Prominent climate alarmist bested by Canadian resources minister

Terence Corcoran:

It takes a rare politician to stand up and take shots at a climate scientist who’s the darling of the global warmist movement. Even more uncommon is to see a politician take on such a climate scientist—and win the contest.

Mr. Oliver pointedly took aim at James Hansen, the former NASA scientist and one of the godfathers of climate catastrophism. Instead of a gooey marshmallow capitulation on the issue of climate change, Mr. Oliver  questioned Mr. Hansen’s tendency to make claims that are at least exaggerations and often outright beyond-the-fringe.

Lesbian activist: "Gay marriage is a lie"

Gay Marriage Fight Is a ‘Lie’ to Destroy Marriage:

The push for gay marriage has less to do with the right to marry – it is about diminishing and eventually destroying the institution of marriage and redefining the “traditional family.”

Lesbian activist Masha Gessen:

“Gay marriage is a lie.”

“Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there.”

“It’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist.” (This statement is met with very loud applause.)

Global warming skepticism - 1100+ peer reviewed papers

Climate alarmists persist in claiming an overwhelming  scientific "consensus" and an absence of peer reviewed science supporting skepticism.  A useful reference for countering the latter claim is a nicely annotated and linked list of 1100+ skeptical peer reviewed papers.  Note that this list has more than doubled since it was published at WUWT 4 years ago.

George W at the dedication of his presidential library

Classic Bush, good speech, funny, emotional at the end:



More.

Charles Krauthammer.

[Via]

BC politics - Godawful choices (Adrian Dix's NDP the worst)

There's no one to vote for.  The only choices are bad choices:
 
     Liberals: can't be trusted; extortionate anti-pipeline policy. 
     NDP: tax and spend; excessively green, anti-development; funded by American eco-interests
     Conservatives: weak; not running a candidate in my riding.

So it's either not vote or hold my nose and vote Liberal. Bah!

Ezra Levant makes some great points about the Dix NDP's dismal agenda:

Coyne's defence of Justin

It's amazing how so many media pundits seem to feel obligated to come to Justin Trudeau's defence when he does or says something dopey.  They defend him by either completely ignoring the incident or by writing long columns 'explaining' at length why they think what he said or did wasn't so dopey after all.

Today it's Andrew Coyne on Justin's dopey musings on the terror in Boston.  Coyne concludes with:

"Trudeau ... never ventured what he thought the “root causes” were — only that we should try to figure it out... "

Actually, Trudeau's exact words were:

"... There is no question that this happened because there is someone who feels completely excluded, ..."

So, without knowing who did the crime he's certain about this.  But given the history of this type of attack (the ruthless slaughter and maiming of innocents), the odds were very high that radical Islamism was involved. That is, the odds were very high that Trudeau was spouting nonsense. Radical Islamists don't kill infidels because they feel excluded but because they feel righteous.

Also, another problem with Trudeau's response is a matter of emphasis. While it's natural to wonder why people do things, in his rambling answer to Mansbridge's question Trudeau paid brief lip service to concerns for security, for the victims and for catching the bombers and then devoted an inordinate amount of time bloviating uselessly about "root causes".

While Coyne doesn't give Trudeau a complete pass, he filled his column with enough fog to give Justin the cover he needs.  Mission accomplished.

Trudeau reveals his inner sophomore

Barbara Kay:

How can the son of Pierre Elliott Trudeau, presumably aware of his father’s role in quashing Canada’s only contemporary terrorist movement, be mouthing these shallow, superannuated bromides of the left?

Trudeau père did not waste a second anguishing over whether these terrorists felt ‘excluded’ or ‘marginalized’.

Jonathan Kay:

... Never did the Tory caricature of Trudeau as a dilettante seem more accurate. Indeed, the Liberal leader’s own words are far more damaging than the Tories’ silly and intellectually dishonest attack ads (whose lameness, until now, had been dominating national political gossip this week). ... [It seems Jon has his mind made up about the Tory ads and can't alter it even when Justin once again proves them accurate.  Intellectually, Jon is to Barbara as Justin is to Pierre.]

Justin Trudeau on the Boston Marathon bombing

Ezra parses Justin's musings:



What a naïf! No doubt about it, JT really is in way over his head.

Harper to Trudeau: Don’t ‘sit around trying to rationalize it’:

“When you see this kind of action, when you see this kind of violent act, you do not sit around trying to rationalize it or make excuses for it or figure out its root causes,” Harper said.
“You condemn it categorically and to the extent that you can deal with the perpetrators you deal with them as harshly as possible and that is what this government would do if it ever was faced with such actions.”

The Woman Who Saved Britain

As Margaret Thatcher is laid to rest today, Peter Foster reviews her legacy, closing with:

For the past two decades, there has been a persistent attempt by the left to parody her motivations, and unseat her from her rightful place in history. But whatever shenanigans the left may dream up for Wednesday, she will always be the Woman Who Saved Britain.

As for those leftist ingrates, Margaret Thatcher's attitude was:

“If you set out to be liked, you will accomplish nothing.”

“I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.”

And on the left's obsession with her "divisiveness", she said: 

“Consensus: “The process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values, and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects; the process of avoiding the very issues that have to be solved, merely because you cannot get agreement on the way ahead. What great cause would have been fought and won under the banner: ‘I stand for consensus?”

Mark Steyn:

"... she arrived to address a small group at an English seaside resort to be greeted by enraged lefties chanting “Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher! Fascist fascist fascist!” She turned to her aide and cooed, “Oh, doesn’t it make you feel nostalgic?” She was said to be delighted to hear that a concession stand at last year’s Trades Union Congress was doing a brisk business in “Thatcher Death Party Packs,” almost a quarter-century after her departure from office."

R.I.P. Margaret Thatcher.

Justin the boy, the Peter Pan

Ezra analyzes:

Justin "... in way over his head"

More.

BC Blue: "Media Party very unhappy with Conservative’s Trudeau ad"

Globe and Mail editorial: "Justin Trudeau should fight back against attack ads" [translation: "We've got your back, Justin"]

The "Dog Sh*t Yoghurt Fallacy"

In his "controversial" essay (previous post) James Delingpole, refers to "the dog poo yoghurt fallacy" - the one that centrists looking for a middle ground in the climate wars often fall into.  In case you missed it a couple of years ago, Delingpole's original explanation of the fallacy, together with a good dose of his trademark climate warrior polemics, makes an excellent read.

Watts and Delingpole in mini-flap over tactics

The flap progressed as follows:

1. James Delingpole blogged in The Telegraph: An English class for trolls, professional offence-takers and climate activists

2. Anthony Watts wrote a blog piece, accusing James of invoking Godwin's Law and suggesting he apologize.

3. James responded in the Spectator  and The Telegraph.

4. Anthony responded to James' responses.

For the record, I side with Delingpole.  For those who take Godwin's Law too seriously, view this:

Global warming "consensus" is only in the media

Lawrence Solomon:

The overwhelming consensus on global warming among journalists may be cracking. Last week, the world’s most prestigious newsmagazine – The Economist – backed away from its past alarmist position ...

... And now the London Telegraph’s venerable Geoffrey Lean concurs, in an article entitled “Global warming: time to rein back on doom and gloom?”

... For the journalists who are now reading this ... here is what needs to be known to cut through the scientific bafflegab and be confident as skeptics:

1. All of the scary global warming scenarios are based on computer models.

2. None of the models work.

3. There is and has been no scientific consensus.

To keep track of, and follow, the journalists who are becoming more skeptical of anthropogenic global warming, I have created a Twitter list, entitled Newly Skeptical AGW Media.

EU opposing Keystone XL to push its carbon markets

Keystone XL Opposition not based on Reason or Climate Change but on EU Carbon Markets:

EU Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard of Denmark says President Obama should veto Keystone XL to make good on his global warming rhetoric or institute a carbon tax. There is neither reason nor science to back up Hedegaard’s claims say Friends of Science.

... “People should be following the money in the argument against Keystone XL,” says Len Maier. “Large mission based investment firms have dumped trillions into carbon trades or green energy start-ups. They will lose their shirts if the climate scare and carbon trade markets dry up.”

Corruption in "clean" energy:

Maier points out that the EU carbon market was just barely resuscitated last month. In Italy the Mafia have been making hay in clean energy. According to an April 4 ABC News article, the police confiscated $1.7 billion in clean energy assets of the “Lord of the Wind” - Vito Nicastri - including 43 wind and solar energy companies, 98 properties and 66 bank accounts.

RBC outsourcing controversy overblown?

Terence Corcoran:

RBC Chairman and CEO Gord Nixon capitulated Thursday with an “Open Letter to Canadians” that was instantly branded as a grovelling apology. ... what else can be expected from this catastrophic media-creation of a story. RBC might as well have dumped a million barrels of crude oil into Toronto Harbour...

... This a story bubble blown up by the CBC out of the mistaken impressions of one worker about RBC’s outsourcing program.

... How did the bank’s vast HR-PR machinery, so sensitive to environment issues and social responsibility, allow this story to get out of hand?

... The facts are now out: No RBC employee would have been fired, no crew of temporary workers has been parachuted in to take away jobs. Furthermore, the practice of outsourcing and worker movements is as natural an economic practice as buying a toothbrush made in China.

... But the CBC and other media ignored the facts and turned the story into an epic war against outsourcing any anything associated with it.  ... The left piled on, including front-line economist Armine Yalnizyan of the Canadian Centre for Alternatives to Good Policy. ...

Apparently, Andrew Coyne agrees.

On news of Thatcher's death the left spews hatred

Left's chorus of hatred: Champagne in the streets, students union cheers and vile internet taunts

Parties break out to celebrate

The trendy, Left-wing gadflies celebrating Margaret Thatcher's death

The Twitterverse

Lovely.

R.I.P. Margaret Thatcher

BBC News: Former Prime Minister Baroness Thatcher has died "peacefully" at the age of 87 after suffering a stroke while staying at the Ritz hotel in central London.

The Toronto Star: Thatcherism influenced a generation of politicians and leaders all over the world with its brand of unstinting support of free market economies, a distrust of the state and disdain for unions.

The Guardian: "... groundbreaking but divisive leader..." ["divisive", 5 times in this column (left-speak for any conservative).]

Canada's admirable contribution to combatting desertification

When Canada recently announced its withdrawal from the UN Convention on Combatting Desertification (UNCCD), professional do-gooders and political partisans began howling with righteous outrage.  For example:

Elizabeth May (tweeted): "So upset Harper pulled us out of another global env treaty. He's making us a rogue nation. The North Korea of environmental law."

Toronto Star: "... The Harper government’s latest nose-thumbing at the UN is a baffling move that lacks any obvious political advantage to balance out the sizeable blows it inflicts on the government’s domestic and international credibility. ..."

Craig and Marc Kielburger: "... walking away accomplishes nothing."

Oh, COME ON! Cut the hyperbole!  With all due respect to the Kielburgers, rather than "accomplish nothing" Canada announcing its withdrawal has had at least two very beneficial effects: 

(1) Until then, no one, least of all the above complainers, had ever even heard of the UNCCD.  Now it's their cause célèbre.

(2) Canada has, once again, drawn attention to the wasteful uselessness of the UN.  Most UN activities, UNCCD included are, at best, unproductive talk-fests that use UN conventions as an excuse for over-paid bureaucrats to regularly gather in five star hotels in exotic locales.

This can only boost real action towards combatting desertification and reforming the UN, something you'd expect the Lizzy Mays, the T-Stars and the Kielburgers would be applauding rather than bitching about. 

Brought to you courtesy of "BlackBerry"

Part One: Lefty academic Thomas Homer-Dixon spreads more hooey against the oil sands

... Mr. Homer-Dixon peddles “global governance” at the Balsillie School of International Affairs.
... You will also remember the name Balsillie. He’s the guy who co-ran, then co-screwed up, RIM (now BlackBerry). ...

Part Two: Homer-Dixon’s one-way ­conversation

... The lefty lecturer’s accusation that the Canadian “conversation” is being suppressed by a “coercive climate” was rendered even more ludicrous this week by the fact that he was instantly invited onto two major CBC programs...

The new three Rs - racism, reproduction and recycling

George Will:

The three R’s — formerly reading, ‘riting and ‘rithmetic — now are racism, reproduction and recycling. Especially racism. ... “instruction” synonymous with “propaganda,” which in the patois of progressivism is called “consciousness-raising.”

...tens of millions could be diverted from progressive gestures to academic purposes by abolishing on every ... campus every administrative position whose title contains the words “diversity,” “equity,” “race,” “ethnicity,” “sustainability,” “green,” “gender,” “inclusion,” “identity,” “interconnectivity,” “globalization,” “climate,” “campus climate,” “cross-cultural” or “multiculturalism.”

Check out the comment thread to Will's column at the WaPo. It's loaded with nasty reaction from  progressives.

Climate science fraudsters confess (sort of)

After Steve McIntyre pointed out the serious 'flaws' in their paper (which had received world-wide media coverage screaming certain doom) the authors, Marcott et al, give a half-assed confession:

"Without providing any links to or citation of Climate Audit, they now concede: 

20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions."

Ross McKitrick:

"... the authors made very strong claims about the implications of their findings regarding 20th-century warming. Yet at no point did they mention the fact that the 20th century portion of their proxy reconstruction is garbage..."

Mark Jaccard - Simon Fraser U's answer to James Hansen

Radical activist and climate alarmist, Mark Jaccard of Simon Fraser University says that newspaper articles promoting projects that produce GHGs should carry warnings like cigarette packages:

Jaccard wrote an article for The Vancouver Sun that ran on the OpEd page. He used it to argue forcefully that anyone who writes in The Sun or other publications in support of projects that release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere should have to also explain how they will contribute to catastrophic climate change.

He said The Sun should add a warning similar to that carried on cigarettes to any article that failed to make such a connection. It would say:

“The author has declined to explain that, according to scientists, this project would contribute to a climate catastrophe for you and your children.”

In White Rock, BC last year Jaccard, much like that other nut-bar climate activist, James Hansen, was arrested for his participation in a protest against coal trains.