Category Archives: Climate Change

Hurricane Jim Inhofe? Why not

I love this idea.


It is beyond me why anyone would choose to take the word of a non-scientist and moron like Bill O’Reilly (“tide goes in, tide goes out…you can’t explain that“) or the knuckle-dragging, mind-numbing ignorance of a James Inhofe

“Well actually the Genesis 8:22 that I use in there is that “as long as the earth remains there will be springtime and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night.” My point is, God’s still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous.”

…before that of 97 percent of the world’s climatologists. Are there no bounds to stupidity?

James Inhofe -global warming denier - stupid   :


Follow MarioPiperniDotCom on Facebook, Twitter and Google+.


Is It Too Late To Throw Miami a Lifejacket?

Miami underwater - global warming  :

Anyone who believes that terrorism or Obamacare is the biggest threat facing the human race, is an idiot or just isn’t listening.

More than 1,700 American cities and towns – including Boston, New York, and Miami – will have significant populations living below the high-water mark by the end of this century, a new climate change study has found.

Those 1,700 towns are locked into a watery future by greenhouse gas emissions already built up in the atmosphere, the analysis published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on Monday found. For nearly 80 of those cities, the watery future would come much sooner, within the next decade.

“Even if we could just stop global emissions tomorrow on a dime, Fort Lauderdale, Miami Gardens, Hoboken, New Jersey will be under sea level,” said Benjamin Strauss, a researcher at Climate Central, and author of the paper. But dramatic cuts in emissions – much greater than Barack Obama and other world leaders have so far agreed – could save nearly 1,000 of those towns, by averting the sea-level rise, the study fund.

If you’re calling Florida home, you might want to consider packing up your bags now.

…the region at highest risk was Florida, which has dozens of towns which will fall below the high water mark by century’s end. Miami would be significantly under water by 2041, the study found. Half of Palm Beach with its millionaires’ estates along the sea front would be below the high water line by the 2060s. Other cities such as Fort Lauderdale were already well below sea-level.

Meanwhile the irresponsible jackasses at Fox News and clowns like Senator Jim Inhofe still refer to global warming as a hoax.


Follow MarioPiperniDotCom on Facebook, Twitter and Google+.


Climate Change Skeptic Rebuttal One-Liners

Footprint on Earth  :

Fed up with trying to deal with climate change deniers morons in your circle of family and friends who have an endless supply of idiotic and baseless claims to support their denialism? Nonsense like, “In the 70s, scientists predicted an ice age” and “Hey, global warming has to be a hoax. We just had a snowstorm!

Well,  Skeptical Science to the rescue. They’ve put together one-liner rejoinders to just about every dumbass argument deniers have in their arsenal of ignorance. They also provide links to the in depth explanations. Examples:

Denier Argument: The sun is causing the planet to warm.
Response: In the last 35 years of global warming, sun and climate have been going in opposite directions [link].

Denier Argument: Climate has changed before.
Response: Climate reacts to whatever forces it to change at the time; humans are now the dominant force. [link].

We’ve all heard this one a thousand times

Denier Argument: There is no consensus among scientists.
Response: 97% of climate experts agree humans are causing global warming. [link].

Good stuff. Check it out and be ready the next time you’re at a family gathering and your Fox News-loving idiot cousin tries to lay a little denialism your way.


Follow MarioPiperniDotCom on Facebook, Twitter and Google+.

Guns, Gays and Immigration

Politics  -

In desperate need of an excuse for voting against background checks, here’s the one an unnamed Democratic senator is using.

“Guns, gays and immigration — it’s too much. I can be with you on one or two of them, but not all three.”

Apparently, asking some politicians to do the right thing more than twice in the same time period crosses the line of reasonable demands. Getting votes triumphs doing the right thing every single time.

Ezra Klein:

…this isn’t just an explanation for a vote. It’s a salve for a guilty conscience. This is not the sort of rationalization that would be leaking from the chamber if senators were confident they’d done the right thing. It’s a rationalization for people who feel they did the wrong thing, and want to tell themselves it’s the cost for doing the right thing later, on an even larger scale.

Noam Scheiber of the New Republic writes an excellent piece on what it is that makes politicians turn their backs on sensible gun control.

…guns tend to be remote from the experience of most gun-control supporters. This is true even after a horrific act of gun violence like Newtown. Though every parent was briefly traumatized by the thought of their child being massacred at school, only a small fraction of parents (and especially parents who vote) are directly or even indirectly affected by such crimes.

This means that, even when overwhelming majorities of Americans support a specific gun-control measure, their support is shallow. Guns and gun violence just aren’t something they spend a lot of time contemplating. The voters who oppose gun control, on the other hand, (hunters, shooting enthusiasts, crazy people) devote a good bit of mental energy to firearms. As a result, they’re easily mobilized by the interest groups who spend all their time on the matter (namely gun-makers and lobbyists).

Scheiber makes the case that the same logic applies to other issues – notably, global warming. While most of us have an understanding that weather has been chaotic over the last number of years and that global temperatures are on the rise, relatively few have been negatively affected in a big way by climate change. On the other hand, big oil understands only too well the implications that comprehensive carbon regulations would have on the bottom line. Therefore…

…voters who work in the fossil fuel industry or whose states depend on it—have no trouble picturing the downsides of making oil, gas, and electricity costlier. As with guns, the people who spend all their time thinking about this (your friends at Exxon Mobil and BP) can rile them up pretty easily.

Be wary of using words like ‘politician’ and ‘courageous’ in the same sentence.


Follow MarioPiperniDotCom on Facebook, Twitter and Google+.