Learning To Think Like A Progressive

Posted on May 9, 2015 by Tony Heller

ScreenHunter_9128 May. 09 19.47ScreenHunter_9129 May. 09 19.47

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Learning To Think Like A Progressive

  1. Mac says:
    May 10, 2015 at 12:03 am

    One of my favorite BS leftoid arguments: there is climate, and there is weather.

    So, basically, any event or condition that doesn’t fit with the global warming scam is merely temporary “weather”, but global warming? Global warming is forever.

    I’m not surprised this garbage comes from a person who doesn’t know the difference between “further” and “farther”. The leftoids are so easily persuaded by the climate change lie because they’re too stupid to know any better, and, of course, it predicts disaster for us all. God knows leftoids love anything that claims the world is coming to an end.

    Reply
  2. Ashley Pond V says:
    May 10, 2015 at 12:06 am

    It’s actually even much better. I couldn’t find US population data, but only looked for five minutes. European data shows puffin populations correlate almost directly up and down with sea temperature change: http://appinsys.com/globalwarming/Puffins_UK.htm

    Reply
    • teapartygeezer says:
      May 10, 2015 at 2:57 am

      Or … maybe not.

      CONCLUSION
      “As usual when anthropogenic CO2-based global warming (a.k.a. “climate change”) is blamed for something, investigation reveals a lack of evidence to support the alarmists’ position. In this case puffins decline at Isle of May – blame it on global warming. A coincident increase of puffins at Skomer Island is not attributed to global warming.

      Puffins’ main food – sandeels – may have declined as a result of overfishing combined with natural variations in the sandeels’ food – zooplankton populations. The zooplankton species composition is affected by the NAO with positive NAO resulting in higher sea surface temperatures in the North Sea. This correlates with a shift in the composition of zooplankton species.”

      Reply
  3. Ted says:
    May 10, 2015 at 12:13 am

    No Steve, you have it all wrong. When fish die because it’s too hot in Maine, it’s climate. When it’s cold in Maine, it’s weather. The fact that Maine can be both too hot and too cold, at the exact same time, is clear proof of climate change.

    That’s how you think like a progressive.

    Reply
  4. nickreality65 says:
    May 10, 2015 at 12:19 am

    IPCC & WMO define climate as weather averaged over 30 years.

    Reply
  5. philjourdan says:
    May 10, 2015 at 12:49 am

    Uh, where is Maine? West coast this year?

    Reply
  6. AndyG55 says:
    May 10, 2015 at 1:05 am

    Did you know, Maine’s highest temperature was set in 1911, 105ºC

    And the lowest state temperature was set in 2009. 🙂

    Reply
  7. Steve Case says:
    May 10, 2015 at 1:46 am

    The left plays bait & switch between weather and climate, warming and catastrophic warming, relative and absolute sea level, ocean temperature and sea surface temperature, ice and sea ice melting ice and calving glacier ice. tides and storm tides. land subsidence and sea level rise, It seems to be a never ending game of mix and match rules applied to whatever situation the agenda warrants.

    Reply
    • rah says:
      May 10, 2015 at 2:26 am

      They also play their word games with all kinds of hyperbole and redefinition of terms. Victims of 911 that were only trying to get the hell out of the towers were “heroes” and a marginal CAT I storm “Super Storm Sandy”. And now since the riots in Baltimore they claim the word “Thug” is a racist term. etc…

      Then people pick up on it. A prime example of one going in circles with me from Dr. Spencers board:

      “rah says:
      May 9, 2015 at 7:13 AM

      Actually Sandy did so much damage because the windward side struck a very vulnerable area during a high tide. But the nomenclature “super storm” was merely alarmist/media hype. No different than the Weather Channel deciding to name winter storms really.

      Reply: David A says:
      May 9, 2015 at 9:51 AM

      Sandy killed 128 people in the mid-Atlantic states, and caused tens of billions of dollars in damages. Is that enough to qualify as “super?”

      rah says:
      May 9, 2015 at 11:15 AM

      Tell me David A. How many killed and/or how much damage must something do to be classified as “super”?

      The earthquake in Haiti killed 10s of 1,000s and nearly wiped out that underdeveloped nations whole economy. Was it a “super earth quake”. If so, why? If not, why not?

      David A says:
      May 9, 2015 at 3:35 PM

      rah: There is no offical classification of “super” — it’s a product of free speech. Perhaps you should lobby for one.

      rah says: Yea, it was a product of the press I believe. But I was just asking how many and how much since that is what you implied was the standard for the use of the term. Remember?

      So we have established that there is no objective standard for the word. But the Merriam-Webster dictionary provides us with with the definitions:
      ull Definition of SUPER
      1
      a : of high grade or quality
      b —used as a generalized term of approval
      2
      : very large or powerful
      3
      : exhibiting the characteristics of its type to an extreme or excessive degree

      Which use applies to “Super storm”?”

      Reply
      • David A says:
        May 10, 2015 at 5:21 am

        Just so you no rah, I am not that David A

        Reply
        • Disillusioned says:
          May 10, 2015 at 10:52 am

          First chuckle of the morning. 🙂

        • rah says:
          May 10, 2015 at 12:07 pm

          Didn’t think so. After posting this here I noticed that a Steve Case had posted over there also. I do assume it is the same Steve I responded to over here simply because of the nature of their posts are similar.

      • Gail Combs says:
        May 11, 2015 at 8:09 pm

        The left are idiots.
        Thug ==> Thuggee

        WIKI

        The earliest currently known recorded mention of the Thugs as a special band or fraternity, rather than as ordinary thieves, is found in the following passage of Ziau-d din Barni’s History of Firoz Shah (written about 1356)….

        Membership was sometimes passed from father to son, in what would now be termed a criminal underclass. The leaders of long-established Thug groups tended to come from these hereditary lines, as the gang developed into a criminal ‘tribe’. Other men would get to know a Thug band and would hope to be recruited, in the way that one might aspire to join an elite regiment or university: they were the best operators in “the business” and, like a regiment or college fraternity, once in the group, there was a camaraderie of numbers and shared experience. The robbery became less a question of solving problems of poverty and more a profession, like soldiering.

        Sometimes the young children of the travellers would be spared and groomed to become Thugs themselves, as the presence of children would help allay suspicion. A fourth way of becoming a Thug was by training with a guru, similar to an apprenticeship for a guild or profession, during which the candidate could be assessed for reliability, courage, discretion and discipline…..

        Thuggee consider themselves to be children of Kali, created out of her sweat. This particular point is also one of the clear disconnects in the story built on the Thuggees. While only Hindus worship Kali, a large number of the Thuggees captured and convicted by the British were Muslims.[14]….

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Group_of_Thugs.gif

        Group of Thugs ca. 1894

        Reply
  8. Windsong says:
    May 10, 2015 at 2:01 am

    Maine? Isn’t that near Nova Scotia? Canadian Maritimes still recovering from last winter.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZmzkxtkMc

    Reply
  9. D. Self says:
    May 10, 2015 at 2:14 am

    The dumbing down of America….my kids deal with the liberal parrots daily at school.

    Reply
    • Disillusioned says:
      May 10, 2015 at 11:18 am

      Well, then it is a good thing I send me Mum potted flowering plants. I wouldn’t want to be associated with mega-carbon footprint hippo-crites like Al Gore, Leo DiCaprio, etc….

      The real reason is, of course, practicality. she gets to plant the bulbs in her garden and enjoy them again the following year. Been doing that for years; her back yard has been quite the [colorful] beneficiary.

      (My apologies to innocent hippopotami for the crass metaphor. They really don’t deserve to be lumped together with Fat Albert and Leo.) 😉

      Reply
  11. rhymeafterrhyme says:
    May 10, 2015 at 5:08 am

    “…I wish I believed in global warming,
    Believe me, I have tried my best,
    But I just can’t deny the real world science,
    So I’ve failed a believer’s first test!

    Read more: http://wp.me/p3KQlH-GD

    Reply
  12. Scarface says:
    May 10, 2015 at 12:16 pm

    Steven,

    I have been intrigued by this paper for years:
    http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y2787e/y2787e00.pdf (2001)

    (LOD = length of day)

    “A phenomenon of close correlation between the main climatic index dT and geophysical index (-LOD) still remains an intricate puzzle of geophysics. Another challenging puzzle is the observable 6-year lag between the detrended run of dT and -LOD. Taking into account this lag, the LOD observations can be used as a predictor of the future climatic trends. Even without a mechanism for a causal relationship between the detrended climatic (dT) and geophysical (LOD) indices, the phenomenon of their close similarity for the last 140 years makes LOD a convenient tool to predict the global temperature anomaly (dT) for at least 6 years ahead.”

    This quote is from page 10 of this paper. See also the graphs on page 6+7.

    Have you ever looked at anyting like this?
    And to other readers: does anyone know where to find an updated graph of the Length of Day?

    If this correlation still holds, then a 6 year prediction of dT is possible.

    Reply
  13. Don says:
    May 10, 2015 at 5:52 pm

    So the Great Lakes are now on the East Coast? I missed that.

    Reply
  14. R. de Haan says:
    May 11, 2015 at 5:18 am

    They will never give up pushing their climate crap.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *