Pages

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

The Ironic Climate Change President...


Promised to slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet 

Over the course of his eight year tenure, this President has devoted himself to issues of climate change and how to combat it. No President has been more involved, more active, and more instrumental in creating change in how our country and the world does things. Over the past eight years we have seen:
  • International treaties on Climate Change
  • Countless executive orders on Climate Change
  • A record amount (over 3300) new regulations from the EPA involving 29,770,000 words (approximately 50 bibles worth of new regulations).
What has it gotten us? Well according to the statistical magicians working with our climate alarmist community, Obama has managed to achieve the three highest years of warming in the history of the planet. More to the point, according to the alarmists each of the past three years has gotten progressively worse. 

Now like most people who are concerned about climate change and want to see a bright future for our planet, I am forced to logically determine that it's time to go back to the drawing board. As much as I believe he "wanted" to help. He quite obviously didn't. Now had the last three years of his Presidency shown that our warming had been reduced or even reversed, I would have seen every incentive to continue forward on the same path. But it got worse. Objective data analysis must prevail. Time to move on. 

The prudent plan, of course, would be to undo as much of it as physically possible and start over with a new approach. I think Donald Trump is the man with the plan to do so! Less regulations, more fossil fuels, and tear up those damned treaties.  I am sure those really concerned with Climate change will agree that insanity is doing the same thing over and over, but expecting different results. We certainly do not want the next eight years to continue with the Obama legacy of being the "hottest on record" (sic)...  

Therefor I am sure they would agree that we need serious change. 

89 comments:

Commonsense said...

Tell the truth. You did this just to drive Opie up the wall. :)

KD, Dems Failures are up to 61 No SHOWS said...

I hope he did it for that reason alone.

rrb said...



the treaties, exec orders and regs were never intended to affect a change in climate or warming.

they were intended to line the pockets of his sycophants and to hamstring our economy.

and clowns like roger and opie are useful idiots in this effort.

caliphate4vr said...

That's being harsh to idiots

KD, Obama lost the workers said...

Funny Cali

KD , More Poor Blacks In the USA today said...

Chevy is waiting on Obama to make good on his promise to by a Volt.

Surely he has already ordered it.

"I’ll buy one and drive it myself," President Obama promised

C.H. Truth said...

When else can the powers to be:

1) identify a problem...

2) Come up with nearly 30 million words of new regulations to solve the problem...

3) Complain that the problem has gotten worse since these regulations...

4) Use the fact it's getting worse as proof that you need more of the same...

rrb said...



that's the beauty, or curse, of government.

there are never any consequences for getting it wrong.

i know of no other entity where failure is accepted, never punished, and all too often rewarded.

this is why liberals gravitate to government employment. there is no downside. you can be a walking clusterfuck for an entire career and your reward is a taxpayer funded pension til you die.



KD, Life is good said...

Republicans keep winning the elections.
Democrats keep winning the media polls. " Classic CHT


CHT, answer me this, IF all the liberals would live like they think we all should, you know , drive electric cars, live in micro homes, live within feet of work, don't fly in jets, the list is endless of how they tell use we should all live.

So IF they lived that way seems to me half the pollution they bitch about would end, right?

So little would need to be build or manufactured so that too would reduce pollution even further.


KD, less then 24 Hours the sun Comes up on the USA said...

I hope that Trump can cut 20% of the hammock swingers off of the Federal pay rolls.

I read that 1/3 of all the things the lazy out going president did can be undone with a pen, no phone.

Tomorrow at 12:01, the USA starts the long road back to recovery.

I am going to do my part, I am going to invest more, work harder, sell more food/meat off of my ranch.

rrb said...


speaking of failure:


Obamacare has cost roughly 300,000 small business jobs due to higher health care costs, according to a new report.

The American Action Forum, a center-right policy institute, released findings Wednesday that rising premiums and regulations under the Affordable Care Act have had “dire” consequences for the labor market.

The report found the law has cost $19 billion in lost wages per year and forced 10,000 small businesses establishments to close their doors. The study covered employers with 20 to 99 employees.

“Research from the American Action Forum (AAF) finds regulations from the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are driving up health care premiums and are costing small business employees at least $19 billion in lost wages annually,” the report said. “These figures varied by state, but in 2015 the ACA cost year-round workers $2,095, $2,134, and $2,260 in Ohio, New York, and North Dakota, respectively.”

“Premium increases, a prospect regulators predicted when issuing the first ACA regulations, also significantly diminished the number of business establishments and jobs nationwide,” the report said. “Across the country, small businesses (20-99 workers) lost 295,030 jobs, 10,130 business establishments, and $4.7 billion in total wage earnings. Florida lost 17,950 jobs; Ohio lost 19,000; Pennsylvania lost 15,680; and Texas lost 28,010 jobs due to higher sensitivity to rising health care premiums and the ACA.”

http://freebeacon.com/issues/report-jobs-lost-obamacare/

rrb said...

So IF they lived that way seems to me half the pollution they bitch about would end, right?
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

then how in the hell would the leonardo dicaprio's of the world be able to fly their private jets to their private docks to board their private yachts to steam to private meetings like davos to determine, in private, how the rest of us should live???

think man, think!!!


LOL.

KD said...

I hope that this rain falls on the Liberals heads, it is going to be like this for a long time.


The Senate Armed Services Committee on Wednesday approved the nomination of retired Gen. James Mattis to be Defense secretary, setting him up to be confirmed by the full Senate as soon as President-elect Donald Trump is inaugurated and officially nominates him.

The committee voted 26-1 to recommend Mattis to the full chamber, meaning the nomination will be sent straight to the Senate without referral by the committee, according a committee statement. The lone "no" vote came from Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)."

lone wolf against the Retired General was a low life ass clown from NY.

HB, is so wrong, ok, I know be more specific.


He said that us Conservatives hate the 2nd amendment, he meant the 1st amendment, he is of course wrong.

Example the Liberal the lite himself on fire to protest Trump, I want ever more liberals to express themselves in this matter.

I want the Liberals to disrupt the metro in DC tomorrow, shut it down, or go to Lafayette Park and protest. Please , put up signs show your hate for the USA, for this President, please.

C.H. Truth said...

Liberals don't want to change their lifestyle... they want to vote for people who will try to force others to change theirs, and feel as though that makes them better people.

Indy Voter said...

Speaking of climate change ...

Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens both topped 50% in the Hall of Fame balloting this year. My guess is they will both be elected no later than 2019.

Congratulations to Jeff Bagwell, Ivan Rodriguez, and Tim Raines, who all were elected this year.

Roger Amick said...

He's the most successful Democratic President since FDR. I had half of a description of why, but the page closed.

But think about it.

Truman, ok but not historical success.

JFK, had a good start, except for the Bay of pigs, then assassinated.

LBJ,civil and voting rights. But Vietnam was a disaster. More later.

Commonsense said...

Truman rebuilt Europe and set the tone of foreign policy for two generations.

Kennedy set the goal to put mankind on the moon.

LBJ passed the civil and voting rights act.

What great thing did Barack Obama accomplished?

rrb said...

What great thing did Barack Obama accomplished?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

0linsky's greatest accomplishment is scheduled for 12 noon tomorrow.

rrb said...

Blogger Roger Amick said...
He's the most successful Democratic President since FDR. I had half of a description of why, but the page closed.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

you obviously haven't been watching "frontline" on pbs the past two nights.

i have.

it could have been much worse as there were many things left out, but i couldn't believe how they depicted what an assclown 0linsky was. we're talking pbs for chrissakes.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/divided-states-of-america/

rrb said...


yup, the most successful prez since the internment camp guy...



When President-elect Donald Trump replaces Barack Obama on January 20, the Democratic Party will find itself more removed from power than at almost any point since the party’s creation.

Scorned by the same voters who once embraced the New Deal, built the Great Society, and put their hope in the nation’s first black president, Democrats are now locked out of power in Washington and out of two-thirds of state legislative chambers across the country.

http://www.nbcnews.com/specials/democrats-left-in-the-lurch

Commonsense said...

0linsky's greatest accomplishment is scheduled for 12 noon tomorrow.

Which is exactly the point. If Barack H. Obama was even a moderately successful president there would have been no president Donald J. Trump.

rrb said...




Mr. Trump: For Science Advisor, You Can't Do Better Than Dr. Judith Curry


http://ace.mu.nu/archives/367892.php

rrb said...

If Barack H. Obama was even a moderately successful president there would have been no president Donald J. Trump.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

amazing when you think about it.

once all of 0linsky's pen and phone orders are shredded and the ACA is cast upon the dung heap of history, skeets' only legacy will be the simultaneous election of president trump and the destruction of the democrat party.

skewed popularity polling or not, this gives us some insight as to his popularity as an outgoing president. i mean, after all he has done to wreck his own party and facilitate the rise to power of the GOP, what's NOT to like about the guy?

trump should find an obscure mountain somewhere, declare it "mount asshat" and commission a bust of 0linsky to be carved into its face.

rrb said...




Florida man charged with threatening to kill President-elect Trump at his inauguration on Twitter was a close family friend of Bill and Hillary Clinton



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4133938/Florida-man-threatened-kill-Trump-Clinton-friend.html#ixzz4WCzu49JS
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

rrb said...



please, please, PLEASE let this be so:


Less than two-thirds of the federal workforce is firmly committed to staying on the job following the election of Donald Trump as president, according to a new survey.

More than one in four federal workers, or 28 percent, will definitely or possibly consider leaving their jobs after Jan. 20 when Trump is sworn into office and becomes leader of the executive branch, according to a new Government Business Council/GovExec.com poll. Sixty-five percent of feds say they will not consider ending their federal service.

About half of those who will consider leaving are eligible for retirement and would do so earlier than they originally planned, while another 37 percent said they would seek another job outside of federal government. Just 1 percent said they would quit and figure out their next step at a later time, while an additional 12 percent said they were not sure what they would do. Federal employees considering leaving government have not backed off those threats now that a Trump presidency has moved beyond the theoretical; in October, 27 percent of civil servants were considering retiring or finding a new job.

http://www.govexec.com/management/2017/01/one-four-federal-employees-may-leave-their-jobs-when-trump-takes-office/134644/?oref=govexec_today_nl


rrb said...



Danish statistician Dr. Bjorn Lomborg, the President of the Copenhagen Consensus Center: 'We will spend at least one hundred trillion dollars in order to reduce the temperature by the end of the century by a grand total of three tenths of one degree...the equivalent of postponing warming by less than four years...Again, that is using the UN's own climate prediction model.'

'If the U.S. delivers for the whole century on the President Obama's very ambitious rhetoric, it would postpone global warming by about eight months at the end of the century.'

'But here is the biggest problem: These miniscule benefits do not come free -- quite the contrary. The cost of the UN Paris climate pact is likely to run 1 to 2 trillion dollars every year.'

http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/01/17/danish-statistician-un-climate-treaty-will-cost-100-trillion-to-postpone-global-warming-by-less-than-four-year-by-2100/


like i said in an earlier comment on this thread:

the treaties, exec orders and regs were never intended to affect a change in climate or warming.

they were intended to line the pockets of his sycophants and to hamstring our economy.

and clowns like roger and opie are useful idiots in this effort.

KD, Wake Up Snowflakes said...

After 8 years and nothing getting done, but dividing the nation and wrecking the economy, less people in the middle income group, more people in the poor group it is time to put this black chapter behind us.


One thing is laid bare , the press is on the side of the liberals, anyone still doubting that is an idiot, no offense to the idiots intended.

PBS is doing a multi part farewell to the beloved obimbo, showing how all the bad that happened was never his fault. Sad that PBS is funded by tax dollars and Koch industries.

opie said...

Well according to the statistical magicians working with our climate alarmist community

As predicted, you again are claiming the data is wrong and that scientists are cultist. Is that all you know have since your big brain and failed logic cannot come up with anything else. A joke worse than a child throwing a a tantrum. With the EPA chief denying the cause and being the head of an agency that can affect change, I am sure you are please. Well, if sticking your head up your rear is your scientific method, the fact remains, the science is damning, but you would never let facts get in your way. No different than you denying the russians did it....all polls are now wrong and the science and data is no good. Perfect, your transformation to a jag off is complete. Be proud, CH, your brain has shut off to logic. Oh well.

KD said...

More than one in four federal workers, or 28 percent, will definitely or possibly consider leaving their jobs after Jan. 20 when Trump is sworn into office and becomes leader of the executive branch, according to a new Government Business Council/GovExec.com poll. Sixty-five percent of feds say they will not consider ending their federal service."

Yep. have them leave, do a four year hiring frees ,, remember the Fed Gov't Shut down when 92 percent of Federal workers are classified and "non-essential" , just clean out a 1/4 of those people.

Was today the Day Obama was going to Appoint Myrlen Garland???

KD, Love the warmer winters said...

I notice Opium is in lockstep with those we talked about earlier and in which CHT nailed to the out house wall.

Liberals IF you all band together and live like you talk, how much will that lower the oceans, health the planet and get rid of pollution?

PBS admits that real welfare numbers are 44.1 million in the usa an increase of over 10 million in 8 years of Obimbo .


KD, Rain and I am collecting millions of gallons said...

For those of you that thought, like I did that Trump just got into the Presidential race on a whim, well think again.

IN the PBS slap down of the no leadership president, I found out that 6 Days after mitt lost, TRUMP applied for a copy rights for this now famous phrase

"Make America Great Again"

Hillary had no less then 63 such slogans , the one I love is the self centered one "I'm with HER" omg funny.


So IF your willing to cut taxes , work and earn the next 12 years are going to be great.

The end has come on the massive free shit for the Interlopers, fair warning HB, you will have to start paying your own way.

KD said...

all polls are now wrong and the science and data is no good. "

Nope, most polls are wrong, that was made clear by the Real Voters .

As for science and data, well, a lot of it is wrong, proven wrong and now we live better more cleaner healthier lives because of it.

Opium, you don't want to chat about this topic, you do want to preach, well, go a head.

However, IF you were real about your beliefs you would change your life, you wife and your kids and friends to reflect you chore beliefs.

Is your home more then 800 square feet?
Do you heat with fosil fuels like natural gas?
Do you own and drive a car?
Is your car solar powered to recharge your batties or does it burn gasoline?

I would like to know. thanks.

caliphate4vr said...

Tenet assured the president that WMD in Iraq was a “slam dunk” case — a conclusion that turned out not to be based on solid intelligence but was certainly welcomed by the administration.

Few believed early intelligence talking points that the American deaths in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012 were the result of a spontaneous riot caused by a right-wing filmmaker residing in the U.S. But that implausible intelligence narrative dovetailed with the Obama reelection themes of an al-Qaida on the run and the dangers of Islamophobia in America. The false Benghazi hypothesis fueled then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s false claims on Sunday-morning talk shows that the Benghazi deaths were not caused by al-Qaeda affiliates.

Such politicized assessments are not uncommon. The 2007 U.S. National Intelligence Estimate ludicrously declared that Iran had halted work on nuclear enrichment in 2003. It was likely a politically driven pushback to the flawed 2002 intelligence on Iraqi WMD.

The media should spare its current outrage at any suggestion that politics affects the administration of some 16 major intelligence agencies. Journalists should instead listen to Democratic senator Chuck Schumer, who cynically warned Trump that intelligence agencies “have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”

Careerism and ideology at the top sometimes undermine the work of patriotic and gifted case officers in the rank and file. The integrity of intelligence depends on the probity of individual intelligence chiefs — and the degree to which administration operatives are kept away from intelligence directors.

Reform requires honesty rather than the present self-righteous hypocrisy.

There are far too many separate intelligence agencies and thus too many agendas. Directors should have term limits. They should not reinvent themselves to bounce between various directorships from administration to administration.

Issuing absurd politically driven hypotheses should be grounds for dismissal — and giving false testimony to Congress should earn perjury charges.

Roger Amick said...

ial: 2016 was the hottest year on record since scientists began tracking Earth’s temperature more than 100 years ago, according to independent analyses by NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The 1.69-degree jump over the 20th-century average, according to NOAA, marks the third year in a row that global temperatures have reached record-shattering levels. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration added that the global average temperature for 2016 was 1.78 degrees higher than a baseline period between 1951 and 1980.


Both agencies noted that Earth’s average global temperature — which NOAA pegged at 57 degrees during the 20th century — was higher in 2016 than in any year since scientists began tracking it in 1880.

“For the first time in recorded history, we have now had three consecutive record-warm years,” said Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University who was not involved in the findings. “The likelihood of this having happened in the absence of human-caused global warming is minimal.”


The government reports were released Wednesday as President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Environmental Protection Agency said he disagreed with the overwhelming scientific consensus that Earth is warming at a catastrophic rate and that human activities are to blame.

“The ability to measure with precision the extent of [human] impact and what to do about it are subject to continued debate and dialogue,” Oklahoma Atty. Gen. Scott Pruitt told senators during his contentious confirmation hearing.

The average global temperature incorporates measurements taken from locations across land and sea, including 6,300 ground-based weather stations, legions of ocean buoys and research facilities in Antarctica.

C.H. Truth said...

As predicted, you again are claiming the data is wrong and that scientists are cultist.

Data is data, Opie... it cannot (by definition) be wrong. It can, however, be adjusted, manipulated, cherry picked, misread to come up with incorrect analysis. To what degree this is done with any data gathering/analysis (including temperature reporting) is simply a matter of speculation.

As far as the alarmist community being cultist... that would be your words, not mine. But I must admit I think your use of the word is obviously intuitive even for you. Bravo!

opie said...

Basically, this piece puts CH's opinion where it belongs, the deepest abyss of inanity. Sure would be nice that he provide some reputable sources of his claim instead of his own ersatz expertise of nothing.

https://skepticalscience.com/surface-temperature-measurements-advanced.htm

I won't hold my breath, as normal. LOL

opie said...

Data is data, Opie... it cannot (by definition) be wrong.

Your claim" Well according to the statistical magicians", not mine questioning the data, now it is not wrong, CH? Being the genius you are, I am sure you can point out what you don't like in detail. LOL

Speculation is your bailiwick, not mine. LOL

opie said...

National review, source of pauline's opinion since he can't express it on his own. LOL Cue another infantile remark.

Loretta Russo said...

Plagiarized spam

C.H. Truth said...

Both agencies noted that Earth’s average global temperature — which NOAA pegged at 57 degrees during the 20th century — was higher in 2016 than in any year since scientists began tracking it in 1880.

Roger - You're supposedly a genius... although it's fairly obvious you didn't bother to read the post, or have some sort of comprehension problem if you had. Otherwise, you just have a terrible need to "repeat" what's already been added to the conversation. Not sure, but it's fairly irritating.

Either way... the question is this:

Given President Obama has pushed through nearly 30 million words of new EPA regulations to combat climate change (approximately 50 bible's worth)

1) Why are we seeing record warming, rather than a reduction of said warming? This suggests that these new regulations are simply not working to accomplish the goals of reducing warming.

2) Why would we continue to follow failing policies that harm our economy?

Bottom line Roger... wouldn't have been better to manipulate the temperature numbers to make it "look" like all these new regulations, executive orders, and international agreements are working rather than failing... if we expect the public to continue to buy into them?

C.H. Truth said...

not mine questioning the data, now it is not wrong, CH?

If you were half as smart as you claim to be... you would understand that there is a fairly significant difference between a speculative conclusion based on an analysis of data, and underlying the data itself.

The former can be wrong for a wide variety of reasons. The latter simply is what it is.

opie said...

Another reputable source that says CH' opinion is just that, opinion and speculative.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2017/01/the-nasa-data-conspiracy-theory-and-the-cold-sun/

opie said...

. you would understand that there is a fairly significant difference between a speculative conclusion based on an analysis of data, and underlying the data itself.

If you had half a brain, you could prove your opinion has merit, you cannot. The data is unassailable, except for small minded experts who think they know everything. The only thing significant is your inability to be rational.

Roger Amick said...

Clinton lead us into a balanced budget and created 21 million non farm jobs.
He was unable to pass universal health care. He was scarred by the Lewinsky scandal.

Obama came into the office in the midst of the worst economy in almost sixty years. He saved the U$ auto industry, saving millions of jobs. He killed Bin Laden, the architect of the worst terrorist attack in US history. He got us out of Iraq, where today, the government, US intelligence support, has decimated ISIS. He got us out of a combat role in Afghanistan, where today the government has control over most of the country.

He has lead the United States out of the Great Recession, left behind by the worst President in the last sixty years. We have had an all-time record of 79 consecutive job growth. The flawed but still successful and increasingly popular health care reform, that has insured 20 million Americans.
He negotiated a treaty that has halted the Iranian drive to develop nuclear weapons. He worked with every single economic power, to reduce greenhouse gases.

He did every single one, despite the fact that the Republican party swore from day one of his administration, to effectively guarantee that he would not succeed.

He has not had one scandal. The First Lady Michelle Obama, has been graceful and has helped thousands of families, and raised two daughters, who are going to be successful adults.

And to top it all off, he has represented the United States with class and a determination to leave the office with our country in far better shape than the day he took office.

We will long be graceful for what he accomplished.

It is too early to be completely honest, to see how history will see this President, but it looks like he will go down as one of the best Presidents of The United States of America.

By the way, this is entirely my words.

opie said...


1) Why are we seeing record warming,

The most dumbass straw man ever posited CH, equating words to change is both inane and naive. Play your mental masturbation games with yourself since you are the only one who seems to understand them. LOL

Roger Amick said...

NASA is a leftist cult, Opie.

Believe that and you too will be convinced that our esteemed host, the all knowing, rational and always correct CH and be reduced to a cheerleader on the Trump Wagon and Barney Fife traveling show!

opie said...

He's already proven himself to be an accolade of Putin.

Roger Amick said...



If you were half as smart as you claim to be... you would not be a mindless and pathetic hack mouthpiece for the science denial cult that we call the Republican party and President Elect.

Your copy paste of the story I posted, directly contradicted your pathetic arguments. aka hackery.

C.H. Truth said...

Au Contraire Roger...

My post fully acknowledges the argument that the earth is warming, and that the last three years (of the Obama Administration) represent the worst warming in history.

I just hope that you are willing to place the burden of that horrifying climate legacy on the very people who have been pushing all the new regulations designed to fight them, but obviously unsuccessfully.

I would also fully expect that you would be excited to see the removal of those in charge of such a horrifying legacy of dangerous record breaking warming, being replaced by people who will most certainly try something new!



Roger Amick said...

The agreement has not yet been implemented by any meaningful analysis. That's why the highest levels since we started to record the data continue to climb. This isn't just implemented in a few months CH.

Going all the way back to coal fired power plants, hell, leaded gasoline, repeal all emission requirements for the automobile industry. The Los Angeles basin will welcome back stage three smog alerts. I moved here in 1987. Stage three alerts were common. We haven't had any for several years now. More lead will increase the criminal rate!

Roger Amick said...

You have been reduced to a rrb hack.

The fucking regulations are just getting started! Jesus H Christ.

Early onset of Alzheimer's disease can be controlled. Get some help.

opie said...

t three years of his Presidency shown that our warming had been reduced or even reversed

That will occur only when humans quit putting C02 into the atmosphere. The current level of 404 ppm is increasing at about 1 ppm per year which equates to gigatons of added C02 per year through the burning of fossil fuels. Reversal is virtually impossible unless that number is reduced, but you knew that and still posted that drivel.

rrb said...



By the way, this is entirely my words.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

and obviously typed while you had a bolus of 0linsky's man gravy on an IV drip.

btw, have you polished dear leader's nutsack in preparation for the inauguration tomorrow?

it's a big day and all...


rrb said...



That will occur only when humans quit putting C02 into the atmosphere.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

so we're all supposed to stop exhaling.

sounds like a plan, stroke boy!

you go first!

rrb said...



Blogger Roger Amick said...
You have been reduced to a rrb hack.

The fucking regulations are just getting started! Jesus H Christ.

Early onset of Alzheimer's disease can be controlled. Get some help.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

well rog, why don't you just wobble back over to the alky blog and stay there? it's obvious that CH's opinions are just too traumatic for you here.

oh, and you might want to enable comments on your posts.

opie said...

t three years of his Presidency shown that our warming had been reduced

Why not since 2012.....393 ppm 2012
404 ppm today.

I'm sure you believe obama is single handedly responsible for that increase as you allege above

rrb said...

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientists have found a solution to the 15-year “pause” in global warming: They “adjusted” the hiatus in warming out of the temperature record.

New climate data by NOAA scientists doubles the warming trend since the late 1990s by adjusting pre-hiatus temperatures downward and inflating temperatures in more recent years.

“Newly corrected and updated global surface temperature data from NOAA’s [National Centers for Environmental Information] do not support the notion of a global warming ‘hiatus,'” wrote NOAA scientists in their study presenting newly adjusted climate data.

To increase the rate in warming, NOAA scientists put more weight on certain ocean buoy arrays, adjusted ship-based temperature readings upward, and slightly raised land-based temperatures as well. Scientists said adjusted ship-based temperature data “had the largest impact on trends for the 2000-2014 time period, accounting for 0.030°C of the 0.064°C trend difference.” They added that the “buoy offset correction contributed 0.014°C… to the difference, and the additional weight given to the buoys because of their greater accuracy contributed 0.012°C.”



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/04/noaa-fiddles-with-climate-data-to-erase-the-15-year-global-warming-hiatus/#ixzz4WE1rOcvY



question - does NOAA use solar panels to cook their data or are they using good old fossil fuels?

inquiring minds want to know.

rrb said...

I'm sure you believe obama is single handedly responsible for that increase as you allege above
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

d0pie,

his allegation, which is accurate, is that for all the regulations enacted and money spent, 0linsky hasn't accomplished a fucking thing.

which is also emblematic of his entire 8 years in office.

opie said...

so we're all supposed to stop exhaling.

sounds like a plan, stroke boy!

Only an ag school flunky could be as stupid, rat.....Be proud.

Roger Amick said...

You have been reduced to a rrb hack.

The fucking regulations are just getting started! Jesus H Christ.

Early onset of Alzheimer's disease can be controlled. Get some help.

opie said...

s that for all the regulations enacted and money spent, 0linsky hasn't accomplished a fucking thing.

It reduced C02 by megatons. BTW.....the temperature is a lagging indicator so changes will take time to be felt by idiots like you.

opie said...


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/04/noaa

The daily caller, CH's source of science. BWAAAAAAAA....that was totally debunked by real scientists, not opinion writers......

Roger Amick said...


The changes they propose are dramatic.

The departments of Commerce and Energy would see major reductions in funding, with programs under their jurisdiction either being eliminated or transferred to other agencies. The departments of Transportation, Justice and State would see significant cuts and program eliminations.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting would be privatized, while the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities would be eliminated entirely.

Overall, the blueprint being used by Trump’s team would reduce federal spending by $10.5 trillion over 10 years.

The proposed cuts hew closely to a blueprint published last year by the conservative Heritage Foundation, a think tank that has helped staff the Trump transition.

Similar proposals have in the past won support from Republicans in the House and Senate, who believe they have an opportunity to truly tackle spending after years of warnings about the rising debt.

Many of the specific cuts were included in the 2017 budget adopted by the conservative Republican Study Committee (RSC), a caucus that represents a majority of House Republicans. The RSC budget plan would reduce federal spending by $8.6 trillion over the next decade.

Two members of Trump’s transition team are discussing the cuts at the White House budget office: Russ Vought, a former aide to Vice President-elect Mike Pence and the former executive director of the RSC, and John Gray, who previously worked for Pence, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) when Ryan headed the House Budget Committee.

Vought and Gray, who both worked for the Heritage Foundation, are laying the groundwork for the so-called skinny budget — a 175- to 200-page document that will spell out the main priorities of the incoming Trump administration, along with summary tables. That document is expected to come out within 45 days of Trump taking office.

The administration’s full budget, including appropriations language, supplementary materials and long-term analysis, is expected to be released toward the end of Trump’s first 100 days in office, or by mid- to late April.

Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), Trump’s choice to head the Office of Management and Budget, has not yet weighed in on the proposed spending reforms because he is still awaiting confirmation by the Senate.

Mulvaney voted for the RSC budget offered as a more conservative alternative to the main House Republican budget in 2015. The House did not vote on the RSC budget for fiscal year 2017.

The preliminary proposals from the White House budget office will be shared with federal departments and agencies soon after Trump takes the oath of office Friday, and could provoke an angry backlash.

Trump’s Cabinet picks have yet to be apprised of the reforms, which would reduce resources within their agencies.

The budget offices of the various departments will have the chance to review the proposals, offer feedback and appeal for changes before the president’s budget goes to Congress.

It’s not clear whether Trump’s first budget will include reforms to Social Security or Medicare, two major drivers of the federal deficit.

Trump vowed during the campaign not to cut Medicare and Social Security, a pledge that Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), his pick to head the Department of Health and Human Services, told lawmakers in testimony Wednesday has not changed.

Yet it could be very difficult to reduce U.S. debt without tackling the entitlement programs. Conservative House budgets have repeatedly included reforms to Medicare and Social Security, arguing they are necessary to save the programs.




Roger Amick said...

The presidential budget is important in setting policy and laying out the administration’s agenda, though Congress would be responsible for approving a federal budget and appropriating funds.

Moving Trump’s budget through Congress could be difficult. In 2015, with the GOP in control of the House, the RSC budget failed by a vote of 132 to 294.

Moderate Republicans and Democrats on the Appropriations Committee are likely to push back at some of the cuts being considered by Trump.

Tell Hill

rrb said...

Roger Amick said...
You have been reduced to a rrb hack.

The fucking regulations are just getting started! Jesus H Christ.

Early onset of Alzheimer's disease can be controlled. Get some help.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

it doesn't get any more clever the second time you post it, rog.

how's your wrinkled old ass today, pal?

seems sore and chapped from this vantage point.

ya better put some ice on that!

rrb said...


alky, you left out the best part!

But they seem likely to have the support of Mulvaney, a conservative budget hawk who backed the RSC budget.

“Mick Mulvaney and his colleagues at the Republican Study Committee when they crafted budgets over the years, they were serious,” said a former congressional aide. “Mulvaney didn’t take this OMB position to just mind the store.”

“He wants to make significant, fundamental changes to the structure of the president’s budget, and I expect him to do that with Vought and Gray putting the meat on the bones,” the source added.

The Heritage blueprint used as a basis for Trump’s proposed cuts calls for eliminating several programs that conservatives label corporate welfare programs: the Minority Business Development Agency, the Economic Development Administration, the International Trade Administration and the Manufacturing Extension Partnership. The total savings from cutting these four programs would amount to nearly $900 million in 2017.

At the Department of Justice, the blueprint calls for eliminating the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Violence Against Women Grants and the Legal Services Corporation and for reducing funding for its Civil Rights and its Environment and Natural Resources divisions.

At the Department of Energy, it would roll back funding for nuclear physics and advanced scientific computing research to 2008 levels, eliminate the Office of Electricity, eliminate the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and scrap the Office of Fossil Energy, which focuses on technologies to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

Under the State Department’s jurisdiction, funding for the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, the Paris Climate Change Agreement and the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are candidates for elimination.

Conservatives allied with fiscal hawks such as Pence, Paul and the Heritage Foundation say the time is long past due to get serious about cutting the federal deficit.

“The Trump Administration needs to reform and cut spending dramatically, and targeting waste like the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities would be a good first step in showing that the Trump Administration is serious about radically reforming the federal budget,” said Brian Darling, a former aide to Paul and a former staffer at the Heritage Foundation.

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/314991-trump-team-prepares-dramatic-cuts

and the best part of all -

Overall, the blueprint being used by Trump’s team would reduce federal spending by $10.5 trillion over 10 years.




opie said...


Overall, the blueprint being used by Trump’s team would reduce federal spending by $10.5 trillion

another pile of guano you have swallowed like the good little dolt you are.......LOL

C.H. Truth said...

The agreement has not yet been implemented by any meaningful analysis.

how about the 3300 new EPA regulations that averaged 10,000 words a piece, Roger... have they not been implemented either?

caliphate4vr said...


Early onset of Alzheimer's disease can be controlled. Get some help.



yet you're the idiot that's always double posting..

now blame it on your phone

rrb said...

how about the 3300 new EPA regulations that averaged 10,000 words a piece, Roger... have they not been implemented either?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

the best way to implement those is to print them on a roll and put them in the EPA rest rooms.

rrb said...



Illegal immigrant sues city of San Francisco for reporting him to ICE

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/01/19/illegal-immigrant-sues-city-of-san-francisco-for-reporting-him-to-ice/



good gawd, the balls on these fucking beaners. thanks skeets.

C.H. Truth said...

Illegal immigrant sues city of San Francisco for reporting him to ICE

I saw that... it begs the question how someone who isn't a citizen of our Country has the right to actually use the government court system to "sue" a government municipal for following the law.

I guess it's all a matter or perspective, huh?

Roger Amick said...

The double posts were from fitting into the limit on the size of the posts. Some c/p was sloppy.

CH, the implementation takes years, or decades. You are just hacking again.

rrb said...



Disaster Could Put Obama Cabinet Member in Oval Office

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vFxbNZ8q4g

http://wwlp.com/2017/01/19/disaster-could-put-obama-cabinet-member-in-oval-office/



unreal. here you have cnn openly hoping for a horrendous disaster just to keep an 0linsky-ite in power.


rrb said...



you post like old people fuck, roger.

slow and sloppy.


rrb said...




“Can we stipulate for the purposes of this conversation that Donald Trump will never be President of the United States?” Mike Barnicle proclaimed on MSNBC’s Morning Joe less than 24 hours after Trump’s campaign kick-off.





opie said...

Mike Barnicle proclaimed on MSNBC’s Morning Joe less than 24 hours after Trump’s campaign kick-off.


I'm sure in your minimal mind, the above means something. Kinda like CH's prognostications, always wrong. LOL

rrb said...


it begs the question how someone who isn't a citizen of our Country has the right to actually use the government court system to "sue" a government municipal for following the law.

I guess it's all a matter or perspective, huh?
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

i guess. here's a sane perspective:


Family of Kate Steinle files lawsuit over deadly shooting on San Francisco pier

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/05/27/parents-kate-steinle-file-lawsuit-over-fatal-shooting.html



opie said...

CH said
how about the 3300 new EPA regulations that averaged 10,000 words a piece, Roger.

How about lowest arctic/antarctic ice for December? How about record arctic warmth? How about CO2 increasing by 1 ppm a year?

C.H. Truth said...

How about lowest arctic/antarctic ice for December? How about record arctic warmth? How about CO2 increasing by 1 ppm a year?

I would have thought eight years of "the one" would have brought about some real "healing"...

Sounds to me like whatever measures we are taking are failing dramatically... wouldn't you agree?

rrb said...



liberals are so much smarter than conservatives...


SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration miscalculated costs for the state Medi-Cal program by $1.9 billion last year, an oversight that contributed to Brown’s projection of a deficit in the upcoming budget, officials acknowledged this week.

The administration discovered accounting mistakes last fall, but it did not notify lawmakers until the administration included adjustments to make up for the errors in Brown’s budget proposal last week. The Democratic governor called for more than $3 billion in cuts because of a projected deficit he pegged at $1.6 billion.

“There’s no other way to describe this other than a straight up error in accounting, which we deeply regret,” said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the Department of Finance.

The agency followed its normal practice by waiting to report the errors in the governor’s next budget, he said.

Brown’s deficit projection was driven by more than just the accounting error, Palmer said, noting that California tax collections came in below expectations for most of the first half of the fiscal year.

The massive hole in the Medi-Cal budget surprised state lawmakers.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/01/18/1-8-billion-error-adds-to-california-deficit-projection/

opie said...

I would have thought eight years of "the one" would have brought about some real "healing"..

Well, your record of predictions of 0% would remain intact. Again, you prove your complete ineptitude when it comes to thinking. LOL When we are still consuming the largest share of fossil each year fuels by a large margin, i would not expect anything changing until there is a significant reductions in that consumption, would you say????? But to non-thinkers like you the longest journey does start with the first step is still true.

LOL

Loretta Russo said...

Plagiarized spam

Loretta Russo said...

Plagiarized spam

C.H. Truth said...

Well Opie...

I think we both know that as long as the "international community" continues to give a pass to "developing" countries like China and India, that what the United States does (with our four percent of the world's population) isn't going to matter much in the grand scheme of things.

I think we both know that the El Nino of 2015-2016 is more to blame for the recent increase in temperatures than any sort of increase or lack of decrease in the use of fossil fuels.

I think we both know that the election of Donald Trump is not going to significantly alter any of this either way.

One of us thinks it's fun to point out that 30 million words of new regulation has done nothing to "control the weather"... and that 30 million more words will have approximately the same effect of "zero".

opie said...

hat what the United States does (with our four percent of the world's population) isn't going to matter much in the grand scheme of things.

God you can be stupid as Loretta at times. You want us to be a leader and then not to lead with BS statements like that. If we don't set an example, why should any others do it. China is leading us in solar investment and India is making concerted effort to modernize and turn green. Your 4% of the population uses 25% of the world's energy. So your illogical argument of only 4% of the population is abject crap, just like your hockey buddy's expertise in stupidity. Thanx again for taking all the time to prove you have nothing.

opie said...


I think we both know that the El Nino of 2015-2016 is more to blame for the recent increase in temperatures than any sort of increase or lack of decrease in the use of fossil fuels.

If you had done any reading, you would have read that statements is oure crap. Sorry, suggest you look it up. LOL

opie said...

Look up that el nino affect CH???.....I know what it is and you are obviously too lazy to look it up. Once again, just make up your own facts to support your own premise. Too bad you got caught again.

opie said...

Still ignoring your screw up, CH? Nothing like hiding like a little girl when caught making up your own fake facts....just like fake news that trump is always doing....like his BC is fraudulent, GW is a chinese hoax, Putin didn't do it....all polls are fake....should I continue.???