Another Hysterical Man Caused Global Warming Statement timed out

Here's the link to this wonderful post that I like so much, I'm pasting all the content here, so you can read it here. You can't make this stuff up, folks.

Please go to the original site via the link, though, they deserve the traffic.

Flashback 2005: UN Predicts 50 Million Global Warming Refugees By 2010

By Noel Sheppard | April 12, 2011 | 10:31

To give you an idea of the kind of hysterical predictions the global warming crowd have made in recent years, the United Nations in 2005 actually forecast that by the end of the previous decade, there would be 50 million environmental refugees around the world as a result of climate change.
Britain's Guardian reported October 12, 2005:

Rising sea levels, desertification and shrinking freshwater supplies will create up to 50 million environmental refugees by the end of the decade, experts warn today. Janos Bogardi, director of the Institute for Environment and Human Security at the United Nations University in Bonn, said creeping environmental deterioration already displaced up to 10 million people a year, and the situation would get worse.

"There are well-founded fears that the number of people fleeing untenable environmental conditions may grow exponentially as the world experiences the effects of climate change," Dr Bogardi said. "This new category of refugee needs to find a place in international agreements. We need to better anticipate support requirements, similar to those of people fleeing other unviable situations." [...]

Hans van Ginkel, UN under-secretary-general and rector of the university, said: "This is a highly complex issue, with global organisations already overwhelmed by the demands of conventionally recognised refugees. However, we should prepare now to define, accept and accommodate this new breed of refugee."

As Gavin Atkins of the Asian Correspondent noted Monday, the U.N. back in 2005 provided a handy map to identify "places most at risk including the very sensitive low lying islands of the Pacific and Caribbean."
Atkins chose to look at census figures for some of these "at risk" locales to see whether the U.N.'s predictions - pun intended - hold water. What he discovered was that far from seeing a population exodus, many of these areas are growing in their number of homo sapiens.
These included the Bahamas, St. Lucia, Seychelles, and the Solomon Islands. Atkins continued:

Meanwhile, far from being places where people are fleeing, no fewer than the top six of the very fastest growing cities in China, Shenzzen, Dongguan, Foshan, Zhuhai, Puning and Jinjiang, are absolutely smack bang within the shaded areas identified as being likely sources of climate refugees.

Similarly, many of the fastest growing cities in the United States also appear within or close to the areas identified by the UNEP as at risk of having climate refugees.

More censuses are due to come in this year, and we await the results for Bangladesh and the Maldives - said to be places most at risk - with interest.

However, a very cursory look at the first available evidence seems to show that the places identified by the UNEP as most at risk of having climate refugees are not only not losing people, they are actually among the fastest growing regions in the world.

Kind of like predicting a team to come in last place at the beginning of the season that ends up winning the Super Bowl, wouldn't you say?
Climate realists are also ticking down Nobel Laureate Al Gore's prediction that "the world has 10 years or less to turn things around before it is too late."
Although this is from his pathetic schockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth" released in August 2006, he apparently made this claim at the Sundance Film Festival in January of that year.
Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh has been counting down the days since January 27, 2006:

In four years, nine months, and roughly fifteen days, when we're all still standing here and the world hasn't come to an end, Gore's going to have some serious splainin' to do.
(H/T Global Warming Policy Foundation)

Looming US Government Shutdown

I just want so badly for each story I hear, each radio or tv blurb to mention that this is THIS YEAR"S BUDGET that LAST YEAR'S CONGRESS didn't get passed, but kicked the can down the road, so we are looking at the 2011 budget in April.

Blame that on the Koch brothers, salad tossers and coffee stains!

Now I have looked and listened for mentions of this fact and have yet to be satisfied. Sure, the commentators are all over it, but as an example, I just want the demon FoxNews to include it in a radio update, since they are so "faux news and uber conservative" and all. I won't hold my breath.

Mother Earth Wins

Well, I admit to have been inspired to post about this by a number-one-ranked radio host, but these thoughts are my own: it's just that we agree. It's funny how often I react to something and have my reaction shared on that program; that's how I realized I was conservative, by the way, by listening to #1 and realizing he was saying what I thought. Try it.

Back to the Earthquake/Tsunami combo:

Simply put, if you think that your Prius or your neighbor's SUV make a dang but of difference after seeing what the Earth can dish out, you are an idiot, a useful idiot, or a liar.

Prisons vs Schools? Really?

So, I'm going to solve a problem in one sentence for a local new channel. Sunday March 13th, I watched a story about how prisons get more money than schools, something along the lines of $18,000 per inmate, versus $3,800 per student.



Really? Here's my sentence: we house and feed our prisoners, and that costs a lot more than teachers and textbooks.

Done. Duh. Go back to grandstanding. Seriously, what a big pile of duh. If you'll allow me one more sentence, the state foots the entire bill for prisons and only a portion of the bill for education, and there are those that would debate whether education is the State's responsibility at all.

I should note that I taught, public high school, for about 9 years, I know what the state money buys.

Socialists Tell You What They Are All About

See, I have a lot more respect for honest, upfront socialists than the progressives, who are for socialist policies but either don't realize it or won't admit it.


This came from The Blaze (to which I never go, frankly) via a tweet. WARNING, a socialist drops the F-bomb several times and talks about his feelings (this is highlighted in the only manipulative edit. It's funny, so it's okay with me, and doesn't change the meaning of what he says).



So, watch and make fun of the total inanity of what these folks are saying.

Let's see, Rob, two things: when the workers pay for the fixtures, the licenses, the taxes, the fees, the inspections, the supplies, the insurance, etc., that the owner has paid, then we can talk about shared ownership. Seriously, did he whine about being told when to come to work, and what to cook? "I'm sorry, Ma'am, the cook chose to make your Pad Thai with beef a Wisconsin Chicken Macaroni in the face of your oppressive capitalistic demand."

Then, let's discuss you selling the magazine... that's okay, right, because the proceeds from the sale are evenly distributed among all that were involved in the production of the magazine, right? Maybe I should have him read my very short explanation of capitalism.

Oooh, and I love the kid, Ben, that identifies himself as from a "radical collective space in West Bend Wisconsin." Seriously? I would have laughed out loud saying something that silly, but not Ben, he believes it.

Now, I might challenge their definition of socialism, anyway, as I have always been taught that it means the government owns the means of production, not the people, but that's just quibbling. Shouldn't they belong to a communist organization, not a socialist one?

Is This How You Think The United States of America Should Behave?

I was considering posting this as my Facebook Status today, but I really am not sure I want to go there.

I’m going to get un-friended by some folks, but I hope you read this first.  I was taken aback by something a lifelong educator that I know and like said to me recently, and I hope this makes those that I love and respect (and those that I just love) take stock of your thoughts. 

It started as a simple “some administrators are idiots, too, so with all the talk about firing the bad teachers, what about firing the bad administrators?” talk.  Inside, I thought “well, that’s a general truth in life, right, that some managers aren’t very good and can hire and fire anyway?” I taught for almost 9 years, and have seen that everywhere I’ve worked when I wasn’t teaching, too.  Do a web search for “bad boss” for Pete’s sake, stories are legendary. But I digress.

What disturbed me came next: he got an email that said something about it being time to “get a little bloody.” Now, if you pay attention, you know that this was recently stated (and probably inspired) by Congressman Michael Capuano in Massachusetts (who now “regrets his choice of words”), but for my friend, I thought he was being metaphorical about the situation here in Ohio until he followed it up with “these right-wingers think they’re the only ones with guns, and they’re wrong.”

This is a complicated issue, and my FB status is no place for debating specifics, I think. I have stopped doing anything other than “liking” posts that I like, for the most part, so I won’t engage in it. However, let’s fly at 30,000 feet, as they say, and ask the philosophical questions, shall we?

Is this how you think America should work? Is this what you expect from an educated person and an educator? Is this how you think The United States of America should behave? I understand that people will react strongly if they feel their livelihood is being threatened and I understand that these were promises made, the pensions and retirement benefits, but still, the threat of violence over this? Going to protest at the homes of people with disagree with?

Another lifelong educator I know threw in "why blame the state's financial woes on the the teachers? Why not look to Wall Street?" and then included the Republicans. I don't have the heart to tell her, because I like her very much, that the number one recipients of Wall Street donations are Democrats, according to CBS and 

the Puffington Host (I can't believe I'm linking to them). Businesses give to the party in power, usually, so it fluctuates, but this Republicans=Wall Street is a myth that I am so tired of. How many Goldman Sachs people work for the current Administration? Even the NY Times has weighed in.

The upshot is that the Union Leaders have screwed the members for years, in collusion with the politicians that have kicked this can down the road, making unsustainable deals. The difference here is that it's our tax dollars footing the bill. A former CEO of GM famously said that he didn't run a car company, he ran a pension and benefit company that sells cars to pay for it. The 90% of workers in this country who aren't in a union are footing the bill for this mess.

gettting traffic, eh?

Well, I have no idea sometimes about how works the internet: I'm getting traffic on a very short post, and here's some funny parts:

I got a hit when someone searched "why republicans are feeble minded" and that person was probably not pleased with the result, I bet.


I was somehow referred by an "onlineviagrapill dot com" site, which is a total mystery.

This is interesting: Moldova? Really?

Pageviews by Countries

Ukraine 12 Russia 9 United States 9 Moldova 3 Germany 2

My Moments On The Radio...and I Finally Wrote Something To Put On The Graph.

Well, yesterday I had my first piece published on The Graph and was fortunate enough to talk to Sean Hannity on his radio show about Egypt.

As expected, I didn't get to mention the Graph piece about Egypt, and it wasn't as clean of a performance as I would have liked, but he certainly did just let me have my say, didn't he? It helps to be polite and make the Host look good, doesn't it?