Saturday, December 28, 2013

Baykeeper wants you to gather their propaganda material for them - again

Be A King Tides Groupie

Go take pictures of the high tide so they can pretend the oceans have risen due to - what is it now, Glogal Warming? Or Climate 'Change'? Some new term?

Then - sit back and watch, because if ANY of these pics DO show up in one of their scam fundraising letters, you ought to be outraged.

Then, start electing people that will rein in these new age con men.

NOTE: They've finally had to give up the price-y Old Town office space.
__________________

King tides to hit North Coast; no major flooding expected due to ...
Humboldt Beacon

For Humboldt Baykeeper policy director Jennifer Kalt, king tides provide a visualization of the impacts of rising sea levels on habitats and infrastructure ...

You thought I was kidding...

46 comments:

  1. You are truely psycho crazy.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Of the crazies, Rose is actually quite tame. Believe it or not most tea party conservatives believe the global temperatures are cooling and polar ice caps are increasing in size!

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/12/rescue-ice-breaker-now-stuck-global-warming-scientists-trapped-in-antarctica/

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/12/bad-year-for-junk-scientists-planet-cools-on-global-warming/

    ReplyDelete
  3. It doesn't matter why they're rising. We might want to prepare.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes, anon, especially the 4th district. But climate change doesn't seem to be on Supervisor Bass' agenda.

    Rose, the has been an effort by academia to change the term from at least the late eighties when I was in school. This article says it is as far back as the 70's.*

    I don't know why the right is preoccupied with this, maybe because they just want to pretend their is any controversy at all on this subject. There isn't. It's happening. It's caused by humans. The preferred term is climate change, but by any name we need to deal with it, especially as we live in a coastal an community with a significant portion of our population at or near sea level.

    You really need to help your party get over this science -phobia. You will continue to atrophy until you stop listening to folks like Rush or Senator inhoff and start listening to... Governor Schwartzenegger.

    *
    http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/04/23/1909881/debunking-the-dumbest-denier-myth-again-climate-change-vs-global-warming/

    ReplyDelete
  5. It snowed in Cairo this year. First time in 100 years. Oh, that's right, it's "global warming's making the weather colder because it's really getting warmer.."

    When the hot air goes out of false fear mongers the temperature will decrease that much faster. If you're really concerned do something. Don't turn on your heater or wood stove, don't turn on your car engine, don't turn on any gas engined devices, and freeze to death. One less excess heat source. Meanwhile, I've got news about our Project, Rose, the one that doesn't exploit environmental problems but solves them--without need of money-grubbing land sharks all dressed up in enviro camo waiting for another Corporate Seal to come along to dine on..

    ReplyDelete
  6. Humboldt's very own loony dynamic duo, Rose Welsh & Stephen Lewis! Take a bow!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous coward, no doubt another identity fraud Prog troll on guard dog duty for the new Good Old Boys and Girls at the community trough, a bunch of phony ambulance chasing landsharks posing as "environmentalists". Mediation costs the community very little but of course, mediation doesn't pay for those Baykeeper, EPIC salaries and operating expenses, does it..

    ReplyDelete
  8. Stephen your example is exactly the reason academics prefer "climate change". "Global warming" connotes "warming". It isn't always going to happen like that. Climate is subject to an infinite amount of variables which is one of the reasons modeling is so difficult.
    So, snow in Cairo is exactly the type of extreme weather that climate change will exhibit.

    And snow on the pyrimids is exactly the type of photo that our local Republicans and Coal Inc. will use to promote confusion and demagogue a very, very, very, serious problem that we actually have the tools to attempt to fix. At little or no cost - and with an exceptional amount of upside - if done right. Say, for example, with "smart growth".

    But that would might mean a person in the TPZ zone or far from town might not be able to build that 2nd or third home on his or her property - and that might mean we start to use less energy. Many people with vested interests are against any truth on this subject and would rather point out the iconic and memorable snow on the pyramids.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Agreed. If the freak snow in Cairo is a sign of any long-term change to the climate, it's climate-change. Meanwhile, we're experiencing a drought, which is exactly what's predicted to happen more and more for our region.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Motormouth Jon, I don't really want to start your "On" button because once on, you just don't shut off.

    You miss the point as usual of my pointing out the little major Prog/Enviro Propaganda Campaign that rested only a year ago on "Global Warming". Now, the Global Warming "experts" had to back off and back fill with "reasons why" the climate's not behaving according to their predictions so now we have "Climate >Change<...

    Please don't do your OCD trip and jump to a response. You talk too much and have little sense because of wanting public attention continuously it seems.

    ReplyDelete
  11. motormouth blogster jon12/29/2013 1:35 PM

    Yes Stephen, touche - when you can't talk policy, attack the messenger. You have learned your right-wing lesson well young padawan.

    It's not that I missed it, your point is wrong. "Climate change" has been the preferred term for decades now. Seems we are stuck with "global warming" though. In no small part because of the right who likes to use it then point out the contradiction just like you did. What are the odds that Drudge had that exact picture that you and the local Republicans used?

    The climate is behaving exactly as it would in a global warming/climate change scenario. There are countless examples if you care to look for them. But Coal Inc. would rather you not.

    Sorry, getting rid of me is not that easy. If you say ridiculous things, and I have the time to rebut them, I will. Especially if it's related to the GPU, which climate change most definitely is.

    ReplyDelete
  12. OMG! Now I've heard it all. Calling Stephen a right-winger. Now THAT'S funny.

    Jon, I don't know where you come from, but you sure don't know what you're talking about AT ALL.

    But you're a good little soldier, not one iota of shame at switching right into "climate change' when the 'global warming' schtick began to fail. When Climategate emails revealed crazed sex-poodle AlGore's "all the scientists agree" claim was pure , unadulterated BS.... not one iota of shame.

    Yet you want to be able to dictate what others do.

    THINK, man. You can do it!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Tea Baggers are the best, thanks for the laughs Rosemarie!

    ReplyDelete
  14. See Rose, you do it too. You are attacking the messenger. Notice that this isn't about climate change but about the messengers.

    Back to the point. Climate change has been the preferred term for decades. I have first hand experience of this and I've provided a link to back this up. I've also pointed out Exactly an example of the reason "global warming" is preferred by the right right here in this thread.

    The rights answer, attack the credibility of the messenger when it's a subject you don't want to talk about. (Yes we will do it too)

    You are more right than wrong about Stephen, but from what I've seen he carries a special venom for the local left and he uses the tried and true tactic that you must be able to admit is much more prevalent on the right - ad-hominem attacks. Rush, Glenn, Sean make a very gaudy living off of it and no liberal who tries the same is nearly as successful. There IS a reason for that and it isn't the correctness of their ideas.

    And I'm not ok with the term tea baggers either. It's not helpful.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yeah, you're just hoping that if it does turn out to be an ice-age instead of 'global warming' that the government will mandate you drive a big SUV to help warm things back up - right?

    Breathe out! You can warm it up, yes, you can!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Jon, 'GLOBAL WARMING' was drummed into your skull - and everyone else's, did you forget that? It was going to melt the ice-packs and kill all the polar bears - and make the seas rise - remember? It was why we were all supposed to feel guilty, and bow and scrape, and pay our penance, and buy our carbon credits - REMEMBER?

    It's an inconvenient truth, I know. Then, like the street corner doomsday preacher's end of the world RANT, when the facts didn't go their way, they changed their terminology. Now it's 'Climate Change' and who can argue with that? and now, when we have blizzards every time Al Gore flies over, it's a sign of - you guessed it - GLOBAL WARMING'CLIMATE CHANGE.

    And YOU buy it. That doesn't make you a messenger, Jon. It makes you a sheep - and no one is attacking you - what I see on every thread on every blog in Humboldt County is people who are frustrated with you. Not because you're a messenger. Everyone of them is asking you to THINK. Not attacking you. Trying to get you to understand. Open your mind.

    The polar bears are alive. The ice hasn't melted.

    None of your warmista friends went out and bought air-conditioning stock, or bikini stocks, because in reality, they know it's all a scam, too.

    Just as you can't stop an ice-age, if one is coming, by driving an SUV, neither can you stop global warming, if in fact it were occurring. You can paint the roof of your car white, you can put on your hairshirt and feel guilty and righteous, but it won't change a thing.

    But the scam will make some people rich, while you shiver in your cold house. Doing the right thing. Right?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Rose, please, please do me a favor. I know it's fun to diminish the leftist. One thing I am very proud of is my Chemistry degree. I did well (outside of quantum mechanics). I know more than a layperson on this stuff and I hope you know by now I don't like to beat my chest. I don't do this as a debate technique, I'm just doing it to establish a tiny bit of credibility with you, Rose, because your opinion as an outspoken community member is important to me. (as another outspoken community member)

    Here** is a graph of C02 levels published in the NYT last May. Look at the x-axis (horizontal) - the dates go 400,000 years back. The y-axis (vertical) is carbon dioxide (yes, the stuff we breath out with every breath). For the past 400,000 years the carbon dioxide level has been constant within a range of about 175 to 275. The expanded region of the graph represents that straight vertical line at the far right of the graph. When the x axis is expanded to show 1960 to today, you can see that the C02 since 1960 has expanded way, way, way beyond anything we have seen in 400,000 years.

    That's a problem. Do you understand why? It's related to the other term you don't hear anymore, the greenhouse effect, CO2 will trap the sun's radient heat as it bounces of the earth, much like a greenhouse, resulting in... yes...global warming.

    The globe will warm, but that effect will not be noticeable by a human in their lifetime, so the more descriptive term, at least from the perspective of one of us, humans, will be climate change. Because that is what we will be experiencing - great variations in climate as the globe does warm.

    But the key is Rose that it is happening even if you really believe Rush has more cred on this than 97 or 99% of all those ideological scientists out there, and this one confused, little, unthinking neighbor of yours. And the proof of this starts....just starts with atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Not pictures of snow-covered pyramids or well worn debate techniques.

    And final point, the 400 ppm CO2 measurement we passed this year hasn't been seen for millions of years. But heaven forbid we try to plan our communities! People need to build a home were they damn well want to build a home. They earned that privilege, what have I earned? Nothing. Slacker.

    ** http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/05/10/science/crossing-a-line.html?ref=earth (if you are interested, the associated article is good)

    * Just discovered this. You might be happy to hear the scientist who has been keeping track of the measurements for the above graph will be losing funding and probably won't get it from private sources.

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=uncertain-future-for-iconic-keeling-curve-co2-measurements

    ReplyDelete
  18. oops - in the copy and paste - I missed pasting the first part of the above post.

    Reading order...THIS FIRST followed by the 4:44 post. Sorry. The tiny blogger screen does not work well for editing long posts.

    "was drummed into your skull"

    By whom? CNN? Rush? Not academics, not those who know what they are talking about. When they did it's with a *sigh*.

    "was drummed into your skull"

    By whom? CNN? Rush? Not academics, not those who know what they are talking about. When they did it's with a *sigh*.

    "It was going to melt the ice-packs and kill all the polar bears - and make the seas rise - remember?"

    This is still true, the earth is warming the sea level will rise, the polar bears will lose habitat. However, sometimes there will be snow in odd places, at which point demagogues will say - "global warming? There was just snow on the pyramids for God sake. Told you it was a hoax by those e-mailing Sussex elitists"

    "And YOU buy it."
    The people I take my information from give it away, it's Coal Inc. that is selling something.

    The reason academics give it away is we have been wise enough in the past to collectively fund disinterested scientists and academics. The right is trying desperately to reduce the influence of the academies and they are having an effect. The tragic thing is they are one of the shining stars of our civilization. My California higher education was highly subsidized by you Rose and many others. Unfortunately we are not continuing in that tradition of building our human, shared future societal infrastructure.

    ReplyDelete
  19. hahah. Rush? That's your answer? NO - tell me if driving an SUV will stop an ice age?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Baggers are THE BEST!

    My favorite kind of reality show!

    ReplyDelete
  21. No, one person driving a SUV will not. That's exactly why we need the public sector to manage big problems. That's also why the private sector would rather we not discuss these problems honestly. How many suvs were there in the 70s Rose? In the 1890s? That's where an unregulated market will get you. It's a big problem and instead of taking a leadership role on this issue as we should be, we prefer to talk about snow on the pyramids and belittle those who would draw attention to difficult problems. Like the Keeling curve, which you managed to ignore.

    ReplyDelete
  22. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/31/science/without-winter-freezes-mangroves-are-marching-north-scientists-say.html?_r=0&hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1388437217-NrPm56+fHIpWofGV/kh/tg

    But there is snow on the pyramids. No worries. I promise you this story won't make it to Drudge, so as a community service I'll post it here.

    "The changes in temperature can be pretty small, but once you cross a threshold, you can get rather dramatic changes in the ecosystem"

    ReplyDelete
  23. The Russian ship measuring antartic ice melting is frozen stuck.....

    Jon...

    perhaps you can help them by propelling a rescue boat with your motormouth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL!!! Too funny coming from Steve Lewis, who used to babble nonstop on Eric's blog among other places.

      Delete
  24. LOL - Global warming scientists forced to admit defeat... because of too much ice: Stranded Antarctic ship´s crew will be rescued by helicopter... with repeated sea rescue attempts being abandoned as icebreaking ships failed to reach them. Now that effort has been ditched, with experts admitting the ice is just too thick. Instead the crew have built an icy helipad, with plans afoot to rescue the 74-strong team by helicopter.

    Inconvenient, that.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Jon, you seem like a nice guy. You'll come around.

    But you mentioned earlier that you think it's the right doing the attacking - I challenge you to re-register as an 'R' and see just how wrong you are about that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rose says, "Jon, you seem like a nice guy. You'll come around."

      What an unbelievably condescending statement. Not surprising though.

      Delete
  26. There is a difference between a stuck ship and/ or snow on the pyramids and something systematic and over time like the northern migration of the mangroves. Are you both really serious or are you playing debate techniques. I really don't know. It's exactly the reason climate change, again is often, (but I'll admit I just realized) not always the preferred term.

    I can't articulate it well enough, but it's like something anecdotal, vs something happening over and over over time. It's the same reason I wouldn't say this dry season is not evidence of global warming but if rain totals over say 50 or 100 years start to significantly shift I'd get a little worried it might be.

    Regarding the R victimization, compare arush to Thom Hartmann. There is a difference.

    ReplyDelete
  27. It's not only climate change that the are pubs are struggling with... Unbelievable

    The Theory of Evolution received a big boost 90 years ago in the Scopes Trial, in which a young Tennessee teacher was tried for having introduced the views of Charles Darwin to his students. But Darwin has his doubters among Republicans in 21st Century America.

    Just 43 percent of self-identified Republicans in America believe that humans and other living beings evolved over time, according to a newly released Pew Research Center poll. The figure has fallen sharply from 54 percent in a similar survey taken in 2009.

    By contrast, 48 percent from the GOP believe that all living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.

    The Republicans’ attitudes toward evolution contrast with those of Democrats and Independent voters. Sixty-seven percent of Democrats accept evolution of species over time, along with 65 percent of Independents.

    Overall, 60 percent of Americans believe that humans and other species have evolved over time, compared to 33 percent who believe species have always taken their present form.

    The highest belief in Evolution comes among college-educated Americans, with 72 percent believing that humans have evolved over time and 77 percent who feel animals have evolved. Among young adults aged 18 to 29, the figures are 68 percent and 73 percent, respectively.

    Pew has the largest sampling of any national pollster, and surveyed 1,983 adults on the question of Evolution.

    ReplyDelete
  28. A 8:44 brings up some important points Rose and Stephen. It may be we are not speaking apples and oranges here. I may be concerned about this world, where maybe this is not something you think humans should concern themselves with. There is something else, something greater, a higher power in play.

    I say that with respect, not dirision. Sincerely. We each have our belief systems as is our right, thank God (or humans;)).

    For the record. I'm agnositic which is definitely not atheist. I'm even more cowardly than an atheist. My view is, I don't know, I don't have faith, but I do believe this world and it's inhabitants are miracles on many levels.

    But back to the mundane. Here is a link from Right Wing Watch (one of my faves) that links to a recent poll which now shows a majority of Republicans DON'T believe in evolution. This is a problem Rose and Stephen. You can be religious (deeply) and still believe in evolution. If I'm not mistaken even the Catholic Church now accepts evolution. So anon's point is well taken - it may be that global warming isn't the issue - science is.

    http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evolution/

    ReplyDelete
  29. Just 43% of those polled believe in evolution? Wow, Republicans and science just don't mix, do they?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Don't go mistaking me for a person of faith, Jon, i don't fit into your little boxes. In fact, I may be more open-minded than you, Jon - I actually think DEMOCRATS go to church, too.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Jon,

    I majored in anthropology at U.C. Berkeley. I've been studying evolution since I got my first book on anthropology at age 7 or 8: The Earth for Sam. Written especially for young people to explain the evolution of life on earth. What do you think of your efforts to link me and Rose together in this or any of your fantasy politics? I am not a Republican but a Democrat and really, one of the most radical Democrats in Humboldt County who considers you and fellow Progs to be poseurs using local political conflicts for personal public recognition.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Jon, Steve Lewis is a lost cause. Don't bother.

    Rose, 43% of polled Republicans don't believe in evolution 43%! It's no wonder they question climate scientists! Glad to hear you're not the uber religious type that fits in the other 57%.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Reading comprehension skills are fading today. It's 57% that don't believe in evolution. 57%! That's unbelievably scary. Rose, you're apparently in the minority within your party. Congratulations!

    ReplyDelete
  34. Since you're into statistics tonight :)

    Nearly 3/4 of felons register as Democrats.

    "The authors, professors from the University of Pennsylvania and Stanford University, found that in some states, felons register Democratic by more than six-to-one. In New York, for example, 61.5 percent of convicts are Democrats, just 9 percent Republican. They also cited a study that found 73 percent of convicts who turn out for presidential elections would vote Democrat."

    ReplyDelete
  35. I found this one interesting

    80% of serial killers vote Republican

    "“Across the board, serial killers are predominantly conservative in their political leanings. Gary Ridgeway, Dennis Rader, and probably the biggest name of all, Ted Bundy, were all active in the Republican Party at some level. Quizzing other killers showed the same thing, that the vast majority vote Republican,” said lead pollster David Quick. “We gain no analysis from this, it garners us no insight into the workings of the minds of conservative politicians or serial killers, but it is an overwhelming majority. Because serial killers come from diverse backgrounds and possess vastly different IQ’s they appear to have nothing in common save their conservative ideals and their desire to butcher people. It’s compelling data to be sure.”

    ReplyDelete
  36. Anonymous - I would not continue that train of thought - that's me. It just doesn't seem right to me. Here is my take...
    I'm proud to have citizens, even ones that have once committed a felony as Democrats - they are smart enough for one to chose right and to understand the Republicans would rather brandish a scarlet F on their clothing for life. They did the crime, did the time welcome back to citizenship. Life-long judgement (if past the term of sentence) for a crime is cruel and unusual. Hopefully there were some programs in prison to help them understand how and why to live a productive life.


    Rose and Stephen, we are veering off subject. In bringing in religion, I'm not saying who you are, I was asking a question. I am trying to figure out the important disconnect on this issue. You are focusing on individual events - snow on pyramids, stuck ships. Both, by the way, connoting cold. Rose brought up the "ice age" when speaking of SUV's.

    This is the exact reason the term "climate change" is preferred (when appropriate). You are both exactly illustrating the point by using deceptive debating techniques (ie cold - not warm - anecdotal evidence). I was trying to figure out if you were being sincere. If you did have strong religious beliefs I would have understood the disconnect - because long term effects or short term ones don't make a difference if in the end our fate is in a higher power's hands. (For the record I personally revere the devoutly religious as half of my family is deeply religious, not to mention I ...just... have no personal issue with a person's chosen (or not) path of spirituality)

    That is what I was doing. Back to the subject then. Do you not see the important distinction between evidence like the Keeling curve and the mangrove story and snow on the pyramids and a stuck icebreaker? The difference is anecdotal vs systemic. The anecdotal will vary by location, and climate change is more accurate to explain what is happening for exactly this reason, even cold scenarios are completely compatible with how global warming or "climate change" will occur.

    Now the mangrove story is important because mangrove habitat is moving northward due to ever more northward latitudes having - yes - systemically warmer temperatures that do not allow the winter thaw that the mangroves cannot tolerate.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Rose, you know that ship that's trapped in the ice? It has a full compliment of idiots just like the scientific experts you've got frantically posting their ridiculous warming "facts" on this blog....

    Wouldn't you LOVE to be a fly on that ship's mess hall wall right now, listening to them trying to explain why they're stuck in a RECORD THINCK ice jam on their way to see the DEVASTATION that global warming (excuse me, climate change) has unleashed on the Antarctic region?

    I'm busting my gut laughing just sitting here imagining it. I don't know if I could take it, hearing it in person...

    I see our "anon" has found a new outlet for his nastiness. He really got spanked elsewhere, so I'm not surprised that he's back to harassing you here ... some people ....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those pesky scientists, first comes the evolution nonsense, then global warming? Meanwhile, the bible has already answered these questions.

      Oh you Baggers are just the best!!!

      Delete
  38. He's ill, Hi.

    And... The team attempted to recreate the 1911-13 Antarctic journey of Douglas Mawson, only to get stuck in the ice.

    One wonders what was causing the 'Global Warming' that allowed Mawson to traverse those waters. Maybe it was the mangroves.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Sadly - Unnoticed, the IPCC has slashed its global-warming predictions, implicitly rejecting the models on which it once so heavily and imprudently relied. In the second draft of the Fifth Assessment Report it had broadly agreed with the models that the world will warm by 0.4 to 1.0 Cº from 2016-2035 against 1986-2005. But in the final draft it quietly cut the 30-year projection to 0.3-0.7 Cº, saying the warming is more likely to be at the lower end of the range [equivalent to about 0.4 Cº over 30 years]. If that rate continued till 2100, global warming this century could be as little as 1.3 Cº.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Planet likely to warm by 4C by 2100, scientists warn

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/dec/31/planet-will-warm-4c-2100-climate?view=desktop

    I wonder how many baggers out there still believe that the world is flat?

    ReplyDelete
  41. Rose you are clearly part of the suicide caucus, disbelieving evolution and climate change is self-destructive behavior. You have only proven your idiocy with this post and thread.

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice-intermediate.htm

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/03/antarctica-ice-trapped-academik-shokalskiy-climate-change

    ReplyDelete
  42. Woah, more comments.
    I just wanted to let you all know that rapscallion Drudge is playing the old "hey look, it's really cold. Therefore globalWARMING isn't occurring." That's why academics prefer climate change when appropriate. Demagogues will use anything, even imprecise language to pull the wool over people's eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Rose - you should source other people's work. I thought conservatives believed in personal responsibility. A quick google of a snippet of that last post took me here.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/01/ipcc-silently-slashes-its-global-warming-predictions-in-the-ar5-final-draft/

    Common now!

    ReplyDelete

Comments are open, but moderated, for the time-being. Good luck.