The Promise of The Trump Presidency: Decline and Fall of "Political Correctness"

"I'll use the word anchor baby."

With that phrase, Donald J. Trump ushered in the end of the "political correctness" era.  

The Washington Times put up this headline almost a year ago:  Why Trump may be winning the war on ‘political correctness’ :

“ ‘Political correctness’ are the two words that best respond to everything that a conservative feels put upon,” ...[it is] a validation that what many on the right see as legitimate policy and cultural differences are not the same as racism, sexism or heartlessness. (emphasis mine)

In, The Rise of Political Correctness,  Angelo M. Codevilla observes that Politically Correctness originated in the communist party, at a time when Stalin was it's figurehead.  It appears that Political Correctness is another term for Propaganda.    They are synonyms. 

"the Party’s interest is to be treated as a reality that ranks above reality itself... Progressive parties everywhere have sought to... force those under their thumbs to sing their tunes or to shut up.. [but] they have been unable to [hide] the gap between political correctness and reality.

It's about time we bid goodbye to Propaganda like Political Correctness.  As in all other things socialistic...  "good ideas should not be mandatory."

That is the promise of the Trump Presidency, the Decline and Fall of Political Correctness.  

Know Your Sources: YouTube, Twitter, FaceBook and Microsoft

Consortium of Media Giants Oppose Free Speech  If FaceBook brands you "extremist" you could automatically be banned by YouTube (Google), Twitter, and Microsoft too.  

Web giants YouTube , Facebook , Twitter and Microsoft will step up efforts to remove extremist content from their websites by creating a common database.  The companies will share 'hashes' - unique digital fingerprints they automatically assign to videos or photos - of extremist content they have removed from their websites to enable their peers to identify the same content on their platforms.

The obvious problem is their definition of "extremism" is subjective.  They have a duty to responsibly prevent people from the equivalent of shouting "fire" in a crowded movie theater. So, they must take a first amendment balance.

However, they do not consider far left propaganda extreme, rather, they consider it "politically correct" speech, and instead, they harshly censor libertarian free thinkers.  

YouTube even censors well known Libertarian PragerU, as seen in this screenshot taken this date.  

What does PragerU do?  "We help millions of people understand the fundamental values that shaped America...These values are Judeo-Christian at their core and include the concepts of freedom of speech, a free press, free markets and a strong military to protect and project those values... 

Yes, your sources from FaceBook to Twitter tilt strongly towards the left-0-sphere.  In a well-documented controversy, Facebook's Zuckerberg held a rare meeting to address valid concerns of oppressed libertarians and other censored conservatives.  

Only a few days after that, Facebook was "up to its old tricks of silencing conservatives and right-wingers."  in this case, banning a Libertarian Defending Free Speech. 

Facebook buckles to the "mob justice' approach, and it only takes one complaint on FB And Twitter. 

Sarah Palin for Sec State

Sarah campaigned relentlessly for The Donald.  She's going to be on the team, the whisper is as VA Secretary.  Further, as of this writing, Predict it doesn't even have Sarah Palin listed in the running for Sec. State.


Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska, Vice-Presidential Candidate, outsider and libertarian would make an excellent Sec. of State.  She easily passes senate confirmation.   Moreover, as a former Secretary of State, the future Sarah Palin would stand a very good chance to become the first woman President.

On the negative side, this would allow her to challenge to Trump in 2020, should she choose to do so.  I don't believe that would bother Donald Trump's decision process, however.

Hard Dawn says it well:

There is simply no one else like here on the global stage today. Her honesty is as bracing as it is beautiful. She speaks eloquently of her passions and her patriotism. There is an unmistakable grace to her intellect. It is deft, defying the fashionable sarcasms and pettiness of our media age. And when she speaks to the heartland, the heartland listens. No one commands the respect on both sides of the aisle that Palin does. She is a phenomenon that spreads beyond party lines. 

Know Your Sources: Reuters

   

Reuters latest article (Reunited in Death) glorifies the unification of murderers in their death.  
These violent, far left radicals seek to emulate Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.  
Then there is Venezuela's Chavez.  He the evil dictator who bankrupted his nation (into Starvation!), also glorified and emulated Castro.

Copy originally read as follows: "Guevara, who once approximated Castro's charisma and influence, also embarked on guerrilla missions in Latin America, dying in battle in Bolivia in 1967."  Later it was corrected to read "...he was captured and executed by CIA-backed Bolivian soldiers in 1967 aged 39."  It was the policy of the United States to oppose communism, banana republics and brutal dictators.   The main US intelligence agencies implemented this policy. Reuters trivializes this by saying the "CIA" opposed Guevara when it was the United States of America.  

The reference to "missions" places him in the company of the Catholic Church missions along El Camino Real.  They also enslaved the local populaces for labor.  

Buried in the article, Reuters admits Guevara was the man in charge of the Castro Death Squads, and he also ran the economy and doled out the wealth, confiscated by Castro, to an enslaved populace. These barbaric acts of violence and slavery are trivialized as being necessary for the revolution.

There are radicals like the holocaust deniers and those that trivialize it. For example, Holocaust on Ice ice dancing artists from Russia are sparking worldwide outrage, trivializing life (and death) in concentration camps.

The radicals on the left firmly have Reuters in their grip! These are the same violent leftists that promote "mob rule" as a substitute for justice.

Reuters is firmly in the grip of far left radicals.

Update:  Reuters deleted the article but these screenshots document enough to show the adulation heaped upon these murderers.  This is part of the propaganda war, Reuters initially puts out far left views (like this) and then substitutes a more moderate view.

  --------
  MORE: Newsbusters summarizes all of the Leftist Propaganda Sources  here.  They include:
NBC News
ABC News
MSNBC
CNN
New York Times
CBS News
Grealdo Rivera on FNC
CBS This Morning                

George Takei: Eternal Propagandist

This recount may not result in much. But Mr. Trump, know this: We will fight, challenge, and oppose you, everywhere, all the time.

— George Takei (@GeorgeTakei) November 26, 2016

Well George Takei just made himself irrelevant for the next eight years.  He announces his intention to oppose the President of the USA on everything he does. 

In Castro's Cuba, he would have been shot.  

Election Recount: "Nothing To See Here, Move Along"

Drudge, And A Lot Of People, Are Making A Big Deal of This.

It's no big deal.

This recount is a wasted, desperate effort on the part of a radical left, one that suddenly found itself unexpectedly and completely void of power.  Now, grasping at straws, they must do... something!

Nothing Will Come Of The Recount

The energy being put into the recount is wasted.  As soon as the recount is over, the radical leftists will turn their attention to impeachment.  An endless drumbeat will sound "it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when" will be the tone of coverage of the New York Times.

Hillary's Involvement Appropriate -- Trump Should Join For The Same Reasons

"Because we had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology, we had not planned to exercise this option ourselves," Clinton campaign attorney Marc Elias wrote Saturday: "... now that a recount has been initiated... we intend to participate in order to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides....Regardless of the potential to change the outcome in any of the states, we feel it is important, on principle, to ensure our campaign is legally represented in any court proceedings and represented on the ground in order to monitor the recount process itself..." 

Nothing wrong with that.  Nothing to see here... move along.   

NYTimes on Castro

Fidel Castro murdered more than 5000 of his political opponents, and confiscated the wealth of the nation of Cuba.  Then he doled it out over sixty years to an enslaved populace.  That is the legacy of Castro.  

Documented deaths and disappearances here.

Some of the atrocities are documented here.  

So how do the powers-that-be note this for posterity?  

The NYTimes and President-elect Trump statements on Castro's demise could not more starkly in contrast.  Here is Trump: 

The NYTimes headline, and lead.  

The Times portrait of Castro as "revolutionary" like Steve Jobs, is more than 8000 words long.

  

It's only after slugging through more than 3200 words do you find out he murdered more than 500 of his political opponents when he took power.  You can almost hear the editorial staff in the back room: "Forget about those 500 murders and the confiscation of the wealth of the nation, that's an afterthought we can bury in the article.  He's a communist, after all."  This is why the NYTimes is nothing more than the mouthpiece of the enemy.  The Times glorified a murderer, because he is a communist.

In contrast, President-Elect Trump properly notes that confiscating the wealth of a nation, enslaving its populace and 5000 murders, cannot justify a legacy.

Who do you trust?

More:  Even Obama is to the right of the NYTimes.
More:  The online version Leer en español"read in Spanish" link as well.  No surprise, as the NYT is 17% owned by Mexican Billionaire Carlos Slim, one of the only men in the world more wealthy than President-elect Trump.  Moreover, when Castro was exiled to Mexico in 1954, so the ties with the Times, Mexico and the radical communist left are deep. 

Hamilton

They booed him?  No!  There were As Many Yays as Boos!

And then the speech:

“Vice President-elect Pence, we welcome you and we truly thank you for joining us here at ‘Hamilton: An American Musical.’ We really do,” Dixon, who also asked the crowd not to boo Pence, said.

Dixon had the class to ask the audience to behave.

 “We, sir, we are the diverse America ..."

However, the notion that Dixon speaks for "the diverse America" is a bit much.  Trump supporters include significant numbers of Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, LGBT, and Muslims.  They are Vocal Followers, and their numbers will grow as Trump keeps generating Win!.

So, please, take note Dixon, you can not speak for "the Diverse."  Moreover, such behavior is bullying.  It's time to stop the bullying.

"...who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us, our planet, our children, our parents "

America's justice system is the best on earth.  

Of those that criticize him for being a racist, they cite his immigration policy.  The Trump policy will, however, be to remove the radical criminal element, in the guise of gangs like MS-13 or those that extort illegal aliens such as smugglers.  Trump believes they should not be part of our culture, and I agree.

There is another concern, that the black market economy will be destroyed.  Under Trump, the black market economy will flourish, because Trump is no economic dummy... and he will not destroy the black market economy. Yes, the Trump Effect will likely shrink the labor supply, however, it will be the criminal element which will be targeted, and that's fine with me.

So, Dixon, after reviewing your claim, I am still with Trump, and you do not speak for the Diverse America.  Enough propaganda.

Elsewhere:

"Partly because he so frequently spoke in derogatory terms about Mexicans and Muslims,... 

I am so confused about this... Trump's policies are not directed at Mexicans and Muslims.  They are directed at criminals and terrorists.

...partly because his campaign won the support of white supremacists,

Did he seek the support of White Supremacists?  Please, this is a no brainer...

... the standard liberal explanation for Trump’s victory is race. The argument is that Trump was the beneficiary of a “Whitelash.”"

If this is the basis for the argument against Trump, then it's over.  There is no whitelash.  Trump has a 50 year spotless record as a humanitarian, and plenty of support from people of all colors.  He's above all the ignorant racists, and you should be as well.

He was elected to clean out a corrupt Washington, reduce crime, and put Americans first.

Dixon said: "or defend us and uphold our inalienable rights, sir. " among our inalienable rights include a right to die a peaceful death, and not a violent one at the hands of a violent culture.  It's our duty as Americans to enforce the law and deport criminals, anyone who interferes is aiding and abetting criminals, which is a crime in many states.

For those that believe he is unfit, Trump were truly unfit, Hamilton's Federalist Paper number 68 allows for the nation to express it's disapproval directly and now.

We are a nation of laws, again.

Jonathan Pie "Quit Attacking People For Raising an Opinion"

This is Jonathan Pie, who I am seeing for the first time.  

 Now, a sample of the comments from that video: (From this page)

For the first time in my life as a liberal, I feel like my side no longer has the moral high ground. We fought for so long to become the majority and once we did, we went and did the same shit that we accused the right of doing. We demonized, lied, bullied, and belittled the other side because we could, and because it was our turn to dish out the pain.

I never looked at it like this before. I'm apart of the problem. Thanks for that verbal ass beatin I needed it.

I'm a millennial, and one of the major reasons I supported Trump was the snarky, condescending, elitist attitudes that come from the left. If you are right of centre, they call you racist, sexist, or homophobe. I just couldn't take it anymore. 

30+ Million views on facebook )=

Re-Ignition of No Oil For Pacifists

I sometimes wish this blog were called No Food For Liberals, rather than No Oil For Pacifists, because, really I have no beef with true pacifists.  Liberals however, are poor misguided misinformed sheeple fed a constant diet of propaganda starting in grade school.  Poor unfortunates, when they occasionally come out of their stupor, they are really pissed to have been misled.

The Left is, and has been for quite some time, dominated by a violent extremism grabbing power at any cost.  Mob justice is as good as any to the left.  The lawlessness of the left, the sanctuary cities for criminals, the unabashed fielding of the most corrupt politician in recent memory, perhaps of all time, these are scandalous, shameful desperate acts of a group that hates America and the American Way of Life.

The national media like the NYT, HuffPo, CNN are disconnected from reality.  Only able to process a world where the "liberal view" is "mainstream."  They protected and nurtured the mob, the sanctuary cities.  Yes, this power of the press has kept the violent left in power by spreading lies such as "voter id laws are racist."  (Really?  Yes, many white liberals believe that people of color are too inept to get an ID card, and therefore... that's what the media wants you to believe!  It's incredible.  Anyways...)

What do we have to balance it?  The Conservatives in this country have most of the guns.  Also grow most of the food. So what is the problem?

We are fortunate to live in the golden age of the Pax Americana, which will last as long as the US Military dominates half the globe.  Yet, someday, America will fall.  And it will fall from within, if we are lucky, and from without if we are not.

By electing Donald Trump, we've avoided a death spiral from within for perhaps a generation.  I believe that the Pax Americana will last through my lifetime.  I wasn't sure about that with the police state Hillary dreamed about for America.

I am only serious.

My name is Bob Cosmos and Carl has asked me to be the caretaker, the custodian of this blog, if you will.

I will occasionally offer musings on the events of the day.   My aim is to cover them as if I am a time traveler from a later generation wanting to know what the hell happened in this country, because, later generations will never get it from CNN.  CNN doesn't have a fucking clue.

If you have a clue, sound off in the comments section.  Let me hear from you.

God Bless America.

Why is Leadership Absent?

The violent leftists that are promoting mob rule and rioting?  The same people that insisted in debate #2 that Donald Trump accept the results of the election.

Why isn't President Obama on National and Social Media asking people to refrain from violence?  The President should be telling the country to accept the results of this process.  

"We ask, we implore that you accept the results of the election.  We must put all politics aside, and unite for the good of the nation."  That's the minimum he should be saying.  What's on his twitter feed?  He congratulated the Cubs, but he can't tell the violent extremists in this country to sit down.  

This why I am so grateful to have Donald Trump in the White House.  

Donald Trump will not suffer violent extremists.     

The NYT is Tool of the Enemy

The New York Times is 17% owned by Carlos Slim, one of the very few people in the world richer than Donald Trump.  Carlos Slim rescued the NYTimes from Bankruptcy.

Carlos Slim makes money every time a Mexican sends money to Mexico via his near monopoly on that service.  Because of that, he lost SIX BILLION DOLLARS when Trump was Elected!  So don't expect the NYT to start giving the President Elect a fair coverage anytime ever.

Carlos Slim benefits from the old, corrupt leadership willing to sell our security to the highest bidder, and the NYT is squarely on the side of corruption and illegals.  That is why the New York Times is the tool of the enemy.

On the front page was an Op-Ed piece warning Trump to recognize the "profound concern"... as the world "wonders" about Trump.

I don't wonder about Trump.

The NYTimes, also, just sent this letter to their supporters:

"After such an erratic and unpredictable election there are inevitable questions: Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters? What forces and strains in America drove this divisive election and outcome? Most important, how will a president who remains a largely enigmatic figure actually govern when he takes office?"

As you can see, they still portray him in a most negative light.

A pragmatist might say that Donald's organizational and leadership experience could translate well in his new role as president.  I say that.  Donald will be a great president.

The people in this country want a nation of laws!  That is why Donald Trump will be President of the United States, and that is why the NYTimes will never give fair coverage, and is an enemy of the people.

The Red Pill

It appears the "dark, dangerous, divisive" mob that Hillary warned us about is upon us.  An angry wave of leftist mob violence is sweeping the country.

And where are the leftist leaders to control their constituents? Absent.  Where is Elizabeth Warren?  Krugman? CNN?  The president or vice president?  Where is Loretta Lynch, why isn't she warning people that inciting to riot is a crime that carries a five year prison sentence?

Absent on leadership, their silence speaks volumes.  Since the Baltimore Mayor encouraged mob violence, since President Obama ignited racist violence across the nation by saying a dead boy would have looked like a son... the left has promoted mob violence as a means to justice.  It's disgraceful.

There is no excuse for terrorism, mob violence of any kind in this country, and the failure of the democratic leadership to respond speaks volumes about the culture they to promote, it's a violent one. 

Having noted that important fact, let's turn now to the substance of their alleged concerns. What should these extremists angry about?  To their complete and utter surprise, Donal Trump won.  They had been told he could not, would not win.  -- Donald isn't qualified and can't win anyways -- this was the drumbeat that CNN, the NYTimes, and HuffPo relentlessly beat, supported by their polls.

But their polls were wrong!

And they are always wrong!  Every election it's the same thing... the polls always tilt towards the left. Brexit! And every year, the news papers and networks say "the people we polled didn't tell us the truth."

It's never the polls that are wrong, it's always those liars they polled.

How does this happen every election?  The press knows their polls are always tilted.  Yet, they present their polling information as fact.  When the facts are the opposite.

What if Donald was ahead all along, meanwhile... the press was saying "she's got this one".   They were deceived by their own press.  No wonder they are angry.    It's disgraceful the press is infected by leftist extremists who are so fully disconnected from reality that they describe a world that does not exist, and instead propagate a fairy tale.  That's what we call propaganda.

Trump just gave everyone the red pill.  Welcome to the real world, mob violent extremists and handlers. 

The Promise of the Trump Presidency

The Promise of the Trump Presidency

Part 1.  The Trump Promise: Response to Orlando Massacre

The highest goal of the Federal Government is to survive and grow.  In keeping with that theme, the official Department of Homeland Security Response to Massacre in Orlando is no surprise.  The DHS Secretary is proposing His department be in charge of Gun Control.

This department, created in response to 9/11, is now threatening to impose Gun Control as a means of combatting terrorism.  Here is the DHS Secretary on CBS This Morning:
“We have to face the fact that meaningful, responsible gun control has to be part of homeland security as well, given the prospect of homegrown, home-born violent extremism in this country,” Johnson said.  This brazen attempt, besides subverting the constitution, is the next step in the Socialists Playbook for taking over a country.

Here is the totally serious amazing logic the DHS Secretary uses: “We need to do something to minimize the opportunities for terrorists to get a gun in this country, and this is now something that is critical to homeland security as well as public safety,” 

Trump vs. DHS on the Orlando Massacre and Immigration

In contrast, Trump's response to Orlando Massacre is to keep the terrorists out of the country in the first place.  He details his plan in a few short words:

"The bottom line is that the only reason the killer was in America in the first place, was because we allowed his family to come here" Trump said.  "The immigration laws of the United States give the president powers to suspend entry into the country of any class of persons. Now, any class — it really is determined and to be determined by the president for the interests of the United States. And it’s as he or she deems appropriate. Hopefully it’s he in this case... I will use this power to protect the American people. When I’m elected I will suspend immigration from areas of the world where there’s a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies until we fully understand how to end these threats....And by the way we have no choice. After a full and partial and long — really long overdue security assessment we will develop a responsible immigration policy that serves the interests and values of America."

That's it, stop bringing people here from states that sponsor terrorism for the time being.  Which, I agree with, for the following reasons:

Reason Number One: Keeping out Terrorists is out Number One Defense.  There is no better way to keep terrorists from getting a gun in this country than to keep them out in the first place.  Terrorists don't need guns.  They use knives, bombs, acid, whatever.  They don't care.  The nastier the better.  Countries with very low terrorism like New Zealand and Japan have strict immigration laws.  What Trump is proposing is not very different.

Reason Number Two:  Three is no reason number two.  Reason number one is good enough.

The fact is, Israel implemented strict border controls and reduced terrorism dramatically.

The DHS (Obama, Clinton) Response is to impose a police state.  The Trump Response is to keep bad guys out.  I vote for Trump.  

So the promise of a Trump Presidency is not only to keep out the terrorists,there is the added bonus of stopping the Feds from imposing the Police State via Gun Control, and prevent the slippery slide into Socialism or a civil war.

Don’t Count Trump Out, the Fight Hasn’t even Started

A number of pundits, along with the betting odds, major newspapers, and pretty much everyone that makes a prediction, with few exceptions, say variously that Trump is an Underdog, he has zero chance and has already lost, or present demographics, electoral maps or polls, and ask, “how can Trump win?”


Fact:  In the last election, 20% of voters made up their mind less than two months before the election. 

For that reason, counting Trump out now is premature.

Fact:  Trump just destroyed a field of 17 tough competitors.

Trumps attack on Hillary will be more severe than those he made on the other republican candidates, as he has one opponent, not 16.  At the same time, Hillary, for her part, has never won a tough election.  She beat out a nobody to gain a senate seat, she lost to Obama after a huge head start, and she barely beat Bernie Sanders, a complete nobody from New England. 

Theory:  Hillary has never faced anyone like Trump, and neither have her advisers.

Hillary is more likely the underdog, not Trump. 

Theory:  Trump Gets His Message Out

He is so incredibly effective in getting his message out through the media, and especially the press.  The press can neither muzzle him, nor can they create a false image of him.  He creates his own image daily.  He appears to be more effective than any other presidential candidate, ever.  This has to be worth 5% in the vote. 

Theory:  There has never been an election like this one, it is different this time. 

Will this contest between Trump and Clinton be the dirtiest political fight ever, or just a spectacle not to be missed?

You Decide, but don’t count Trump out yet. He’s not a loser.





More:

Seven Ways Donald can become president.

T. Boone Pickens hedging all bets.

Trump will Beat Hillary in Landslide

 

Trump's Threat to the Status Quo

Looking at the headline of a recent Vox article touting Sanders Plan, it could easily be read as 95% of us gang up on the top 5%, so we let's raise taxes that way.  

 Sure, well, it's either that, or, we gang up on the middle class, or that fellow behind the tree.  The politics as usual is to raise taxes.   

Raising taxes any amount always has the same effect: it grows the size of the government.  Any job the government does, the job costs money.

But a simple question: What is the number one mission of any government agency?  Is the FBI's primary concern justice, or is the FBI more interested in its own survival? 

It is the latter.  Preservation and Growth of the Agency.  The number one mission of the Federal Government, like all governmental entities, is to grow itself.  Even Reagan, the great conservative, could not shrink government. 

Our federal government is already so strong it controls half the world with its military, and about half the economy of the U.S. 

To give you an idea of its reach, most of the stock market public companies success rides on its good graces with the government.  It's control of the market is so broad, it's no longer wise to invest in market, in the face of an arbitrary and capricious decision of appointed cronies.  Isn't half the world enough? No, the behemoth will devour everything in its path on the way to socialism.  So big, that, there will come a time to leave the US to escape it, before it becomes oppressive.  Perhaps in our lifetime.

Then there will be an overthrow of the government,  that is the only way to shrink it. Alternatively, at some point the federal behemoth might self destruct through sheer bloating.  Hopefully, we are still a ways away from that, yet it is possible.

Federal Government Behemoth

Democrats and Republicans alike, they all understand the behemoth concept.  They compete to see who is is "at the helm" of the behemoth, how much to feed it (in taxes) with full knowledge it will devour anything in its path. The differences in Democrats and Republicans is pretty much nil considering the damage the behemoth does devouring the economy.   They all compete and collaborate on who will get the choicest federal contracts, jobs and authority. 

It's a big comfortable ship, full of do-nothing jobs, the government is.  From politicians down to lunch ladies, everyone in it rides a gravy train of benefits. 

Yet, Trump threatens this backscratching status quo.  He threatens to start holding people accountable.  That's what he does.  He holds people accountable. 

The Feds have taken notice of Trump, and fed employees, politicians, contractors of all kinds, are dependent on the gravy train.  So please excuse them in this election.  There's something more at stake here, besides socialism.  Peoples phony-baloney Jobs are Threatened! Nothing brings the full might and weight of the federal government at you than threatening a government job, as this Mel Brooks bit from Blazing Saddles illustrates. 

While Trump isn't afraid to fire people, he threatens the behemoth.  And it is turning its full weight against Trump now, which explains in part why so many Republican Insiders are now, all of a sudden, coming out against Trump.  These people are part of the Behemoth, they depend on it for their livelihood.  As such, they might actually prefer Hillary, because, at least with HRC, they know what they will get.
  

A bigger behemoth.  Much bigger.

Bumped to stay on top.

Still posting on Twitter:  @nooil4pacifists  See you there!

Searching for the Elusive Extreme Weather

The previous post raised -- again -- the issue of whether global warming (ahem, climate change) causes more extreme weather.  The US Environmental Protection Agency says "no"; indeed, in the lower 48 states, the greatest concentration of "heat waves" was in the 1930s:

If anything, global warming has created more pleasant summers:

"But what about storms?", I hear you say.  There's been no increased precipitation in the U.K., and storms haven't gotten stronger. Now comes a new study in the Hydrological Sciences Journal confirming the obvious (citations omitted): 

[R]eporting on hydro-meteorological disasters has improved significantly because of a denser satellite network, the Internet and international media, whereas earthquakes were recorded globally from terrestrial stations.  These improvements have introduced a bias in information access through time, which need to be addressed in trend analysis.  

Sure, property losses from floods and hurricanes have increased dramatically.  But that's because of ever denser lowland and sea-coast building, and near-free flood insurance. In sum, the study concludes, "The scientific community needs to emphasize that the problem of flood losses is mostly about what we do on or to the landscape and that will be the case for decades to come."  In other words, stop trying to "cure" natural climate variability and focus on amelioration or adaptation.

(via What's Up With That)

Follow me on Twitter!

Bumped to stay on top.

Still posting on Twitter:  @nooil4pacifists  See you there!

What, Me Worry?

U.S. Temps, 1895-2012 (lower 48), from the United States' National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Climate Data Center, plotting data from 1895-2012, with a trend line from 1922 to 2012:

Result:  warming of +1.26 degrees F per century.  That's +0.13 degrees F per decade.  And close to the revised IPCC predicted increases of around +0.4 degrees C (0.7 degrees F) over 30 years, which -- if constant until 2010 -- means global warming could be as little as 1.3 degrees C (2.3 degrees F) over this century.

Chill baby.

More:

Recent trends from Anthony Watts's continuously updated Global Temperature Page:

More & More:

Remember: don't believe the temperatures you read from some scientists--they adjust older weather data to make it seem as if recent warming is more severe and ignore the "urban heat island" effect.  And you needn't merely rely on me--look at the record.  And check the facts on claims of increased precipitation or extreme weather events.