Now that the Democrats are poised to triumph over the House, we shall soon daily hear from the likes of Nancy Pelosi and the appalling Raul Grijalva on the tedious subject of global warming. Which means we’ll have to begin talking about it again, like we did in the old days. I hate to do it because I am sick unto death of the whole subject.
What’s it’s been? Twenty, thirty years? Fifty if you throw in global cooling. Decade upon decade of increasingly shrill promises of plummeting—rather, soaring—-temperatures, with nothing much happening. Month or so back we heard there were no strong tornadoes in the US last year. But there were increase in threats that tornadoes were growing more frequent, destructive, et cetera. And also an increase in the believe the threats are reality.
Remember when I (as minority member) and three others published a paper that said, yeah, we’ll get some warming, probably, but not too much? And the crap storm from it that followed? Older readers will recall all that when I speak of “the hacking”. Some environmentally minded zealot pegged my site because I didn’t agree the world would flame out. All of that dull history can be read in articles on the Classics page.
Isn’t it obvious by now the whole thing is political? Well, if not, today I present conclusive proof.
Here’s a CNN tweet (ellipsis original): “‘We must hold the older generations accountable for the mess they have created. … and say to them you cannot continue risking our future like this.’ Teen climate activist Greta Thunberg calls on young people to use their anger as activism.”
Anger?
That we have ignorant brats admonishing us about global warming is all you need to demonstrate climatology has succumbed almost entirely to politics. One hopes there are at least some scientists left who cringe at these embarrassing displays.
I didn’t hear of any who complained of this, or of the many, many similar idiotic displays, though. Meaning scientists who work in this field are pleased to have demonstrably stupid spokespeople. (I almost qualified spokespeople with “celebrity”, but realized the redundancy in time.) I’m not picking on this earnest yet foolish young lady. I am saying CNN, the girl’s parents, and everybody else responsible for the PR stunt should be horsewhipped.
Global warming is politics. QED. I have demonstrated what I set out to prove.
But wait! There’s more! There will always be more. Global warming—under its nom de guerre climate change—will never go away because of its global nature which, as is clear, causes reflexive drooling in globalists. (“Nation states must today be prepared to give up their sovereignty,” said Angela Merkel. “In an orderly fashion of course.” Give up sovereignty to be ruled by whom? She doesn’t say.)
Anyway, here’s another headline: “$1 Million Climate Change Prize Awarded To Unlikely Candidates.” This, depressingly, is in Forbes.
Yesterday, The Roddenberry Foundation awarded four organizations $250,000 each as winners of its 2018 Roddenberry Prize. The $1 million prize focuses on food waste, plant-rich diets, girls’ education, and women’s rights—all generally underfunded and often overlooked for their impact on climate change.
Now you can, at a stretch, and if you are sleepy, kinda sorta make a case about food waste and meatless diets and global warming. But you cannot carp about girls’ education and women’s rights unless you have no idea whatsoever about fluid flow on a rotating sphere. Or if you don’t really care about cloud parameterizations but you really do care about being a social justice warrior—or in spreading cultural Marxist ideas and are looking for the scariest excuse you can find.
Global warming is politics. Again, QED.
And how about that perpetual truth fornicator, Jerry Brown. Take this headline: “Jerry Brown: Climate change challenges as serious as those faced in World War II.”
I would point to the fact that it took Roosevelt many, many years to get America willing to go into World War II and fight the Nazis. Well, we have an enemy, though different, but perhaps, very much devastating in a similar way. And we’ve got to fight climate change. And the president’s got to lead on that.
Well, he worked in Nazis, which is always a winning tactic for the left. Now here’s a quote with some facts: “World War II was the deadliest military conflict in history an estimated total 70-85 million people perished, which was about 3% of the 1940 world population (est. 2.3 billion).”
Three percent of today’s population is about 230 million. Total global warming deaths so far: 0. [Update: My enemies slipped in a typo into this paragraph that has been corrected.]
Jerry Brown is an ass. And global warming is asinine. QED.
Well, yes, it is asinine, Briggs. But I’ll see your climate crisis asininity and raise you with…
The female-dominated American Psychological Association’s (yes, the folks who discern “invisible racism” by reading word patterns) toxic “rasculinity ideology disorder” crisis (i.e., untrammeled rascality, weight lifting, dislike of bearded womyn, x-games, aggravated leering, snuff dipping, etc) as a cause of gender role strain, homaphrobia, and inadequate self-care. Statistics are cited, treatments recommended.
Leftism is the denial of the existence of reality and a war against reason and sanity. If men can be women, then no evidence can be evidence. Lies are facts when used in support of the Narrative.
Amen to that. Let’s see what happens with the Mann/Steyn lawsuit.
Let’s see, you support child abuse with your dollars and your time (and myths about God having nothing better to do than knock-up virgins), but Jerry Brown is an ass, LOL. (… I presume when you mistakenly wrote “Jerry Brown” you meant “Eddie Feser”).
“Three percent of today’s population is about 230 billion”
You must mean million?
OK the great Nazi Party Prom Dance formally opened in September 39 and the USA was putting on it’s corsage in December 1941. Now theoretically that’s “years” but this peroration is normally employed to suggest a longer period of perseverance. Shorter than “decades” or “a lifetime” bun normally longer than half a presidential term.
Secondly, Germany declared war on the USA on 11th December 1941 (https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/hitler-s-speech-declaring-war-against-the-united-states) not the other way around. So even if Roosevelt had toiled for aeons in vain, the USA was at war with Nazi Germany anyway
Does public education in California no longer require learning to read?
Let’s see, you support child abuse with your dollars and your time (and myths about God having nothing better to do than knock-up virgins, but Jerry Brown is an ass, LOL. (…I presume when you mistakenly wrote “Jerry Brown” you meant “Eddie Feser”)
Michael Oz
You remind me of Snopes or Politifact straining at gnats in order to prove a viewpoint as wrong.
(I realize that I’m kinda defending ol’ Jerry, but if it’s right it’s right)
Germany, Italy and Japan had signed the the Tripartite Pact on September 27, 1940.
The US declared war on Japan on Dec 8, 1941. By doing so, it meant getting into it with everybody including Germany – it was understood.
Germany simply “officially” declared war to “honor” it’s commitment to Japan and to put its own people on notice.
Also, the moment Germany started breaking the Treaty of Versailles in 1933, became a reason to engage Germany first diplomatically, then politically and then militarily to “honor” the treaty. Even when Germany marched troops and joined forces with Austria in violation of the treaty in 1936, nothing much was done or said by America. England itself waited until late 1938 to “sue” for “Peace in our time”. So you could consider 38 or even 36 as the opening salvos of WWII.
Just sayin’, Mike, that’s all. Peace in our time, to coin a phrase.
I won’t even address Shecky R Us’s inanity
Condescending and wrong.. are you a climate scientist?
Tripartite Pact Berlin 27/09/1940 :
ARTICLE THREE
Germany, Italy and Japan agree to co-operate in their efforts on aforesaid lines. They further undertake to assist one another with all political, economic and military means when one of the three contracting powers is attacked by a power at present not involved in the European war or in the Chinese-Japanese conflict.
This is a defensive alliance, Germany was not obliged to declare war on a country that Japan attacked.
Germany began breaking the Treaty of Verailles before the ink was dry on it in 1919 so you could equally well argue that WW1 never ended.
Girls’ education and women’s rights are our most important tools for reducing over-population because female self-esteem inversely correlates to lifetime fertility. This has already had a devastating effect on white liberals, setting them firmly on the path to extinction as strong independent women refuse to marry young or have more than one child. The Taliban and Boko Haram were founded mainly to stop us from doing the same to their people.
When you deny Global Warming, you are saying that the world will carry on just fine long after white liberals are dead, gone, and forgotten; they killed themselves for nothing. How dare you!
Note: Illiberal whites will do fine as long as they control their women and shoot diversity on sight. As for nonwhites carrying forth the liberal torch, see North Korea, Zimbabwe, and Venezuela.
“Now you can, at a stretch, and if you are sleepy, kinda sorta make a case about food waste and meatless diets and global warming. But you cannot carp about girls’ education and women’s rights unless you have no idea whatsoever about fluid flow on a rotating sphere. Or if you don’t really care about cloud parameterizations but you really do care about being a social justice warrior—or in spreading cultural Marxist ideas and are looking for the scariest excuse you can find.”
During a fit of extreme boredom I read a recent UN resolution on sustainability (possibly the one Jordan Peterson was involved in). Some of the stated goals were things like “Eliminate all forms of oppression against women everywhere by 2035.” I interpreted it as a sort of mission creep singularity; any single progressive cause has to be about every progressive cause.
But even more impossible than predicting the future climate in general is determining the impact of any single intervention on that climate — nobody can ever tell you that whatever you did made no difference. If you say you support X because it helps minorities, you will at least have to downplay any research showing it doesn’t, so just say you support X because it counteracts global warming instead.
I habitually check for sea level changes as an indicator for climate change. In Cape Town the Castle of Good Hope was built around 1660. At the time springtide touched the main entrance. Today springtide is 15 meters lower. However, nobody wants to confirm it officially and the local Prof in charge of the coastline only admits to an “accelerated sea level rise of 2mm”. Another study done of coastal vegetation changes over time indicate that sea levels changed 2m up and down over probably 1000s years. That the US Navy declared climate warming as a priority risk (Government Accounting Office risk table) must be a total disgrace and they should hang their heads in shame.
Another indicator for climate change is high level winds measured by NASA to provide data for Aircraft design engineers. This data and the change in wind force to suggest climate change has not been forthcoming, despite aircrash investigators noting ice on wings etc.
«“Three percent of today’s population is about 230 billion”
You must mean million»
Hssh, he’s a statistician and is always right about numbers. And global warming, of course.
Pete – Our gracious host does commit the occasional typographic error, which are easily corrected. You, however, appear to suffer from runny brain, for which there is no cure. Fortunately, your nonsensical ravings do occasionally make us laugh, and serve as an excellent example of what not to do.
The next time there is a hurricane or big ice storm in DC and the power goes out and the pipes freeze up I think that all of those large trucks with cherry pickers on them full of toxic masculinity should just drive into town and park around the capitol office buildings. The Asplundh tree trimmers, the plumbers, electricians and linemen. Just fill up the streets like all the women marchers and wait a few days. Wait a few days while the offices get cold and the toilets don’t work. So who’s going to call on some toxic masculinity then? Nancy “can’t P”? AOC? Schemer “can’t poop”?
Let’s send AOC out in one of those trucks so that she can fix the power line up on that 50ft tower. Let’s send Nancy P out to remove a 3 ft chunk of poop and garbage stuck in the main to the sewer plant. You go Nancy. I want to see all of those women’s marchers (gender pay gap? why of course, you’re always out marching and not at work) in 20 degree drizzle climb 8 or 10 poles one morning to restore power to a neighborhood. Toxic masculinity stops working and all you womxns start pooping on the sidewalk and freezing to death.
You … appear to suffer from runny brain, for which there is no cure
Who’s the one with runny brain? Pete was clearly joking,