLW rather than due to the increase in anthropogenic atmospheric CO2, LAGW.
The paleo data shows there is cyclic warming which in all cases was followed by cooling in both hemispheres.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/davis-and-taylor-wuwt-submission.pdf

Davis and Taylor: “Does the current global warming signal reflect a natural cycle”
…We found 342 natural warming events (NWEs) corresponding to this definition, distributed over the past 250,000 years …. …. The 342 NWEs contained in the Vostok ice core record are divided into low-rate warming events (LRWEs; < 0.74oC/century) and high rate warming events (HRWEs; ≥ 0.74oC /century) (Figure). … …. "Recent Antarctic Peninsula warming relative to Holocene climate and ice – shelf history" and authored by Robert Mulvaney and colleagues of the British Antarctic Survey ( Nature , 2012, doi:10.1038/nature11391),reports two recent natural warming cycles, one around 1500 AD and another around 400 AD, measured from isotope (deuterium) concentrations in ice cores bored adjacent to recent breaks in the ice shelf in northeast Antarctica. ….

Greenland ice temperature, last 11,000 years determined from ice core analysis, Richard Alley’s paper. William: As this graph indicates the Greenland Ice data shows that have been 9 warming and cooling periods in the last 11,000 years.
http://www.climate4you.com/images/GISP2%20TemperatureSince10700%20BP%20with%20CO2%20from%20EPICA%20DomeC.gif

Reply to  William Astley
November 20, 2016 6:01 pm

The IPCC models do not “predict” but rather “project.” Models that “predict” convey information to us about the outcomes of events. Models that “project” serve no useful purpose.

hunter
November 11, 2016 12:48 pm

Mr. Trump will be sorely tempted to compromise on killing the Paris accord.
I suggest that the best way to kill it is to submit it to the Senate for advice and consent- unsigned. Let the Senate vote on it: Respect the Constitution, and show the climate kooks that there is *no* popular support in a lawful open society for their obsession.

milwaukeebob
Reply to  hunter
November 11, 2016 12:53 pm

+1

AllanJ
Reply to  hunter
November 11, 2016 1:04 pm

Agree. Just declare it to be a treaty and it would require a 2/3 vote to approve it.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  hunter
November 11, 2016 1:09 pm

Or he could simply ignore it, since there are no teeth in it anyway.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 11, 2016 7:27 pm

Beth, I am indeed Rud, short for Rudyard, as in Kipling. The first name is honored via the following true story. My father survived WW2 and Korea as a command pilot (with a Guam interlude 1948-1950 where he was a command pilot on retrofitted B-29s for typhoon recons). His flight instructor during WW2 was a Battle of Britton 1941 pilot named directly after Kipling. So I carry that second generation odd name very proudly. Rikki Tivi Tavi, Jungle Book, poem IF… Dad survived two wars because his primary flight instructor was named after writer Kipling. And so I survive today.
Highest regards from one serf to another.

Reply to  hunter
November 11, 2016 2:14 pm

It is NOT a treaty requiring ratification for two distinct reasons. 1. It is nonbinding. 2. There is an opt out.
The simple things to do are revoke the EPA CPP , which is unconstitutional so stayed by SCOTUS, and invoke the Paris agreement opt out clause. Both are simple executive orders that can be done on the first of Trump’s100 days, in about 1 hour. Then pass a simple 1 sentence amendment to CAA declaring that for all CAA purposes, CO2 is not a pollutant. Simpler that redoing the endangerment finding and relitigating Mass. v. EPA, which woild stretch for years. Reid already removed in 2013 the 60 vote filibuster rule that would otherwise have previously applied to that simple legislation in the Senate. Puts in place a permanent legal fix in the first week Congress reconvenes.

Reply to  ristvan
November 11, 2016 2:48 pm

ristvan fer Trump legal adviser!

Reply to  ristvan
November 11, 2016 3:02 pm

Probably not, Beth. i am too deplorable despite my Harvard Law degree.

Greg
Reply to  ristvan
November 11, 2016 3:12 pm

ristvan for AG !
Since US has only “agreement” status for COP22, not ratified, does it even need to opt out?
I an not even sure that there is not some fast dealing going on with the “coming into force” conditions that were announced last week, since it seems that they may be counting the US into the number of countries already engaged ( on the basis of the “agreement” not ratified position ) and thus the 55% threshold they are claiming to have achieved may be false.
Ristvan is much more informed on legailities than I am , I’d like to have his opinion on that issue.

Reply to  ristvan
November 11, 2016 3:28 pm

Given our experience of recent elites, why, ‘deplorability’
has become an asset, Rud – if that is what you are. )

Reply to  ristvan
November 11, 2016 6:47 pm

Greg, there are two legal conflicting standards: international law, only partly binding on the US by treaty, and US binding by the Contsitution. So, under international law the Paris accord is ‘binding’. Except the only binding provision is to submi a new INDC in 4 years. Under US law itmis a mere executive agreement. Undoable by the next executive. Plus. Paris has an explicit opt out. Nobody needs an HLS degree to understand these basics. Opt out is a political nose punch, not legally necessary. Nonbinding INDCs have one Paris enforcement mechanism, UN name and shame. Who cares? “Sticks and stone can hurt my bones, but words will never hurt me.”
US just needs to grow some kindergarten chops. Highest regards.

Reply to  ristvan
November 12, 2016 5:30 am

Rud, a proud history. On 11th November, in Oz we commemorate
Armistice Day, WW1.
Say, on Climate Etc we have you named after Kipling and we have kim. )

milwaukeebob
November 11, 2016 12:52 pm

President Trump’s biggest problem is going to be ferreting out the 1/3 good from the 2/3 bad the Fed. Gov does and the live wood from the dead wood. (Probably about the same ratio.) One way he could do that would be to turn over some Fed. functions to the States (a lot of which are duplicated at State level anyhow) saying here’s 1/3 of the money (divided by 49) that the Fed was spending on X. 49 because of course he would exclude California from that “gift” because they would do something stupid with the money like spend it on a high-speed train from nowhere A to even lesser nowhere B – well, not actually on THE train, but rather on a committee of accountants and university researchers to plan the best way to study the ramifications of implementing a plan (yet to be created) on the best method and most cost effective way to convince the public of the positive environmental effects of riding bicycles to high-speed train stations.
But you other States here’s your Hippocratic oath: DO NO HARM to anyone, particularly business and the State next to you with your policies and actions. If you do, the money will stop.

MarkG
Reply to  milwaukeebob
November 12, 2016 3:50 pm

Shouldn’t be hard. Didn’t 1/3 of Federal employees say they’d quit if Trump became President?

Ernest Bush
Reply to  MarkG
November 13, 2016 2:54 pm

These will turn out to be another bunch of liberal liars.

Paul Westhaver
November 11, 2016 12:58 pm

Bill Nye is soon to be unemployed.

Greg
Reply to  Paul Westhaver
November 11, 2016 1:00 pm

Na, there is always work for clowns.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
November 11, 2016 1:32 pm

Lots of vacancies at McDonalds.

Tom Judd
November 11, 2016 1:06 pm

I found this attachment in the comments to a post at the Powerline blog. I think that now that the election is over we should exhibit the same concern for our opponents’ feelings that have been exhibited to us ‘lo these last eight years. And, I think this is an excellent way to start:
https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Flist%3DFLTtgRqjamnYx8wHNOqjcJpA%26v%3DxNbF9PI9Gjo&h=VAQGJwOx4

Rhoda R
Reply to  Tom Judd
November 11, 2016 2:20 pm

THAT is great!

auto
Reply to  Tom Judd
November 11, 2016 4:01 pm

Tom J
Fabulous!
Almost wet myself – certainly + Dozens!
Spread it far and wide.
But, whilst the recent events are good omens, the Watermelons’ Religion needs to be killed – and Cooked [and Manned??] – otherwise there is a fear that the pendulum may swing again . . .
and Nu-Watermelons will pervert the data again.
Go Donald.
As a brit, I had no vote [quite rightly] on the Trumping of the USA – but, heyyy – I was a Brexiteer!
Auto, rather cheered!!!

Myron Mesecke
November 11, 2016 1:16 pm

Well this Myron is rooting for the other Myron.

November 11, 2016 1:27 pm

Myron Ebell – if you take off the glasses he looks a bit similar to Vladimir Putin.

graphicconception
Reply to  ptolemy2
November 11, 2016 8:14 pm

I bet Hillary’s supporters think he is Vladimir Putin!

al
November 11, 2016 1:30 pm

Holdren is preparing his bucket list.

Resourceguy
Reply to  al
November 11, 2016 1:55 pm

He’s probably at the beach where they created a temporary buyers market with rising seas and scary climate stories.

JimB
November 11, 2016 1:30 pm

First step: Cut off all funding for NGOs that focus on ecology, particularly global warming dangers. Next, cut back on funds for college level ecology courses. In fact, cut back on all college funding.Next, cut back on EPA funding by about …umm…99%. You’re welcome.

Dr. Dave
Reply to  JimB
November 11, 2016 2:00 pm

You’re just getting started…
NASA GISS funding… zero
National Science Foundation funding on global warming… zero
EPA funding on Global Warming… zero
NOAA funding on global warming… zero
State Department funding on global warming… zero
Department of Energy funding on global warming… zero
Department of Defense funding on global warming… zero
The gravy bowl is dry fellas… time to find a new line of work!

brians356