Connect with us

Everything

Irma hysteria makes landfall; the actual hurricane did too

Published

on

The faces you see on television are paid to entertain you and make you feel like they should be trusted. They are reading a script, and most of the time, they don’t know any more than you do.

Hurricane Irma is a terrible force of nature. It could be the strongest storm ever recorded in the Atlantic, which means it could be one of the strongest forces of nature Planet Earth has produced. And the media wants you to know two things:

(1) If you live in Florida or the gulf, this monster is probably headed directly at your house; and

(2) Mankind is responsible for this.

Irma’s eye made landfall over the small island of Barbuda, where hurricanes and Atlantic storms are a way of life. In nearby Antigua, residents got a side swipe from Irma.

In Florida, people are freaking out.

They’ve got plenty of reason for concern…this morning’s official storm track has Irma turning north into south Florida early Monday morning.

But the level of hysteria, and the media’s own infotainment treatment of it, along with the smug “we told you so” attitude of those who believe that somehow Earth could be tamed into producing smaller storms…or that Earth wouldn’t produce such large storms if humans did things differently.

Those who firmly believe in the “climate science” numbers supporting anthropomorphic  climate change are so emotionally invested in the numbers that some are rooting for the storm. Others are pretending to be scientists, leading to ridiculous exchanges like the one below.

Ryan Maue is in fact bona fide a hurricane scientist. Kurt Eichenwald is an editor for Vanity Fair and an MSNBC contributor. “I’ll show you the science paper on it” is about as absurd as me (with zero medical training) telling a heart surgeon that he’s doing a mitral valve repair wrong, and I can show him the “science paper” on it that I found with Google.

That is the point here: everyone in the media is suddenly an expert, declaring fact and denouncing fiction, when we need to be respecting nature’s power, not trying to explain why driving a Ford F-150 caused it.

A fake Irma track showing the storm heading for Houston went viral Monday, causing renewed panic in the storm-devastated region. Now people in Jacksonville are emptying stores of bottled water.

Certainly, people should be prepared. But NHC forecasts and probabilities do not support the level of hysteria the media is conveying. Jacksonville has a 6 percent chance of winds 64 mph or more by Monday. It has a 26 percent chance of winds over 34 mph. That’s gusty, but not catastrophic.

Orlando, Miami, and Fort Myers have under 20 percent chance of winds over 64 mph for Monday. These forecasts are updated at least twice a day, and that’s what should guide us, not the hype.

They’ve called Rush Limbaugh a “hurricane truther” or “hurricane denier” because he pointed out on his show that local TV and national media both have a vested interest in making the storms worse than they are, and ensuring maximum concern by local residents.

(1) It’s good for business for local stores when everyone runs to buy water, and other staple items. (In Middle Georgia, if there’s a hint of a snowflake, the stores sell out of milk, bread and toilet paper–I’m serious.)

(2) Anthropomorphic climate change believers get to crow about how they’re right, and everyone else is wrong, and this prediction was made 15 years ago. (Except that they also predicted 20 years ago that most of Florida would be under water by now, and that hasn’t happened.)

Limbaugh said:

Let me just put it this way. The latest National Hurricane Center forecast map, the track, which was released at 11 a.m. puts the Sunday target exactly where I told my buddies on Saturday and Friday night that it was gonna go, while the models all had it turning north up to North Carolina and Washington, D.C., and the Northeastern coast. That was just one data point that I kept looking at that told me where I thought this thing was gonna go.

They call Limbaugh “out of his mind” because of this. Two more observations.

(1) Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. He admits it freely. He is a radio host who speaks his mind, based on his own experience and claims no special expertise.

(2) The people who call him “out of his mind” also have the same level of non-expertise and access to the same data as Rush Limbaugh, yet Rush’s conclusions fit the forecast better than theirs.

Irma is a dangerous storm. The best advice is to go to the NHC website and look at what the NOAA professionals, who do this day-in-day-out for a living, think will happen. Actually read the forecasts. Then prepare based on fact, not hysteria.

Also realize that most people know jack squat about how hurricanes form, and what causes ocean temperatures to be 1.7 degrees higher on a certain spot than “normal.” If you think that it’s very simple to find a “science paper” linking your F-150, or cow flatulence, to deep ocean temperatures, you are woefully gullible.

The faces you see on television are paid to entertain you and make you feel like they should be trusted. They are reading a script, and most of the time, they don’t know any more than you do.

In fact, you may know more than they do.

Advertisement
2 Comments

2 Comments

  1. William Scherk

    September 6, 2017 at 11:03 am

    Why do you use the phrase “anthropomorphic climate change”?

  2. Steve Berman

    September 6, 2017 at 11:22 am

    Two reasons:

    1) It’s another way of saying “man-caused,”
    2) The apostles of the global warming church assign divine and human qualities to the earth, that somehow it’s Gaia’s revenge on humans for infesting the planet. I choose to make a distinction between “climate change” as a scientific field of study (which is perfectly valid) and the Captain Planet club that has already decided what they believe.

Leave a Reply

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

Democrats

Leftist media pushes back on Green New Deal criticism

Published

on

Leftist media pushes back on Green New Deal criticism

It’s been an up-and-down couple of weeks for proponents of the Green New Deal. Before details were released, it was already being heralded as the greatest thing since President Obama’s election. Then, the details came out and even many on the left were taken aback by the ambitious and incoherent provisions of the deal as detailed in a FAQ section on Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s government web page.

But that was just a draft. They took it down. At least that was the story.

Unfortunately for proponents, they were caught a little flat-footed as questions started pouring in about, well, all of it. Even if we dismiss the less-draconian concepts such as eliminating air travel or the less-sane ideas like taking care of those who are unwilling to work, the left is still stuck with a proposal that the most frugal estimates put at costing around $7 trillion while other’s consider the decade-long cost to be in the HUNDREDS of trillions of dollars.

This is, of course, ludicrous. There’s not enough money in the entire world to pay for the proposal if its cost is somewhere between the lowest and highest estimates, but that hasn’t stopped leftist media from regrouping. Now that the dust has settled a little bit, they’re doing everything they can to recommit to this concept. It’s not that they suddenly believe in this fairy tale. It’s that they don’t want this to be the issue Republicans attack in the 2020 elections.

One article in particular that I read from CNN (yes, sometimes I need to see what the other side is thinking) really struck me for its honesty about the situation. Though I stopped reading it in paragraph two when it referred to “non-partisan” PolitiFact, I went back to it just now to digest the awfulness fully (see the sacrifices I make for our readers!).

To be clear, much of what this article says is correct. It asserts the GOP will take the tenets of the Green New Deal and use it to scare voters into thinking it’s even worse than Obamacare. From 2010 through 2016, Republicans attacked Obamacare incessantly and it worked, giving them the House in 2010, the Senate in 2014, and the White House in 2016. Unfortunately, they stopped there and didn’t actually go after Obamacare with the same fervor they held in their campaign rhetoric and now the Democrats have turned the issue on its head.

But here’s the thing. Obamacare may have been bad, but the Green New Deal truly is worse. It’s not even close. Even if we take at face value the notion that the Green New Deal is simply an ambitious framework around which real legislation can be forged, we have to look at the core issues entailed in order to see the true damage it can do. This is a socialist document. It’s a call for the same levels of insanity that drive the Medicare-for-All movement. Within its frivolous attempts to change perceptions of air travel, cows, and job creation is a deep-rooted desire to convert Americans to needing more government.

NOQ Report needs your support.

The Green New Deal represents the far-left’s desire to make more American dependent on government. At the same time, it aims to increase the levels of dependency for those who are already in need of assistance. It wants Democrats to latch their wagons on the notion that if we become a militantly environmentalist nation, that will serve the dual purpose of giving us fulfillment while saving the planet.

I believe most leftist journalists understand this, but they see in the ridiculous framework a path through which Republicans can be defeated wholesale in 2020 as long as the left can control the narrative surrounding the Green New Deal. They fear another Obamacare counterinsurgency that would wipe out the anti-Trump gains they made in 2018, so they’ve adopted a stance that the Green New Deal isn’t as bad as Fox News says it is. Meanwhile, they’re doing everything they can to say, “look over here and not at the Green New Deal.”

The politics behind what the Green New Deal represents is more in play than the tenets of the proposal itself, at least in the eyes of leftist media. It’s not that they want to promote the concept. They simply don’t want the concept to derail their party in the next election.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Louis Farrakhan refers to Ilhan Omar as ‘sweetheart,’ prompting zero outrage

Published

on

Louis Farrakhan refers to Ilhan Omar as sweetheart prompting zero outrage

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan referred to Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) as “Sweetheart” as he addressed her during a speaking engagement on Sunday. He apparently caught his faux pas and immediately justified the remark, but at that point the moniker which many consider to be sexist or misogynistic had already been noted.

Nevertheless, it didn’t cause the stir one might expect. As a far-left progressive, Omar is known for being a feminist icon on Capitol Hill even though she hasn’t been in office for a full two months yet. As our EIC noted, the lack of a rebuke was because of the source, not because she now feels it’s okay to refer to her as “sweetheart.”

The statement came as Farrakhan was telling Omar she shouldn’t be sorry for the statements she made last week about Israel, AIPAC, and Jewish influence in Washington DC, particularly over Republicans.

In a world where consistency was still considered a virtue, followers of Omar would be wondering why she’s not expressing outrage over the belittling reference from a powerful man. But the world isn’t consistent and Farrakhan always gets a pass.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Democrats

Kamala Harris stutters through non-answer when asked about her Jussie Smollett Tweet

Published

on

Kamala Harris stutters through non-answer when asked about her Jussie Smollett Tweet

In one of the most cringeworthy moments of Senator Kamala Harris’s new presidential campaign, the California Democrat found herself hesitant and uncertain about her feelings towards Jussie Smollett’s apparent hate-crime hoax. This is in stark contrast to her bold and racially charged accusations of a “modern day lynching” allegedly perpetrated by two Nigerian actors at the request of Smollett himself.

Above, you can see her attempt to calm the situation and state that facts are still emerging about the case. Of course, this is three weeks after the alleged incident, which is strange since her response the moment the news broke seemed to express zero interest in waiting for facts to emerge.

“. is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate.”

This is the latest minefield Democrats find themselves traversing after quickly reacting to false claims. It happened with the Covington Catholic School boys. It’s happened far too many times since President Trump ran for President in 2016.

The anti-MAGA hoax epidemic

http://noqreport.com/2019/02/18/anti-maga-hoax-epidemic/There’s a trend that’s been quietly, consistently rearing its ugly head against the President of the United States and his supporters since before the 2016 election. We’ve seen it among unhinged journalists, virtue-signaling celebrities, and Democratic politicians. We’ve seen it manifest in the ugliest form of hatred – the common hate-hoax – and it’s doing more to divide America than the source of the perpetrators’ anger.

They hate President Trump. They hate the people who got him elected. The hate the idea of making America great again because as much of the MAGA agenda comes to pass, they’re learning they’ve been wrong the whole time. I know first hand. I’ve been proven wrong myself.

It doesn’t take a skilled orator or ethical paragon to say, “I reacted too quickly before. I should have waited for all of the facts to come out before reacting emotionally.” Of course, doing so requires humility, which Kamala Harris apparently does not have.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report