Archive for the ‘Environmentalism’ Category

Via HotAir, from Government Executive:

Environmental Protection Agency workers have done some odd things recently.

Contractors built secret man caves in an EPA warehouse, an employee pretended to work for the CIA to get unlimited vacations and one worker even spent most of his time on the clock looking at pornography.

It appears, however, that a regional office has reached a new low: Management for Region 8 in Denver, Colo., wrote an email earlier this year to all staff in the area pleading with them to stop inappropriate bathroom behavior, including defecating in the hallway.

In the email, obtained by Government Executive, Deputy Regional Administrator Howard Cantor mentioned “several incidents” in the building, including clogging the toilets with paper towels and “an individual placing feces in the hallway” outside the restroom.

Confounded by what to make of this occurrence, EPA management “consulted” with workplace violence “national expert” John Nicoletti, who said that hallway feces is in fact a health and safety risk. He added the behavior was “very dangerous” and the individuals responsible would “probably escalate” their actions.

There are two possible explanations for this.

First explanation is that the EPA is hiring people from the third world.  It’s just possible.  It’s a common occurence at colleges where third world students are taken in who’ve never used flush toilets, aren’t familiar with indoor plumbing, and aren’t familiar with sanitation at all.  Signs like this exist for a reason:

sitting vs squatting on toilet sign

Some places people aren’t used to how toilets work.  Even people from places with public sanitation sometimes leave unexpected messes.  Some folks south of the US have flush toilets but low pressure, so they’ll throw used paper into a trash can next to the toilet, or just on the floor.  People from different parts of Asia and Africa frequently are used to squatting and often don’t know how flushing works.  A lot of folks in the Middle East… well, you just don’t use your left hand to shake there.   They’re really bad.

So this could be a matter of the EPA having really crappy hiring practices and pulling in people from remote third world areas that have failed to assimilate in even the most basic manner.  If you move to some remote jungle place, you learn to dig a cathole and squat.  If you move to the civilized world,  you learn to use a toilet.

Failure to learn how to poop in your host country is not only disgusting, but in this case these are people with regulatory authority who don’t even know how to shit.  If you’ve failed to learn the culture well enough to operate your own bowel movements, you should not be in charge of anything.

Second explanation, and the more likely one: These are filthy, disgusting EPA employees who know how to shit and are willfully crapping everywhere because they’re filthy, malicious animals.

That’s much worse.  A cultural misunderstanding that comes from hiring some ignorant dirt farmer out of blind stupidity – and an ignorant dirt farmer who will be responsible for the interpretation of millions of rules and regulations that destroy American businesses with compliance costs – at least that’s just profound stupidity on the part of the EPA hiring department and profound ignorance on the part of the third worlder.

If culturally acclimated EPA employees from modern nations are doing this, they’re just filthy malicious swine who will shit where they work out of hate and contempt for everything.

A citizen petitioning the EPA to stop using their millions of regulations to crush them would be greeted with the stink of EPA peons’ anal creations and probably walls smeared with brown bureaucrat fingerpaint.  The EPA-crappers’ own coworkers must live and work in their filth whether diligent employees or lazy cretins.  The taxpayers and government funded by those taxpayers that paid for their building and pays their salaries is having steaming clumps of contempt flung at them – and at you if you’re a taxpayer.  It’s all because some disgusting primate has made his workplace – the workplace you paid for – into a sewer.

They’re tasked with Environmental Protection, have been granted the absurd authority to control CO2 – every breath you exhale… and they shit in their own workplace.

Longer version here.  Remember, this is the guy who actively said he will bankrupt the coal industry.

Now, here comes a mandate for 30% cuts in emissions, which are already low.

From WSJ:

WASHINGTON—The Environmental Protection Agency will propose a draft rule on Monday seeking a 30% reduction in carbon-dioxide emissions by 2030 from existing power plants based on emission levels from 2005, according to two people who have been briefed on the rule, setting in motion the main piece of President Barack Obama‘s climate-change agenda.

The rule, scheduled to be completed one year from now, will give flexibility to the states, which must implement the rules and submit compliance plans to EPA by June 2016. States can decide how to meet the reductions, including joining or creating new cap-and-trade programs, deploying more renewable energy or ramping up energy-efficiency technologies.

Either buy carbon indulgencies from Global Warming High Priest Al Gore or throw money at Solyndra or go out of business.  And soon the American people will be experiencing brownouts and blackouts and power loss that will be blamed on the greedy power companies.  There will always be kulaks or counterrevolutionaries or people who are not significantly revolutionary enough who are the cause of misery, never the actual tyrants who engineered it.

The Obama administration is already claiming credit for everything that was done by Bush 10 years ago and that is coming to fruition now.  The Chamber of Commerce (though reprehensible on amnesty) has already come forth warning that the new regulations will cost upwards of $50,000,000,000 for energy producers.  Watching the second Obama video above, he outright states “the companies will pass those costs onto their customers” – you will foot the bill for this.  The EPA is already setting up a legal bulwark to prevent anyone from assailing their new regulations – they’re spending your money to raise your power rates and cut your access to energy and now they’re spending your money on their lawyers to crush anyone who would oppose them.

As usual.

regulations grow freedom dies

From Breitbart:

When Siskiyou County, CA Sheriff John Lopey tried to buy an M1 Garand rifle through the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP), he was denied and told he failed to pass the background check conducted via the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

Lopey is a sheriff: he carries a gun and enforces the law for a living. Prior to being a sheriff, he spent 33 years with the California Highway Patrol and is a retired Army Colonel. He had Top Secret clearance in the Army.

The FBI handles NICS background checks for firearms purchases. Ironically, Lopey recently went through and passed a background check to attend the FBI national academy.

Very interesting, since he’d bought guns within the past year and had no problems.  But then there’s the fact that he’s not very politically popular with the left and the Obama administration, mostly for opposing tyrannical environmental regulations that are destroying his county and region.

He holds ideas that are very unpopular with the current regime and has openly stated them at Support Rural America town hall meetings:

RED BLUFF — Sheriffs from nine Northern California counties on Saturday blasted government regulations and public agencies that, they said, have devastated their counties.

We were sworn to defend America against all enemies, foreign and domestic. It seems we have more enemies that are domestic these days,” said Jon Lopey, Siskiyou County sheriff. “There is a movement to destroy rural America as we know it.”

His pro-rural America, anti-fedgov-leviathan stance is one he holds pretty consistently:

Standing tall and trim in a dark suit and tie, Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey grimly delivers his message of resistance, warning of state and federal regulators moving to usurp control of local resources and constitutional rights.

“We’re in a fight to preserve our heritage, way of life, economy, public safety, health and the welfare of the citizens and the freedoms we hold dear,” he tells meeting rooms packed with his law enforcement peers and their constituents. “This is serious business folks.”

That specific statement went out to an audience of about 300 at a September gathering of sheriffs in Josephine County, Ore., one of more than a half-dozen such public meetings during the past year where Lopey’s remarks have been greeted with approving applause.

“We sheriffs have recognized that some agencies and several special interest groups are using money, influence, politics, regulations and sometimes lies to push an extremist agenda which threatens to literally destroy rural America and our way of life,” he said.

This Huffpo piece names Lopey as one of the left’s most-hated sheriffs in the nation (right next to Joe Arpaio), but the comments are much more informative about the condition of northern California than the Huffpo propaganda.

You can also just consider what Lopey has to say about the Second Amendment and consider if that might make him unpopular with the fedgov.


Now, it’s just speculation that he’d be targeted, hence the “tin foil” tag… but given that the IRS, the ATF, and numerous other fedgov agencies have specifically targeted Obama administration opponents and continue to do so all lends credence to the idea.

Via FOX:

The Los Angeles Times is giving the cold shoulder to global warming skeptics.

Paul Thornton, editor of the paper’s letters section, recently wrote a letter of his own, stating flatly that he won’t publish some letters from those skeptical of man’s role in our planet’s warming climate. In Thornton’s eyes, those people are often wrong — and he doesn’t print obviously wrong statements.

“Simply put, I do my best to keep errors of fact off the letters page; when one does run, a correction is published,” Thornton wrote. “Saying ‘there’s no sign humans have caused climate change’ is not stating an opinion, it’s asserting a factual inaccuracy.”

They’ve shown Andrew Klavan’s dissection of leftist debate to be correct again:

Anthropogenic global warming advocates and watermelon environmentalists pushing their own agenda lieIt happens over and over, and those who oppose “the consensus” are mocked and compared to holocaust deniers?

Manbearpig proven to be fake again and again?

MoS2 Template Master

The solution?  Muzzle dissent!  Block out all observations that are contrary!  It’s what science demands!  Observation that disproves the theory are heretical lies that go against science!  Death to the unbelieversDeath to those who question Manbearpig!

What amounts to a ban on discourse about climate change stirred outrage among scientists who have written exactly that sort of letter.

“In a word, the LA Times should be ashamed of itself,” William Happer, a physics professor at Princeton, told

“There was an effective embargo on alternative opinions, so making it official really does not change things,” said Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism at The Rockefeller University in New York.

“The free press in the U.S. is trying to move the likelihood of presenting evidence on this issue from very low to impossible,” J. Scott Armstrong, co-founder of the Journal of Forecasting and a professor of marketing at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, told

In short: shut up.

All the arctic ice has melted!  Oh, wait, no, that’s totally wrong.  Manbearpig is totally not showing up in the arctic.

Because global warming anthropogenic climate change peddled by Al “Super Serial” Gore, the UN IPCC, and all the other watermelon environmentalists is a scam.

Via HotAir, from UK Daily Mail:

MoS2 Template Master

The 1970s were all about global cooling.  Wattsupwiththat has an extensive catalog of articles on global cooling from the 1970s.  For those who either weren’t alive yet or didn’t notice it, as Levar Burton used to say on Reading Rainbow, don’t take my word for it.  Take Leonard Nimoy’s:


Keep in mind that the people who were telling you the ice is gone and the earth will melt are the same ones who want you to be forced to buy carbon offsets from the carbon exchange they set up – taxing you for your output, production, and existence as though your “carbon footprint” is original sin that can only be paid off with indulgences to the Church of Manbearpig.

Or it could be that plants like carbon dioxide, the earth is a very resilient system, and maybe we should just listen to Woodsy Owl and not outright pollute; rather than going to Al Gore for confessional and paying “sin” taxes to a global wealth and production destruction/redistribution scheme.

Manbearpig busted.  Again.

Happy Earth Day!

Posted: April 22, 2013 by ShortTimer in Environmentalism, Humor, Manbearpig

From the People’s Cube:

Global Warming Is Man-Made maksim peoples cube


… and just like moving to any state, that means assimilating.

Rabid leftist activist Rev. Audette Fullbright wrote demanding that Wyoming submit to her newcomer “educated” demands.  State Representative Hans Hunt replied in the best manner possible.

Via the Blaze:

Dear Representative,

I hope you are taking care of yourself during this busy session. I know it is a challenging, compressed time.

I am writing to express my grave concern about House Bill 105. Ample evidence has shown that schools and guns do not mix, and in particular, guns in the hands of amateurs/non-professionals is extremely dangerous, especially in any highly-charged situation. to expose our children to greater risk in their schools by encouraging more guns on campuses is something that we cannot allow.

My husband and I moved to Wyoming not too long ago. We believed it was a good place to raise children. With the recent and reactive expansion of gun laws and the profoundly serious dangers of fracking, we find we are seriously reconsidering our decision, which is wrenching to all of us. However, the safety of our family must come first. We are waiting to see what the legislature does this session. I know of other new-to-Wyoming families in similar contemplation. Your choices matter. It would be sad to see an exodus of educated, childrearing age adults from Wyoming as a result of poor lawmaking.


Rev. Audette Fulbright

And the response from Hunt:

Rev. Fulbright,

I’ll be blunt. If you don’t like the political atmosphere of Wyoming, then by all means, leave. We, who have been here a very long time (I am proudly 4th generation) are quite proud of our independent heritage. I don’t expect a “mass exodus” from our state just because we’re standing up for our rights. As to your comments on fracking, I would point out that you’re basing your statement on “dangers” that have not been scientifically founded or proved as of yet.

It offends me to no end when liberal out-of-staters such as yourself move into Wyoming, trying to get away from where they came from, and then pompously demand that Wyoming conform to their way of thinking. We are, and will continue to be, a state which stands a head above the rest in terms of economic security. Our ability to do that is, in large part, to our “live and let live” mentality when it comes to allowing economic development, and limiting government oversight. So, to conclude, if you’re so worried about what our legislature is working on, then go back home.


Hans Hunt

Representative Hans Hunt

House District 02

There has been a slow migration of the leftist “educated” elitists who demand that their ideology be accepted as the only choice.  They leave some decrepit state that they’ve thoroughly corrupted and destroyed (like California), then move to a free state (like Colorado), and slowly, progressively destroy it.  Then they move on to the next state, demanding that the leftist ideology that destroyed their last state be implemented in the new one.

Fulbright is a leftist political activist who’s demanding that Wyoming bow to her will and adopt her leftist ideology.  She comes in with the smug attitude that she and her “educated” ideas be adopted.  She posits that guns are bad and that defenseless schools are somehow a good thing – something that people from Wyoming have learned over generations is utter foolishness.  Yet she insists that her “education” dominate their ideas.

Kudos to Representative Hunt for standing up for Wyoming – and I say that as a former resident.

For those unaware, Chris LeDoux, who’s considered the musical voice of Wyoming, wasn’t a native – he assimiliated.


The Casper Tribune, in the usual vein of media everywhere (they certainly aren’t the Greybull Standard), screws things up from almost the first sentence in their own story:

CHEYENNE — A Newcastle state lawmaker is refusing to apologize after telling a Cheyenne minister that her and her family should leave the state if she doesn’t like Wyoming politics.

Those aren’t Wyoming politics, those are Wyoming virtues.  The Equality State doesn’t play favorites.  It doesn’t disarm people to make them “safe” because that doesn’t work.  Wyoming stood up for the citizen so much that it’s now one of only four states with constitutional carry.  Wyoming residents remember things like the Johnson County War.  They know that guns have utility, for good or evil.  Disarming people makes no one safer.

They also know not to trust environmentalists who claim that no one else knows anything about science… especially when that science, as in the anti-fracking case, is backed by political entities opposed to certain industries.

People from Wyoming have seen what happened to Colorado – how the swarm of Californians who moved there with their “great ideas” have turned the once-great state into a pot-smoking basketcase that hates any freedoms other than getting high, led by representatives that want women to be raped rather than letting them defend themselves, and are driving businesses out of Colorado.

The left poisons an environment with its own failed, destructive ideology, then individual leftists move, fleeing the wastelands they leave behind to infect other free areas with their love of oppression of the individual and elevation of the state.  They leave one “utopia” that’s an unliveable hole and go to create another.

One astute commenter paraphrased leftist Fulbright’s demands:

“I moved here, to a place with a different culture, both civil and political, but expect you to kowtow to MY different preferences and change YOUR culture to suit ME. I shouldn’t have to adapt to the way things have been here for generations, I should be able to impose my will, standards and beliefs upon you backwards hicks, because I’m smarter than you. I’m EDUCATED.”

Thank you Representative Hunt for standing up to this.

There’s been a bit of discussion, though not really very much, about Obama’s new CAFE standards that mandate average fleet fuel economy at 54.5 mpg by 2025.  That’s not that far away.  And as noted, the leftist watermelon environmentalists are very fond of making up mandates that simply cannot be met – such as requiring fuel companies to use a fuel that doesn’t exist.  The objective it to get rid of cars they don’t like by making their production nearly impossible or illegal, citizen demand be damned.  But the most interesting car issue has been about a newer car idea from government.

In the last week or so, there’s been a kerfuffle in the car communit about the Tesla S sedan.  To put this out there before we even get started, Tesla is effectively a government project.  They got a loan to the tune of $465 million from you, the taxpayer.  Tesla is a government sponsored “good idea”.  Electric cars are expensive (the roadster runs about $109K), so the proletariat has to ride mass transit, and the Tesla is eco-friendly and expensive, so the limousine liberal set can pat themselves on the back for being “green”.  The poor are shoved into government control, the rich are allowed to feel enlightened.  South African billionaire Elon Musk spent almost a half-million dollars lobbying for his half-billion dollars in taxpayer handouts, all so he could design a car for those who tell you how to live to get them to and from their bureaucratic offices.

Back on Feb 8, the NYT, which has a harsh leftist bias to the point that they aid Al Qaeda by showing where US body armor is weak, and is all about fighting Manbearpig, decided to have one of their reporters test the claim that the $101,000 Tesla S sedan could be driven like a normal car.

WASHINGTON — Having established a fast-charging foothold in California for its electric cars, Tesla Motors has brought its formula east, opening two ultrafast charging stations in December that would, in theory, allow a speedy electric-car road trip between here and Boston.

But as I discovered on a recent test drive of the company’s high-performance Model S sedan, theory can be trumped by reality, especially when Northeast temperatures plunge.

It’s an interesting story of what happens when an enlightened “good idea” meets the real world:

Setting out on a sunny 30-degree day two weeks ago, my trip started well enough. A Tesla agent brought the car to me in suburban Washington with a full charge, and driving at normal highway speeds I reached the Delaware charging dock with the battery still having roughly half its energy remaining. I went off for lunch at the service plaza, checking occasionally on the car’s progress. After 49 minutes, the display read “charge complete,” and the estimated available driving distance was 242 miles.

Fat city; no attendant and no cost.

Except that $465,000,000 taken out of the taxpayer’s pocket.  And the fact that the car runs on coal.

coal mineBut he went on:

As I crossed into New Jersey some 15 miles later, I noticed that the estimated range was falling faster than miles were accumulating. At 68 miles since recharging, the range had dropped by 85 miles, and a little mental math told me that reaching Milford would be a stretch.

Simply put, the cold weather, along with other factors, reduced the battery life.  He started calling Tesla and they told him to shut off the heater.  And they told him do do “regenerative braking“, which will conserve energy, but won’t actually recharge batteries.  You can’t burn energy to go forward and then stop and get all that energy back by stopping, because energy was expended in moving from one place to another.  Tesla’s engineers apparently think that the laws of thermodynamics don’t apply to them just because they’re friends with Obama and he can tell Eric Holder not to prosecute.

The NYT reporter quoted Obama’s leftist watermelon environmentalist who wants $8/gallon gas Energy Secretary Steven Chu:

At the Washington Auto Show last month, Dr. Chu, who has since announced his plan to leave office in the next few weeks, discussed the Energy Department’s goal of making electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids as cheap and convenient as comparable gasoline-powered cars.

He continued: “We can’t say this everywhere in America yet, but driving by a gasoline station and smiling is something everyone should experience.”

Chu’s decided what you should experience, what’s good for you, and he will make you drive an electric car by killing the gas car.  I could dissect the leftist tyrannical knows-what’s-best-for-you mindset of Steven Chu, but I’ll move on to a simple fact of why people won’t be smiling as they look at gas stations.  From the NYT:

I drove a state-of-the-art electric vehicle past a lot of gas stations. I wasn’t smiling.

Instead, I spent nearly an hour at the Milford service plaza as the Tesla sucked electrons from the hitching post. When I continued my drive, the display read 185 miles, well beyond the distance I intended to cover before returning to the station the next morning for a recharge and returning to Manhattan.

To get 185 miles of range in a mostly fuel-inefficient (but powerful) Ford F250 that could pull a Tesla S on a trailer, I can pull into a gas station and get those 185 miles of range in about four minutes, unless it’s a very slow pump.  Then I’ll be back on the road.  To get that 185 miles of range in a Ford Focus, you need maybe two minutes, because that’s only about 6 gallons of gas.  You also don’t need to turn off your heater when you’re driving, and don’t lose huge amounts of mileage in the cold.

And then, for the NYT reporter, things got worse.  He stopped overnight and a charge of 90 miles dropped to about 25, short of what he needed for the last leg of the two-day trip.

…“Car is shutting down,” the computer informed me. I was able to coast down an exit ramp in Branford, Conn., before the car made good on its threat.

Tesla’s New York service manager, Adam Williams, found a towing service in Milford that sent a skilled and very patient driver, Rick Ibsen, to rescue me with a flatbed truck. Not so quick: the car’s electrically actuated parking brake would not release without battery power, and hooking the car’s 12-volt charging post behind the front grille to the tow truck’s portable charger would not release the brake. So he had to drag it onto the flatbed, a painstaking process that took 45 minutes. Fortunately, the cab of the tow truck was toasty.

At 2:40 p.m., we pulled into the Milford rest stop, five hours after I had left Groton on a trip that should have taken less than an hour. Mr. Ibsen carefully maneuvered the flatbed close to the charging kiosk, and 25 minutes later, with the battery sufficiently charged to release the parking brake and drive off the truck, the car was back on the ground. A Model S owner who had taken delivery the previous day watched with interest.

Tesla’s chief technology officer, J B Straubel, acknowledged that the two East Coast charging stations were at the mileage limit of the Model S’s real-world range. Making matters worse, cold weather inflicts about a 10 percent range penalty, he said, and running the heater draws yet more energy. He added that some range-related software problems still needed to be sorted out.

You can’t drive it like a normal car.  It doesn’t work.  You can’t use it for road trips, and the “super recharge” stations run on coal, and take an hour to charge.  When the batteries get cold, you lose power, when you lose power, the car shuts down.

But we spent $465,000,000 on a “good idea”.

tesla s flatbed

The South African billionaire needed $465,000,000 of your money to make a car that doesn’t work and build infrastructure for an idea that as far as cars go, was cutting edge in 1884 but abandoned back in the early 20th century.  The South African billionaire then went on to rant about how the NYT was out to get him.

Of course, as Jalopnik noted, third parties shot that paranoid criticism down.  And the NYT reporter wrote not just one, but two responses of his own.

Virtually everyone says that I should have plugged in the car overnight in Connecticut, particularly given the cold temperature. But the test that Tesla offered was of the Supercharger, not of the Model S, which we already know is a much-praised car. This evaluation was intended to demonstrate its practicality as a “normal use,” no-compromise car, as Tesla markets it. Now that Tesla is striving to be a mass-market automaker, it cannot realistically expect all 20,000 buyers a year (the Model S sales goal) to be electric-car acolytes who will plug in at every Walmart stop.

Knowing then what I know now about the car, its sensitivity to cold and additional ways to maximize range, I certainly would have treated the test differently. But the conclusion might not have been any better for Tesla.

It wouldn’t have been.  The thing is, it’s not a normal use car.  It’s a niche car for people who want to out-smug Prius owners, and have $100K to do it with.

Some CNN Money reporters went on to repeat the distance of the drive from DC to Boston, but not the duration of the drive.  They made the drive successfully, but as they note:

There were some differences with my ride and the one from the New York Times. The weather for mine was about 10 degrees warmer. And I did mine in one day; the reviewer from the Times split it into two.

The NYT reporter stopped overnight and his Tesla’s battery died in the cold.  He didn’t plug it in because he wanted to drive it as a “normal use” car, which it clearly isn’t.

Some of the advice given to the NYT reporter sounds like Tesla is trying to apply Keynesian economics to cars:

It was also Tesla that told me that an hour of charging (at a lower power level) at a public utility in Norwich, Conn., would give me adequate range to reach the Supercharger 61 miles away, even though the car’s range estimator read 32 miles – because, again, I was told that moderate-speed driving would “restore” the battery power lost overnight. That also proved overly optimistic, as I ran out of power about 14 miles shy of the Milford Supercharger and about five miles from the public charging station in East Haven that I was trying to reach.

If you spend some power to run the car and “prime the pump”, the car will magically keep running!

unicorn fart

Those people are so foolish they don’t understand that power has to come from somewhere.  It would be like calling Surefire and having them tell you that you can make your flashlight brighter by turning it on for a while, because the batteries don’t run down when used, they’re charged by being used.  You’d be wondering if the guy is an idiot, or if he’s just an asshole on his last day.

It doesn’t work that way with flashlights, or cars.  Doesn’t work that way with government spending or government cars, though some governments and their car companies think it does.  They think wrong.

In addition to the $465,000,000 in taxpayer money for a car that can’t drive 200 miles over two days without spending hours of downtime being plugged into a coal mine, there’s also the fact that if you leave them parked, they might never start again:

One owner, Max Drucker, provided with an email he sent to Telsa Motors CEO Elon Musk saying his battery was rendered “dead and unrecoverable” after he left the unplugged car in storage for six weeks.

“I had no idea I could be putting my car at risk,” Drucker told by phone. “This was an accident. I didn’t know.”

Drucker, first identified by Green Car Reports, took delivery of Roadster No. 340 in May 2009, more than a year after placing a $50,000 deposit for the vehicle. He said he has driven the car 13,000 miles and followed Tesla’s service guidelines. He moved into a rental house while his home was being renovated and parked his Roadster in the garage, leaving it with a 25 percent state of charge. He didn’t touch it for six weeks and found it dead when he attempted to start it earlier this month.

“It wouldn’t do anything,” he said. “It wouldn’t even unlock. It took four guys two hours to get the car out of my garage and onto a flatbed truck. The car wouldn’t even roll.”

He sent the car to the Tesla store in Los Angeles. Three days later, Drucker said, Tesla told him the battery must be replaced at a cost of $32,000 plus tax and labor. He said Tesla told him the warranty will not cover the repair, and his car remains at the Tesla store.

Sounds like a government car.

The government spent $465,000,000 of your money giving it to a South African billionaire to develop a car that costs $100,000 that as a brand new car that runs on coal and can’t go from Boston to DC without special treatment and constantly talking to the manufacturer.

Top Gear reviewed the car and both liked it and found it horribly impractical because it takes forever to charge and it runs out of battery life.  So naturally, Tesla sued them.  And Top Gear won the suit.

“But as a device for moving you and your things around, it is about as much use as a bag of muddy spinach.”

- Jeremy Clarkson on the Tesla Roadster

The Tesla is a government-sanctioned program, forcibly funded by taxpayers (remember at April 15th that you’ve paid for these bags of muddy spinach), with that $465,000,000 given to a South African billionaire so he can have funds to sue anyone who questions the holiness of the car that will stop Manbearpig.

If it was his own car company, then it would be a simple indictment of electric cars as technological throwbacks due to their massive limitations, no matter if they do have good 0-60 times.  But as is, it’s another reminder not only of Milton Friedman’s statement that no one spends money as carefully as the person to whom it belongs; but it’s also an indicator of what government mandates amount to when they meet the real world – fanciful ideas, but nothing that works.

China In Desperate Need of Perri-Air

Posted: January 30, 2013 by ShortTimer in Environmentalism, Humor, Marxism, Spaceballs

Life imitates Spaceballs:

For the fourth time this year, a murky haze has descended over north China, leaving residents of Beijing choking on toxic smog. China’s air hasn’t been this bad since 1954, according to the state-run People’s Daily newspaper.

In a remarkable record of dirty air, 24 out of January’s first 29 days this year had air classified as hazardous. And the skies have still not cleared.

The air is so bad that wealthy Chinese entrepreneur, Chen Guangbiao, is selling fresh air in soft drinks cans, similar to bottled drinking water. Each can is sold for 5RMB or about 80 cents.

From the NYT:

WASHINGTON — President Obama made addressing climate change the most prominent policy vow of his second Inaugural Address, setting in motion what Democrats say will be a deliberately paced but aggressive campaign built around the use of his executive powers to sidestep Congressional opposition.

“We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that failure to do so would betray our children and future generations,” Mr. Obama said on Monday at the start of eight sentences on the subject, more than he devoted to any other specific area. “Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.”

This is laughable.

Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.

The “overwhelming judgement of science” ignores the scientific method.  Science is about hypothesis, observation, analysis of results, and conclusions based on what theory seems to fit with the hypothesis and data.  Sometimes hypotheses are proven wrong.  Other times, people like the East Anglia Climate Research Unit simply fabricate observation data to confirm their hypothesis, since they already know the conclusion they want.  So the “overwhelming judgement of science” is a complete fabrication.

Now, as to the second part, that “none can avoid” the devastation of nature.  This sounds like some primitive culture fearful of the sky gods.

The witch doctor “scientist” tells the ignorant tribesmen that they must bring him virgins and make him chief of the tribe so that he can prevent those raging fires and powerful storms.  Only he has the power to stop these – and you must stop eating of the fruit that grows by the river – only the medicine man may eat those sweet fruits because they give him strength to fight the storms!  For you, the pitiful tribesman, it would harm you – but for him, it gives him the power he needs!  So bring him those fruits!  And bring him those virgins that he needs to keep his strength as well.  Only he has the power – he, with overwhelming judgement of the sky gods – can protect you!  Only he can protect you from the monster that comes in on those storms – the monster – OF MANBEARPIG!

It's Manbearpig!  I'm super serial!

Every time the storms are worse, it’s because the tribe hasn’t given him the power to fight manbearpig.  Every time the fires are worse, it’s because they kept one of their daughters away from him, and he could not absorb her virgin powers and so he did not have the strength to do battle with manbearpig.  Every time they keep some of the sweet river fruit to themselves – that’s why the drought came – because they were greedy and kept it from the shaman.  Every time the ignorant tribesmen don’t do exactly as the medicine man commands, that’s why manbearpig will attack them.

For all the leftist accusations of fearmongering, this is probably one of the worst examples.  They tell you that you’re responsible for the planet dying – if you don’t give them enough power to fight it.  Since there’s never enough power to fight the weather, they just need more.  And just like the small-scale tyrant shaman in our story holding the tribe in terror, so to do these global cooling global warming climate change fearmongers today try to hold us in terror.

The rich and powerful can buy carbon indulgences (offsets) so they can continue to sin against nature by their own theology – and conveniently that money goes into Al Gore’s pocket.  Any who question this are considered heretics, and lumped with the most vile of people.

One article in particular from Micha Tomkiewicz, who is himself a holocaust survivor, has earned the ire of climate denialists around the web because in addition to the comparison of the tactics of global warming denialists and holocaust deniers, he additionally creates a moral comparison. While not saying it’s as bad a holocaust denial, Tomkiewicz does suggest they might be denying the possibility of a future holocaust:

I make my “climate change denier” claim for one reason. It’s easy today to teach students to condemn the Holocaust, but it’s much more difficult to teach them how to try to prevent future genocides. There are different kinds of genocides and they don’t repeat themselves; they come to us in different ways. I am not suggesting that the Holocaust is just like climate change. But what I am suggesting is that even though it’s hard to see a genocide – any genocide – coming. The future is hard to predict, but we can see this one coming. This genocide is of our own making, and it will effect everyone, not just one group or country.

Not to walk back to another topic too much, but the Holocaust was done by armed tyrants against unarmed men.  The Holodomor, the Armenian Genocide, and numerous other genocides have been perpetrated by armed groups in power through various means against unarmed, subjugated groups.  Relatively easy to understand.  It’s actually easy to prevent future genocides – if people have the tools to resist, they can fight back. (That’s why the JPFO exists – to make sure of “Never Again”.)

With climate change, we have scientists who have equated their fight against Manbearpig to fighting against the Holocaust.  They have declared “consensus” and that “the science is settled”.  They invoke the murder of millions to shame into submission those who would oppose them.  Any who would question their global cooling global warming climate change conclusions are considered vile, genocidal scum like the Nazis, worthy only of derision, ridicule, and considered subhuman trash who need to be exterminated themselves before they kill the planet.

That’s not how science works.

Science is a process of creating theories based on repeated observations.  Science is not demonizing those who question.  Science itself is questioning.

Alinskyite politics, where all the angels are on one side and all the devils are on the other, are like what current global cooling global warming climate changers are about.

If one were to look at this from an anthropological point of view, this would be a transparent power play, and every bit as clear as the tyrannical shaman.  If one looks at it from a modern political point of view, one sees that this is watermelon environmentalism.  That is, it’s green on the outside, red on the inside; environmentalism surrounding collectivism/socialism/communism.  For some reason, the solutions to global cooling global warming climate change have always been the same.

From Zombie at PJ Media:

I just finished reading a terrifying new book about climate change. I learned this:

• Climate change is happening faster than we realize and it will have catastrophic consequences for mankind.
• There’s very little we can do to stop it at this late stage, but we might be able to save ourselves if we immediately take these necessary and drastic steps:

- Increase our reliance on alternative energy sources and stop using so much oil and other carbon-based fuels;
- Adopt energy-efficient practices in all aspects of our lives, however inconvenient;
- Impose punitive taxes on inefficient or polluting activities to discourage them;
- Funnel large sums of money from developed nations like the U.S. to Third World nations;
- In general embrace all environmental causes.

You of course recognize these as the solutions most often recommended to ameliorate the looming crisis of Global Warming. But there’s a little glitch in my narrative. Because although the book I read was indeed about climate change, it wasn’t about Global Warming at all; it was instead about “The Coming of the New Ice Age,” and it isn’t exactly “new” — it was published in 1977.

It’s a rather interesting book:

weather conspiracy ice age pg 9Oh noes, we’re all going to die!

weather conspiracy ice age pg23

Even the BBC agrees.

weather conspiracy ice age pg59

Zombie writes:

Interestingly, the “Impact Team” also gives space to the other faction of climatologists — whom they dub the “hot-earth men,” a primitive term for “Global Warmists.” The hot-earth men are the mortal enemies of the “cool-earth men,” i.e. the ice age predictors, who are obviously more correct and who are therefore given the soapbox throughout the book. What we see here in 1977 is an interesting historical pivot point: The crisis-mongers needed an ecological disaster to hype, and at that moment in history there were two factions battling for the microphone, each trumpeting the exact opposite scenario: the “hot-earth men” and the “cool-earth men.” The media weighed the two views, decided that the cool-earth men had more evidence, more team members and a better argument, and so ran with the “new ice age” story. When that didn’t pan out, they later dumped the cool-earth men and embraced their rivals.

And there’s the rub.  We’ve been told all this stuff before.  The solutions, as noted, are always the same – we as individuals have to give up our liberty to some governing body that will “save” us from ourselves; whether it be the weather shaman who demands the best food and our daughters, or whether it be the global cooling global warming climate change fearmongers today.

manbearpig snake oil peoples cube

I’ll quote from the holocaust deniers=Manbearpig deniers guys again, attempting to explain it all away:

Climate change denialism shares all of these features. Denialists like Inhofe (Morano’s boss) allege a global warming “hoax”. This conspiracy theory suggests that thousands of scientists worldwide are all operating from the same playbook (the Protocols of the Al Gore), falsifying data for the purpose of creating regulations to restrict business, and secretly working to create one world government. Or that somehow peer-review and grant rewards only go to those who back the consensus, the classic “grantsmanship” conspiracy theory that is contradicted by the fact that scientists encourage and reward revolutionary results as long as they are well-grounded in data. It sounds ridiculous, but these are their arguments. How one could possibly manage to make thousands of people fabricate evidence for peer reviewed journals all to say the same thing and not be detected is beyond belief. And before the cranks show up and suggest the East Anglia emails are of any significance, let’s move on to number two:

The cherry picking of papers, often from journals that are overrun by cranks like Energy and Environment, and even the cherry-picking of individual data points or time periods is rampant. The theft of the East Anglia emails, which were then cherry-picked and quoted out of context to create the false appearance of deception on the part of scientists is another excellent example.

First off:

Second, like all big political movements with bigger objectives, these Manbearpig-worshipers may not realize what they’re doing.  The Manbearpigger goes on to say that the East Anglia emails are meaningless because a bunch of other scientists who agree with Manbearpig agreed that they were meaningless.  And anyone who questions them isn’t an expert, so they don’t realize how stupid they are and can’t make decisions (Dunning-Kruger).

Now, I may not know everything about climate science, but I subscribed to Science News for nearly a decade when they were in their weekly format.  I cancelled when they went to bi-weekly and they added an editorial page.  One of the first editorials they did was on the need for “advocacy science” to save us from Manbearpig.  Suddenly, there was a political objective to science; there was a pressing political and emotional need that demanded that they find the “right conclusions” and make the “right policies”.  That’s not science.  That’s advocacy journalism at best, propaganda at worst – the gatekeeper to information makes the decision on what you need to know and what you don’t.

Just like I’m mocking global cooling global warming Manbearpig, so too is the Manbearpig worshiper mocking those who question his “settled” science, calling them cranks, quacks, and idiots who engage in cognative biases that make them think they know something, when only he, holy defender of the Codex of Science Truth Fact of Manbearpig can know the Righteous Word Of Manbearpig.  Of course, I’m mocking him for his defense of rigid orthodoxy and Manbearpig zealotry.  He’s going the Godwin’s law route because SHUT UP!

Consider this:

red sprite lightning

That’s a sprite.  It’s a lightning phenomenon that wasn’t discovered until 1989.

I think that’s pretty cool, but it’s very sciency in a department I know little about.  Just tossing it out there because it shows how little we as humankind still know, and how our understanding of the world is still yielding new discoveries.

But I know politicians, and I know people, and I know political swindlers who create crises to exploit.  Human nature hasn’t changed.

To dissect the Manbearpig worshiper’s denial of any questioning his orthodoxy, there are many scientists taught by other scientists who are taught what has become politically unquestionable.  Those who teach the teachers will dictate how the students learn.  This is why they have lectures on subversion.  Whether as overt as that or more subtle, it’s how people interact.  Those who create bogus data, falsify it, or otherwise taint it with the conclusion they know they should reach aren’t necessarily doing so because their marching orders from Al Gore (who just sold his TV station to petro-barons in Qatar) – they’re doing so because that’s what they’ve been told to believe, whether or not it’s true.  “Grantsmanship” also stem from the fact that the people handing out grants, the people involved in these circles, are mostly of the same mindset.  They have the belief that they’re saving the world, and anyone who questions that is the devil.  They don’t need marching orders – they’re individually capable of acting on their ideology, and the ideological guidance they’ve been given drives them.  Thousands of people aren’t necessarily on some list of conspirators that parrot the party line, but they’re ideological clones – believing in the same thing.  They are missionaries of Manbearpig, and no matter their sins, they are here to save you from yourself – and if you oppose them, you support the Holocaust.

Just to contrast, my ideological compass gears me towards the maximum amount of liberty for the maximum amount of people with the minimum of coercion.  Individuals know what’s best for them in their own life.  Those who make bad choices typically learn from experience and stop making those bad choices.  Those who don’t live with the consequences of their actions – and that teaches them, too.  With plenty of good examples, people can see what works and what doesn’t, and absent any enabling of bad choices, people will mostly make good ones for themselves.  As individuals mature, they’ll see that protecting the freedom of others and helping to ensure the same choices they had are still around can lead to better lives for everyone, and they’ll raise their children up to make good decisions, or if they choose not to have children, they’ll still act as examples for others to follow or avoid, for good or ill.

Through that prism, I can see the same lists of demands from global cooling nuts in the 1970s as from global warming nuts in the 1990s as from “climate change” nuts today.  They have the same ends, with their means only being separated by whether it’s hot or cold or just “different” outside.

Now, were I to do a apply the scientific method to this, I could do it this way:

Question: Is climate change valid?
Observation: Australia’s going through a hot summer, last summer where I live was hot.  Maybe.  But the backers for it aren’t acting very sciency.
Hypothesis: Climate change is a political tool.
Test the Hypothesis: We can observe trial & error in the news anyway, so I’ll run with that for now.  We can see that those who defend climate change have changed their own positions from global cooling to global warming to now the non-substantive “change”.  Further observation shows that those who support climate change have seemingly always demanded more control over the individual in order to fight climate change.  Actions of climate change supporters mirror those of the political left. Data is all included in the above blog entry.
Analysis, Interpretation & Conclusion: Climate change mirrors politics on the left in a lot of ways.  Whether it’s the left hijacking science or simply riding its coattails is unknown, but not necessarily important, either.  The results of changes that climate change supporters wish to push are the same as Malthusians and those who believe in both people overpopulation and consumption overpopulation believe.  No one is exempt from control by either the political or scientific entities if they were to get their way.  Climate science itself might not be a political tool, and would be an interesting science to study, but it certainly is not settled in the least.  There are those using it as a political cudgel to fabricate a crisis in order to push for demands they were making before they settled on the reason of “climate change”.  Those who are on the receiving end of “climate change” are expected to change their living standards, while those who are dictating that “climate change” is a threat stand to benefit from it and gain power, like the primitive shaman.  This hurts the majority of individuals while favoring a few.

For all the Manbearpig worshiper claims that “evil energy corporations are behind it” and other such accusations, the problem with that is that those same “evil energy corporations” have investments in so-called green energy.  GE has made huge amounts of money by claiming to be green, while scamming the taxpayer – all by getting Manbearpig worshipers to tilt at windmills.  Petrochemical dictators in the Middle East have been funding leftist environmentalist propaganda in the US in order to protect their own bottom lines.

So, to sum up – Manbearpig is a scam.  It’s a power play.  We’ve been told it’s going to be hot, it’s going to be cold, it’s going to be different and everything else.  Global cooling/warming/climate change is a political tool right now to push an agenda.  It is watermelon environmentalism, with collectivism at its core, with reduction of the individual at its core.  The science really doesn’t matter, because the means to that power, whether it be cooling/warming/change don’t matter.  It’s a politically fabricated crisis that can be always on the horizon, a crisis that has never materialized and doesn’t ever have to materialize, but a crisis that demands immediate action.  It’s an ongoing constant threat that means those who are politically correct need more power from you the invididual, and they can always demand you do something “for the children”.

From the 10 10 Campaign, which wanted people to cut their carbon emissions by 10%.  If you haven’t seen it, you should really watch it – it gives you some idea of how these people think:

It’s amazing how much the left loves the blood of children to try to force you to do things.

Manbearpig remains a fictional fear-mongering tool used as a means to an end – power.  And despite being a giant fraud, Manbearpig is back for 2013.

>Manbearpig out of the bag - I'm super serial!