Sandbox – 27feb16

February 2016
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

Sandbox – 27feb16

27 February 2016

[Here is what Joe Biden had to say about filling SCOTUS vacancies. And the record here shows that no liberal has explained why this time is so different that the Senate should not continue to follow the advice of our VP and several of his prominent Democrat colleagues. We expected crickets, and they have spoken. gjr]

Posted in Comment Sandbox

197 responses to “Sandbox – 27feb16”

George Rebane

27 February 2016

Yesterday’s Daily Signal reported the ongoing and longstanding tenet of progressive belief – opposition voices are to be proscribed by force if necessary – on the CSULA campus. My conclusion is rapidly changing from their being simply stupid to ‘stupid and evil’.
Student protesters swarmed California State University, Los Angeles to barricade the entrances of a theater where conservative commentator Ben Shapiro was set to deliver a speech about censorship and diversity on college campuses.
Led primarily by the school’s Black Student Union and Black Lives Matter chapter, the hundreds of demonstrators, including some professors, poured into the Student Union building Thursday afternoon to block other students from attending the event.
http://dailysignal.com/2016/02/26/campus-protesters-try-to-silence-conservative-speaker-demand-college-presidents-resignation/

LikeLike
Walt

27 February 2016

Once again demonstrating ” You can say anything you like,, just as long as we(Progressive Commies) agree with what you say”.
A comment I heard and saw from a news story filmed on the Berkeley campus.

LikeLike
Patricia Smith

27 February 2016

Truthfully, I was appalled when this statement surfaced. Biden has always spoken inappropriately and I’m glad he withdrew from the race. That being said, he was wrong and so are the Republicans that want to block Obama’s nomnation. It is his right as long as he is still in office. I think it would be hysterical if the Republicans block his nomination, Bernie gets elected, and nominates Obama for the Court.

LikeLike
Patricia Smith

27 February 2016

BTW, I deplore political correctness that censures either side.

LikeLike
Gregory

27 February 2016

I’d not become aware of Ben Shapiro, though I can’t say the name rings no bells. Thanks to the protest against him I clicked through to listen to his whole spiel. I’d say the President of CSULA shot himself in the foot with his actions against free speech and allowing hard left protesters seal off the auditorium; the end result of the actions of the censors outside the venue is to have multiplied the number of eyes and ears Shapiro reached by a few orders of magnitude.
The event itself is here:
http://livestream.com/YAF/events/4870270
An interesting character, BA UCLA, JD Harvard Law. A Cruz supporter, and that didn’t surprise me. Not a racist word was uttered on stage or among members of the audience, contrary to the claims by the fascisti outside the room.
Walt’s 12:34 is not unlike a joke from the old Soviet Union… from a Pravda employee to a western journalist… “We have the same freedoms… you can criticize your President, and we are equally free to criticize your President”.

LikeLike
Gregory

27 February 2016

“That being said, he was wrong and so are the Republicans that want to block Obama’s nomnation[sic].”-P Smith 117
No one is blocking Obama from any nomination, no one has said he didn’t have that power.
The Senate has advised that no hearings will be scheduled to take up the nomination, and that is the Senate’s power. That is their right, and past Senates have refused to act on Presidential SCOTUS nominations for well over two years, waiting for that President to term out.
That President, James Tyler, was a lifelong slaver and a Constitutional literalist who passed away twenty years later on his way to take a seat in the Confederacy’s House of Representatives equivalent and before the Senate began blocking him, he was thrown out of the Whig Party. The Whigs were sort of a grabbag of what we would now call Libertarians and Republicans (in fact, Abraham Lincoln was a Whig Party leader before he was a Republican).

LikeLike
George Rebane

27 February 2016

Signs of our times. I understand that many parents today have raised their now teen-agers so that they dare not leave them at home alone under their own recognizance. Is this societal progress? At the age of eight I was capable and regularly babysat infants who needed to be bottle fed and have their diapers changed. I recall those times as my first cold dose of responsibility because that child’s life was in my hands until her parents returned, and that was serious duty. Our ten-year-old kids would do the same for our neighbors in the 1970s. But today a politically correct parent dare not leave their teenager at home for fear of,… for fear of,… for fear of what I have no idea unless the kid is a complete imbecile.

LikeLike
Gregory

27 February 2016

A local blogger recently wrote that he skipped an event because he was sitting his 8th grader alone at the house and couldn’t risk traveling a mile to the cocktail lounge where the major shindig was taking place.
In general, it isn’t the kids who are the imbeciles.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

27 February 2016

Did anyone see the mother of the year candidate in the Union who sent her pit bulls after the deputies when they were on a kidde welfare check?

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

28 February 2016

http://patriotpost.us/posts/40918
http://patriotpost.us/articles/40948

LikeLike
fish

28 February 2016

Questionable news for our gal Bill…..the Neocons Neocon…Bob Kagan endorsed Hillary yesterday. That should do wonders locking down that constantly growing cadre of anti war Sanders voters who probably would have otherwise reluctantly pulled the lever for her.
Not sure that’s going help her get “over the top”!?

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

28 February 2016

My question I have been asking myself is where will the Socialist Workers of America go now? The Green Party or one of those American People’s Parties should get a small spike, but what about most of the others? Sure, some will break for Hillary and others simply cannot ever pull the lever (with or without using a vagina) for My Gal or Mr. Trump. When all is said and done Hillary needs them more than the Republicans….ok, we need a few of them. We won’t know the answer until well into 2017

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

28 February 2016

Gilled One @ 7:33 in the late morn…it’s Sunday.
Bob Kagan?. Never heard of him until now. Yep, foreign policy adviser to Presidents and Hillary Clinton when she was Madame Secretary. Oh well. You win some, you lose some, and some you are glad to lose. 🙂

LikeLike
George Rebane

28 February 2016

DonB 1017pm – OK, I’ll see your ‘mother of the year’ and raise you the just discovered longstanding fight club at our own NUHS.
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016/02/26/watch-video-surfaces-of-alleged-fight-club-at-grass-valley-high-school/

LikeLike
Don Bessee

28 February 2016

Saw that Dr. R. From the snipit I saw there did look look like much chance of any injury. Perhaps come boys club boxing classes would help with the testosterone and develop some actual self defense skills at the same time. 😉

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

28 February 2016

Don’t they get a participation ribbon? Be true to your school.
This one has surprised me that it took this long. Our vet from Hawaii that serviced active duty in Raghead land already called Debbie out a couple months ago. When the Dem debate issue arose, Debbie said it was a group decision in the DNC on the number of debates and dates by the DNC. Not so, said the vice-chair lady from Hawaii. Liar, liar! She said there was no counting of heads, no discussion, no vote. Debbie just announced the schedule. I figured then that any person of character and uprightness would have to part company with Debbie Whatzhername Shultz’ aka, My Gal’s best friend for life.
http://news.yahoo.com/democratic-rep-tulsi-gabbard-resigns-dnc-endorses-bernie-150742044.html

LikeLike
jon smith

28 February 2016

Re: fight club. This is a perfect example of parenting gone to hell. What good father doesn’t teach his son the basics of boxing? At twelve my boy could have taken out both of those high school kids with a few jabs and a hook.

LikeLike
Russ Steele

28 February 2016

I was in a sixth-grade fight club. The dads build a raised ring in the ice rink warming shed; we had a mat surrounding by ropes, gloves and head gear. We were matched up using our weight by the coach, who has been a professional boxer. I was matched up with his son, who had far more experience. I when down for the count in the first round of my first and last boxing club fight. Lesson learned, experience counts!

LikeLike
Russ Steele

28 February 2016

Press Forbidden from Filming Hillary Boarding Private Plane
The press was forbidden from filming Hillary Clinton boarding her private plane, said an ABC reporter covering the leading Democratic candidate.
“Clinton staff won’t allow press to film HRC boarding her charter. We must get on our plane before she gets out of car,” Liz Kreutz wrote on Twitter.

OK, you Republican investigative reporters, get out those long lenses and lets lets solve this problem. What no Republican investigative reporters? OK, amateure photogs here is your chance for for 15 minutes of fame.

LikeLike
Gregory

28 February 2016

Regarding the NUHS Fight Club, it has been taken up by the Drudge Report and that is NOT going to help NJUHSD public relations. Time for Ms. Louise Johnson to earn that $170k coming her way this year.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

28 February 2016

Whatz doing on?? I expectec Salon and the Huff n Puff post to run critical stories about My Gal here and here, but not the NYT. And the Times endorsed her! Now Fox is going negative on Trump.
It’s a mad world I tell ya, stark raving mad.
http://news.yahoo.com/video/york-times-hillary-clinton-legacy-162434154.html

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

28 February 2016

Warren Buffet disagrees with shareholder who owns one share of stock.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/f265e50a-dbea-11e5-a72f-1e7744c66818.html#slide0

LikeLike
George Rebane

28 February 2016

BillT 537pm – Mr Tozer, this is embarrassing, but FYI Fox News has been consistently negative on Trump since Day One.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

28 February 2016

Dr. Rebane, thank you. I am such a worm. A worm with a red face. I haven’t keep up with those who have a boob tube. I had no idea…..except on this one Pro Trump site they were calling for a boycott of some gal named Megan. The conservative sites generally don’t like Trump. Neither to the liberal sites. Whatz up with that?? Getting lonely at the top. :). .Oh well……knowledge is good. Is Big Bob still on The Five?? .Found him a straight shooter and candid. I respect that. Thank you again for handling me with kid gloves. I am a sensitive sort who gets my feeling hurt easily. It because I have a big heart and those with big soft hearts feel pain easier.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

28 February 2016

Hey, this guy is dissing my gal. Shameful.
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/02/28/farrakhan-dont-fall-for-satan-hillary-clintons-crap/

LikeLike
Russ Steele

28 February 2016

A majority of likely California voters support legalizing marijuana, a new pollster announced.
Just shy of 60 percent of respondents to a survey conducted by Probolsky Research threw their weight behind the Golden State’s upcoming referendum on pot, which would dramatically shift the public debate around state and federal drug policy. A supermajority of Democrats (69.4 percent) said they would support an initiative okaying the recreational use of marijuana, “while a majority of Republican voters (57.8 percent) would vote against it,” Probolsky noted in a release.
Other cleavages emerged from the polling. The 18 to 34-year-old cohort of likely voters turned in the greatest level of support, nearly reaching 80 percent. “And, while 79.8 percent of those who describe themselves as ‘liberal/progressive’ and 55.3 percent of ‘moderate’ voters would vote yes, an initiative would capture the support of 38.4 percent of self-described ‘conservative’ voters. That said, 58.9 percent of conservatives vote no.”
The prospect of legal pot in California has been a polarizing one, the poll confirmed. Just 3.4 percent of respondents were unsure how they came down on legalization or refused to state a preference.
http://calwatchdog.com/2016/02/25/pot-popular-in-ca/
This will change the character of Nevada County as the large cooperations take over the growing and distribution of recreational MJ.

LikeLike
jon smith

29 February 2016

The failed “Just say no” policy passed by 4 of our 5 board sups led by Constitutional sheriff Royal speaks volumes about our inability to be proactive to a challenge facing our community. Their one fits few answer to pot growing is mind grating in its simplicity. It reminds me of A bomb drills under our desks in the third grade. No one questioned why these drills were needed much less what good they would do against the inevitable blast wave,
Marijuana is and will continue to be grown in this community. Regulate it at a rational level with rational rules and it will work for us as a county. Drive the entire endeavor underground and you have lost all control regarding cultivation rules, taxation, and distribution. The pot growers here have forty years of history nimbly sidestepping jack booted law. Give us some tangible and common sense regulations to work with and we’ll enter the fold. Until then, expect nothing in return except a costly and ineffective game of cat and mouse.

LikeLike
Gregory

29 February 2016

I completely support the relegalization of cannabis, whose criminalization in the US was largely due to the law enforcement buildup over Prohibition of alcohol looking for something else to do as that gig was winding down. However, I don’t support the concept Nevada County can toke themselves to riches as a major source of pot for the state and beyond.
It’s a bloody plant; there really isn’t any good reason for it to cost more than tomatoes, and if it becomes legal, it probably won’t cost more than tomatoes so growers will have to work as hard as tomato farmers to make a decent living.
The real money is in avocados. 🙂

LikeLike
Gregory

29 February 2016

and now for something different…
Checking the accuweather.com forecasts, we might expect four inches of rain in the next week, 5+ in the week after that. Keep your powder dry.

LikeLike
Robert Cross

29 February 2016

“We expected crickets, and they have spoken. ” Do you mean that the two “progressives/lib holes/etc.” that are willing to brave the insults that come with commenting here haven’t weighed in? You speak as if the world (and not just your cadre) turns on your words and the cricket people have nothing better to do than follow and comment on every syllable as does your meager following of cohorts. Not so, some people actually have lives that go beyond political blogging and painting “kilroy was here” on the digital landscape.

LikeLike
George Rebane

29 February 2016

re Gregory 930am – It seems to me that most RR commenters support legalizing MJ in one manner or another. While I respect Mr Don Bessee’s and Sheriff Keith Royal’s positions on the downsides of legalized MJ, I haven’t heard any convincing arguments that prohibiting or making it harder for individuals to grow it in NC will marginally impact our way of life (culture) when it becomes legal statewide and the big guys start growing the stuff in huge warehouses. While I’m concerned about retaining the ambiance of our neighborhoods, I don’t see how small private grows could compete with the scalable efforts of Big MJ which will definitely be located away from built-up areas. What am I missing?
RobertC 1010am – You are, of course right, people do have other things to do than comment on RR. However, as the very long record of these pages shows over the last ten years, it is the selective absences that our liberal readers exhibit that gives rise to the remarks you dun. Evidence on other blogs and Facebook pages is abundant that our progressive friends continue to assiduously read and comment on what is posted here. Nevertheless, your apologetic is duly noted.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 February 2016

Mr. Cross is correct. The 320 million Americans could come here and comment but most don’t, even though it is free. I guess if Mr. Cross started a blog he would experience the same. However, Mr. Cross, do you have one?
The thing we humans have over the lesser beasts is the ability to talk and write. We here like to practice those gifts. But there are numerous people like Mr. Cross who are unable to engage. Too bad.

LikeLike
Gregory

29 February 2016

“Robert Cross”, did that make you feel better?
Rather than crickets, I’d be happy to hear why you might think Democrats were right to block Republican judicial candidates for political reasons but Republicans are wrong to block Democratic judicial nominations.
Here’s a great quote:
“There are some who believe that the president, having won the election, should have complete authority to appoint his nominee…that once you get beyond intellect and personal character, there should be no further question as to whether the judge should be confirmed. I disagree with this view.”
That was Senator Barack Hussein Obama, who I am proud to agree with on that matter.
Here’s nine more like that one:
http://thefederalist.com/2016/02/16/10-times-democrats-vowed-to-block-republican-nominees/
The crickets Rebane was referring to are the result of left-liberals, like everyone else, balking when they are asked to help rub their own noses in the steaming pile of warm hypocrisy they left out for all to see.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 February 2016

This election is ever intriguing. The moderate Republicans have been completely dumped by the party and the Dems are aware of it and are licking their chops waiting to dive in. This Politico analysis hits the nail the head for sure
“Democrats are drawing blueprints for stealing GOP moderates from a rightward-driving Republican party, saying the heist is key to scoring a White House win in November.
Democracy Corps’ Stan Greenberg, a prominent national pollster, delivered data Monday morning that suggest moderate Republicans – nearly a third of the GOP base — are being ignored by their presidential candidates. They don’t revile Planned Parenthood – in fact, many prefer the women’s health group to pro-life groups and candidates who take hardline stances on abortion. They’re supportive of same-sex marriage. They’re not enamored of the NRA. They have less rigid attitudes about sex. They accept climate science.
“It’s mind-boggling,” Greenberg said. “They’re considered illegitimate within the Republican party and no one is speaking to them.
It’s a dynamic Greenberg said could drive those moderates toward Democrats this fall, and he wants his party to work to make that happen.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/democrats-2016-strategy-gop-219957#ixzz41aFE5nHC

LikeLike
Gregory

29 February 2016

Paul, moderates are always largely ignored by their party in the primary season. That Greenberg has discovered the GOP isn’t lurching to the middle is real dog-bites-man news.
BTW did you manage to dig up the info about the number of scientists who expect a catastrophic warming from CO2? Something besides the thoroughly discredited Doran & Zimmerman, Oreskes and Cook et al “studies”, I would hope.
The only real poll of scientists close to the subject was by the American Meteorological Society a couple years ago, which had just 52% believing half or more of the warming of the last century being anthropogenic, from all causes not just CO2 from fossil fuel use.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

29 February 2016

Sure PE, loads of republican are going to vote for madam liar liar pants on fire when she is losing women and so many key dem demographics. Not even democrats trust her. They may not vote but there is little to no chance there will be any appreciable R support for the liar in chief of the dems. Another 1600 small cuts released last Friday. Then we are going to have the spectacle of her key aides under oath on the willful dissemination of classified information in June. Some now has been shown to be cut and pasted from highly classified documents and sent to the bathroom server. Said server’s swiped hard drive was reconstructed by FBI in large part already. Dem soccer moms are not voting for MLLPOF now and the R’s aren’t going to either.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

29 February 2016

I agree with Mr. Cross as well. However most of the crickets come during a running dialogue when facts are presented that counter the “lib holes” arguments or prove its not all back and white. If not crickets, then some minuscule point or Strawman that in and of itself is a diversion or not the point at hand.
Cuts both ways. I remember when the Trayvon Martin came down and suddenly there was a slew of ‘lib holes” decrying the fact that the comments were nonexistent concerning this headline grabbing story. On some things we jump the gun (well, I do!) and on other issues we wait and see, especially if it is a LE case. To the left Treyvon Martin was a much bigger issue of national race relations, the fight to shoot first ask questions later if your believe life is threatened, guns, blacks, hoodies, profiling, and Skittles. Boy, the infrequent commentators were appalled and our crickets was more proof that we Y-T’s here in our villages and hobbles are indeed racists.
All the evidence pointed to a racist motivated white dude murdering a innocent teenager because Treyon was a black kid wearing a hoodie in a rich white only neighborhood. Then came the news that the 911 call was doctored, witnesses to the fight that have the kid on top smacking the Hispanic’s head into the cement, blah, blah, blah. Wait and see.
The only local issue no one, not one single soul on either side of the aisle is talking about is Terry Lamphier. Wait and see. Sure, there are societal and workplace issues to be addressed beyond this one Court case without his name, but we don’t even go there. Everybody is doing crickets on this one out of fairness to the accused.
Here is my take concerning wacky tobacky. Recreation MJ is now in view on the horizon, but not here yet. I sometimes deal with the here and now, except for Hillary and The Donald. I asked a grower what are all the growers saying about the outdoor ban. Wait and see, they are waiting to see. It’s only February. The grower did say some are going to grow outdoors anyway, waving a one fingered salute into the air, mimicking the ones he talked to. Most are in the holding mode. The here and now deals ONLY with medicinal marihuana.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 February 2016

Paul Emery has no idea what or who are involved in a primary. Gregory is right on the money.
Also, “dems are licking their chops”? Not happening. They are afraid their candidate will be indicted. And the other one will take their money. We on the right are licking OUR chops for all that.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 February 2016

Gregory
Here’s a list of organizations that are concerned about global warming and believe that a significant cause is human activity
Scientific Organizations That Hold the Position That Climate Change Has Been Caused by Human Action
https://www.opr.ca.gov/s_listoforganizations.php
Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile
Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal
Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana
Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela
Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala
Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico
Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia
Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru
Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Académie des Sciences, France
Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada
Academy of Athens
Academy of Science of Mozambique
Academy of Science of South Africa
Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS)
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy of Sciences of Moldova
Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic
Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt
Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy
Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science
African Academy of Sciences
Albanian Academy of Sciences
Amazon Environmental Research Institute
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Anthropological Association
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Fisheries Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Biological Sciences
American Institute of Physics
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
American Public Health Association
American Quaternary Association
American Society for Microbiology
American Society of Agronomy
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Statistical Association
Association of Ecosystem Research Centers
Australian Academy of Science
Australian Bureau of Meteorology
Australian Coral Reef Society
Australian Institute of Marine Science
Australian Institute of Physics
Australian Marine Sciences Association
Australian Medical Association
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Bangladesh Academy of Sciences
Botanical Society of America
Brazilian Academy of Sciences
British Antarctic Survey
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
California Academy of Sciences
Cameroon Academy of Sciences
Canadian Association of Physicists
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Geophysical Union
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Society of Soil Science
Canadian Society of Zoologists
Caribbean Academy of Sciences views
Center for International Forestry Research
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia)
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences
Crop Science Society of America
Cuban Academy of Sciences
Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters
Ecological Society of America
Ecological Society of Australia
Environmental Protection Agency
European Academy of Sciences and Arts
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
European Science Foundation
Federation of American Scientists
French Academy of Sciences
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of Australia
Geological Society of London
Georgian Academy of Sciences
German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina
Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
Indian National Science Academy
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management
Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology
Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK
InterAcademy Council
International Alliance of Research Universities
International Arctic Science Committee
International Association for Great Lakes Research
International Council for Science
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
International Research Institute for Climate and Society
International Union for Quaternary Research
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
International Union of Pure and Applied Physics
Islamic World Academy of Sciences
Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities
Kenya National Academy of Sciences
Korean Academy of Science and Technology
Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts
l’Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Latin American Academy of Sciences
Latvian Academy of Sciences
Lithuanian Academy of Sciences
Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences
Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology
Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts
National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina
National Academy of Sciences of Armenia
National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic
National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka
National Academy of Sciences, United States of America
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
National Association of State Foresters
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Council of Engineers Australia
National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Research Council
National Science Foundation
Natural England
Natural Environment Research Council, UK
Natural Science Collections Alliance
Network of African Science Academies
New York Academy of Sciences
Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences
Nigerian Academy of Sciences
Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters
Oklahoma Climatological Survey
Organization of Biological Field Stations
Pakistan Academy of Sciences
Palestine Academy for Science and Technology
Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Polish Academy of Sciences
Romanian Academy
Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium
Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain
Royal Astronomical Society, UK
Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters
Royal Irish Academy
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
Royal Scientific Society of Jordan
Royal Society of Canada
Royal Society of Chemistry, UK
Royal Society of the United Kingdom
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Russian Academy of Sciences
Science and Technology, Australia
Science Council of Japan
Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research
Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Slovak Academy of Sciences
Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Society for Ecological Restoration International
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Society of American Foresters
Society of Biology (UK)
Society of Systematic Biologists
Soil Science Society of America
Sudan Academy of Sciences
Sudanese National Academy of Science
Tanzania Academy of Sciences
The Wildlife Society (international)
Turkish Academy of Sciences
Uganda National Academy of Sciences
Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities
United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
World Association of Zoos and Aquariums
World Federation of Public Health Associations
World Forestry Congress
World Health Organization
World Meteorological Organization
Zambia Academy of Sciences
Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 February 2016

All government funded and grant funded apparently. I’d probably support it too if my income depended on it.

LikeLike
fish

29 February 2016

Even Marco “Boy President” Rubio gets it………

“Rubio: Trump ‘Could be the End’ of GOP
Trump’s three rivals express confidence as they head for likely Super Tuesday slaughter”

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

29 February 2016

Ah, the proof is in the pudding. The science is settled. If not, hit the reset button to make sure it is double settled. Reboot the computer as well to triple dog dare settle this thing. Armenia and science. Oxymoron. I thought the Turks took care of that problem around a hundred years ago. And Sri Lanka is a racist country.
National Academy of Sciences of Armenia
National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic
National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka
Well, guess I-Paul was overdo spinning the human caused Global “Fried like Twinkie at the Iowa State Fair” song again. I thought it would about the Marihuana Godess of Fertility, but I was wrong. Spin that record round and round, throw it in the toilet and flush ‘er down. Bye, bye fried Twinkie.

LikeLike
Gregory

29 February 2016

Paul, so tell me, what knowledge of atmospheric physics does the American Academy of Pediatrics bring to the table?
National Academies of Science are the folks who help guide government science spending. That’s their job. It’s where political funding meets big science research who want that money to spend. It’s no more a conspiracy than when cows come to the feeding trough at feeding time. It’s what they do.
The AMS poll I cited was an anonymous questioning of scientists with BS, MS, PhD in all the climate related sciences, the AMS professional membership. 52% is the number they came up with who believed a half of the last century’s warming (after the Little Ice Age ended in the 1800’s, and hint: the little ice age was colder… naturally).
Michael Mann is an AMS Fellow. So is Richard Lindzen. Here’s Lindzen from last fall (I’ve added whitespace):

So where does the issue of global warming stand? In retrospect, we are confronting three
rather different narratives. The first I would call the IPCC WG1 narrative. This narrative, while
broadly supportive of the proposition that increasing greenhouse gas concentrations are a
serious concern, nevertheless, is relatively open about the uncertainties and even
contradictions associated with this position, and its public pronouncements tend to be vague
with ample room for denial, carefully avoiding catastrophist hyperbole while also avoiding
outright rejection of such hyperbole.
The first narrative is very much the narrative of many of the major supporters of the global warming agenda.
The second narrative is that of what are referred to as ‘skeptics.’ To an extent, not generally recognized, there is considerable overlap with the first narrative. Thus, although skeptics might agree that alpine glaciers have been retreating since the early 19 th Century, they are also aware that alpine glaciers were largely absent during the medieval warm period, and that their more recent retreat preceded by well over a century the period when anthropogenic greenhouse warming became moderately
significant. Moreover, skeptics generally regard the fact that virtually all models ‘run hot;’ ie, their projections for the period 1979 to the present for the most part greatly exceed observed warming, strongly supports low climate sensitivity.
They generally believe in testing the physics underlying the positive feedbacks in sensitive models rather than averaging models. Skeptics also are much more open to the numerous known causes of climate change (including long period ocean circulations, solar variability, and the various impacts of ice), and do not regard CO2 as the climate’s ultimate ‘control knob.’ The main difference between these first two groups, however, is that the second group openly opposes catastrophism while the first group does not. The third narrative is that of the political promoters of climate alarm including many of the environmental NGO’s, and most of the mass media. The promoters of this narrative also include many of the contributors to WG2 (impacts) and WG3 (mitigation) of the IPCC.
The latter generally emphasize alleged consequences of the worst case scenarios presented by
WG1. It is this narrative for which the science is largely irrelevant. Few scientists will endorse
the notion that the planet is at risk, though this is standard fare for the catastrophists. It is also
this narrative that invariably claims virtually unanimous support. Such claims generally rely on bogus studies which, moreover, dishonestly conflate the points on which both the WG1 and the skeptical narratives agree, with the third catastrophic narrative. Anyone looking at any statement concerning global warming will readily identify which narrative is in play. Unfortunately, for most people, the third narrative is all they will see.
The overwhelming emphasis on the third narrative has very serious implications for proposed
policies alleged to deal with global warming such as the restriction of access to electricity for
the 1.3 billion human beings currently without such access, and the increased poverty for
billions more with its obvious implications for health and longevity, etc., not to mention
foregoing the well-established agricultural benefits of added CO2, a chemical essential to life
as we know it rather than a pollutant (the US Navy regards levels of 5000 ppmv safe on nuclear
submarines; ambient levels are currently 400 ppmv).
It is clear that the issue of climate does constitute an emergency. However, as is so often the case, the emergency does not arise from science and technology, but rather from politics. It is worth examining whether science can play a role in the mitigation of this emergency. It is doubtful whether the answer will consist in research grants. However, science has much at stake. Its hard earned raison d’etre as our most effective tool for objective assessment is being squandered, and with it, the basis for public trust and support.
If we do nothing to stop this insanity, science will rightly be regarded as just another racket.
This might just be more collateral damage than we can readily afford.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Global_Warming_and_the_Irrelevance_of_Science-Erice-mod1.pdf

Paul, it’s clear you’re so stuck in the mire of the science-free third narrative you can’t even imagine the first two.

LikeLike
Gregory

29 February 2016

Paul, one more way to put all the above together… your list of groups that in one way or another support AGW are all among those who support the first narrative. It might be a big problem. Feed us and we’ll help you do the right thing.
…but you misidentify them as supporting the third “we are all going to die if we don’t do something NOW” narrative pushed by the likes of McKibben of 350.org… and the folks in the third group are mostly ignoring the fact that people will die from the radical restructuring of energy enterprises the radical environmental left is pushing… which is why the “global warming solutions act” that is wrapped around the state of California is so endearing to Dems… we’ll do it so well everyone will want to follow our lead. Low cost renewable and non polluting energy for everyone. Also cute bunnies and Hello Kitty!

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 February 2016

So Gregory you believe that global warming is not a problem and it should be business as usual with no concern?

LikeLike
George Rebane

29 February 2016

re Gregory’s 114pm – Ah, the joys of the consensuals who know not what they are consensing. When assembled en masse, they give much comfort to those standing at the side who know neither the consensers nor what is being consensed. They only see the all encompassing warm glow of consensus that outshines the discomfiting details, so as to make their very existence irrelevant to the matter at hand. A mantle of certitude then descends over the masses when they hear that the ‘science is settled’ and ‘the debate is over’. Such are the benefices that a strong faith in scientism bestows upon all True Believers.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 February 2016

Funny how we all are against polluting our planet but that was not good enough for the left. They created a new pollutant! CO2. And carbon! No life as we know it without both yet somehow the left and a dumbass SCOTUS /EPA made those life GIVING elements and molecules a pollutant label. Then the Paul Emery’s run with it as if those life giving carbon’s are a life ending threat. You cannot make up the stuff.

LikeLike
Gregory

29 February 2016

Paul 215, so you believe every complex thought should be caricatured so the average Democratic voter can understand it?
I’ve written enough on the subject you ought to be able to find a quote of mine without having to invent something I’d not write. I agree completely with Dr. Lindzen. What do you disagree with?
George 2:26
You can’t tell the players without a program, and I think you agree that Lindzen did a nice job of laying out the lay of the climate land pretty well. I only quoted the last bit of his presentation, I especially hope Paul will click on the link I provided and read the whole thing, only 6 pages.
It starts off:

Global Warming and the Irrelevance of Science
Text of lecture delivered on August 20, 2015 to the 48th Session: Erice International Seminars
on Planetary Emergencies
Richard S. Lindzen
Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, Emeritus
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
In many fields, governments have a monopoly on the support of scientific research. Ideally,
they support the science because they believe objective research to be valuable. Unfortunately,
as anticipated by Eisenhower in his farewell speech from January 17, 1961 (the one that also
warned of the military-industrial complex), “Partly because of the huge costs involved, a
government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity.” Under these
circumstances, when the government wants a particular scientific outcome the ideal
arrangement is vulnerable. However, as I hope to show, the problem is not simply bias.
Rather, the powers that be invent the narrative independently of the views of even cooperating
scientists. It is, in this sense, that the science becomes irrelevant. This was certainly the case in
the first half of the twentieth century, where we just have to look at Lysenkoism in the former
Soviet Union, Social Darwinism, and Eugenics throughout the western world, as well as, in the
1960s, the unfounded demonization of DDT. Each phenomenon led to millions of deaths. And,
in each case, the scientific community was essentially paralyzed, if not actually complicit.
<a href="http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Global_Warming_and_the_Irrelevance_of_Science-Erice-mod1.pdf

“>http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Global_Warming_and_the_Irrelevance_of_Science-Erice-mod1.pdf

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 February 2016

Gregory
I asked your opinion to a very simple question since you are one with considerably more scholarship in this matter and also one whose opinion I value. Once again the question:
Do you believe that global warming is not a problem and it should be business as usual with no concern?

LikeLike
jon smith

29 February 2016

The same folks who scoff at Paul’s lengthy list of scientific Institutions will set their hair on fire if anyone were to even suggest that Moses did not part the Red Sea and that every living creature on the (flat) earth probably didn’t walk, crawl, or slither into Noah’s Arc. Of course these events are physically impossible, but the “show me the AGW proof” bible thumpers will be content by saying “it was a miracle.”

LikeLike