SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Brumar89 who wrote (931037)4/19/2016 9:13:29 AM
From: Brumar89  Respond to of 1572605
 
The Left Is Coming for You Next

Liberal fascism is a real thing.

by Kevin D. Williamson April 17, 2016 4:00 AM @kevinNR

The case against Exxon and CEI will not stop with Exxon and CEI We think in language, and we think in stories, a fact that is appreciated most keenly not by writers or literary critics but by censors. In the course of writing about the ongoing fraud in which a cabal of left-wing lawyers with connections to the administrations of Barack Obama and Andrew Cuomo has attempted to extort many billions of dollars from Chevron, I had a memorable conversation with an executive at the energy giant. “We are the least sympathetic defendant there is,” he said. “We’re an oil company. You can say almost anything about an oil company. There are no stories in which the oil company is the good guy.” There is one:

The one where you go to the 7-Eleven and fill up your miraculous machine with a miraculous energy source
that would, within the recent history of the human species, have been indistinguishable from magic. But the point stands. You can say anything you like, no matter how wild the claim, about an oil company or a financial firm, or, indeed, about any corporation, “corporation” now being the English word that means “a business that I hate.” The demonization of the word “corporation” has proceeded alongside the demonization of the concept. The word “corporation” already had slightly sinister overtones (it is naturally associated with the English word “corpse,” though that word is not in fact derived from the Latin “corpus”) which has been intensified by the immortal, galaxy-spanning corporations of science fiction; I have always thought (here I glance nervously over my shoulder at Kathryn Jean Lopez) that the writers of Star Trek missed an opportunity with the Borg, whose habitual promise that “you will be assimilated” would have been much better rendered “you will be incorporated,” since they, like a Portuguese man-o’-war, form a single colonial organism. Incorporation is a word that strikes terror into many hearts. (Particularly those beating in proximity to Houston.)

I spent part of Friday night among Hillary Rodham Clinton supporters in New York, and one very nice young couple warned me darkly that Republicans would “do whatever the corporations tell them to.” The corporations: As if they were all part of the same team, and had meetings. The American Left, which long ago abandoned its hereditary liberalism for totalitarianism, is very much interested in policing language. Writing this week in Time, which still exists, Katy Steinmetz complains about the use of the word “transgendered” to describe people who were until five minutes ago known as transsexuals, and five minutes before that weird guys in dresses. (The argument, in case you are wondering, is that the implicitly passive form “transgendered” suggests that something was done to these people, as though we could not distinguish between a tossed salad and a spotted owl.)

She offers other sage advice: “If you meet a trans person — someone who identifies with a gender other than the sex they were assigned at birth — it’s generally a good idea to ask which pronouns (he or she, him or her) they prefer and to use whatever that is.” Other than establishing that she isn’t a reliable guide to pronouns, the merry assumption of absolute nonsense — “the sex they were assigned at birth” as opposed to the sex they are — isn’t just illiteracy. People instinctively resist the lie, which makes it necessary to make the truth almost literally unspeakable, even unthinkable. The lie isn’t quite sold yet, inasmuch as people still roll their eyes a little at the phrase “women with penises,” but it is getting there.

Progressive tut-tutting about that sort of thing may be the mild stuff, but it isn’t innocuous. Activists for the so-called transgendered have argued that my work on the issue should be not criticized but banned, as in suppressed by the force of state violence. The usual banalities — “hate speech” and all that — are invoked. So far, it isn’t a crime to get on the wrong side of the men-in-dresses activists. We aren’t, after all, Canadians. Global warming, though, is a different matter.

The attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands, Claude Earl Walker, has issued a subpoena to the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a libertarian-leaning think tank that has been critical of a great deal of global-warming scholarship. This is part of a coordinated campaign by Democratic attorneys general, including those in New York and California, to prosecute persons and institutions with nonconforming views on global warming, with special attention being given to Exxon and to groups that it may have supported financially. The subpoena against CEI is a pure fishing expedition, a search for anything that might be potentially embarrassing that can be used as part of the public-relations campaign rather than as part of a prosecution, the prosecution bit being tricky because there isn’t much of an argument that any laws have been broken. New York’s attorney general, Eric Schneiderman, is taking a similar approach. He isn’t sure what law Exxon has broken, but he promises to find one, making different accusations and arguments as the venue demands.

Barack Obama’s so-called Justice Department is considering filing a case of its own. Despite the insistence of Democrats in positions of power, this is not a “fraud” investigation. There has been no credible case made — none whatsoever — that any fraud has been committed. We should, while it is permitted, be as plain as possible about what is happening here:

This is an act of obvious, gross, and indefensible political suppression, with two ends: One is riling up young, white, middle-income progressives before the 2016 election (in which California’s Democratic attorney general, Kamala Harris, is a Senate candidate), voters who care a great deal about global warming and not very much about freedom of speech; the second is financial, in that Exxon, the second most valuable firm on Earth by market capitalization, has a great deal of money, and may be bullied into a settlement that will fund a great deal of Democratic activism for years to come. Prosecuting political institutions and businesses for political activism is brown-shirt business. This is banana-republic stuff. Kamala Harris, Eric Schneiderman, Claude Earl Walker, and Attorney General Loretta Lynch should not resign — they should be hounded from office, and from polite society. Prosecuting political institutions and businesses for political activism is brown-shirt business, plain and simply and ugly and heinous. If you believe that this will stop at prosecuting wicked, evil “corporations,” you are deluding yourself. You’re next.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434160/exxon-climate-change-prosecution-witch-hunt

When the Obama administration sues Hobby Lobby and an order of nuns, when Democratic AG's subpoena companies and libertarian groups over opposing Mann-made global warming, when a lesbian mayor subpoenas church sermons, when leftists boycott states like IN or NC over gay weddings or men in little girl's rooms ..... it's really all the same thing. Liberal thought and speech control.




To: Brumar89 who wrote (931037)4/19/2016 9:36:38 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572605
 
Wait, that would mean the ice had to have been advancing sometime during the decades since WWI.

Wait; no it wouldn't. It just means snow covered dead bodies. If you put markers at the front of glaciers, and they get wiped out by movement, the glacier is advancing. If you markers at the front, and then open ground appears between them and the glacier, it is retreating. It turns out people actually do that.

Retreat of glaciers since 1850

Other researchers have found that glaciers across the Alps appear to be retreating at a faster rate than a few decades ago. In a paper published in 2009 by the University of Zurich, the Swiss glacier survey of 89 glaciers found 76 retreating, 5 stationary and 8 advancing from where they had been in 1973. [18] The Trift Glacier had the greatest recorded retreat, losing 350 m (1,150 ft) of its length between the years 2003 and 2005. [18] The Grosser Aletsch Glacier is the largest glacier in Switzerland and has been studied since the late 19th century. Aletsch Glacier retreated 2.8 km (1.7 mi) from 1880 to 2009. [19] This rate of retreat has also increased since 1980, with 30%, or 800 m (2,600 ft), of the total retreat occurring in the last 20% of the time period. [19]



Morteratsch (right) and Pers (left) glaciers in 2005

The Morteratsch Glacier in Switzerland has had one of the longest periods of scientific study with yearly measurements of the glacier's length commencing in 1878. The overall retreat from 1878 to 1998 has been 2 km (1.2 mi) with a mean annual retreat rate of approximately 17 m (56 ft) per year. This long-term average was markedly surpassed in recent years with the glacier receding 30 m (98 ft) per year during the period between 1999–2005. Similarly, of the glaciers in the Italian Alps, only about a third were in retreat in 1980, while by 1999, 89% of these glaciers were retreating. In 2005, the Italian Glacier Commission found that 123 glaciers in Lombardy were retreating. [20] A random study of the Sforzellina Glacier in the Italian Alps indicated that the rate of retreat from 2002 to 2006 was much higher than in the preceding 35 years. [21] To study glaciers located in the alpine regions of Lombardy, researchers compared a series of aerial and ground images taken from the 1950s through the early 21st century and deduced that between the years 1954-2003 the mostly smaller glaciers found there lost more than half of their area. [22] Repeat photography of glaciers in the Alps indicates that there as been significant retreat since studies commenced. [23]

en.wikipedia.org