“If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder
for the global mean temperature in 1990, but 11 degrees colder by the
year 2000. This is about twice what it would
take to put us in an ice age.” - ecology professor Kenneth E.F. Watt at the
University of California in 1970.
These "protectors of real science" had numbers to make their argument, just not the right numbers.
In 2005, predictions were rampant (Al Gore and other climate change "experts") that New York City would be under 20 feet of water by 2015. Not even close.
Also, in 2005, the year that Katrina struck New Orleans, we were told that the event was the beginning of dozens of such storms in the next ten years. "We have waited too long to avoid climate change tragedy." No major storms have hit the Gulf since that prediction and only two or three such storms have landed on the east coast . . . . marking normal and predictable trends.
In 2005, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) predicted that, by 2010, some 50 million
“climate refugees” would be frantically fleeing from various regions of
the globe such as the Caribbean, low-lying Pacific islands, along with coastal areas and a number of regions in China. These U.N. clowns even produced a climate change map showing the regions "in extreme danger." Didn't happen and, since that time, the UN map has been taken down from its website.
Conclusions? Well, it is clear that climate change alarmists cannot predict their way to the nearest toilet. But abject failure has never stopped a committed redistributionist collection, so we will have to contend with this nonsense.
What is totally overlooked, in this debate, is the fact that these "scientist" cannot come up with a plan for actually cooling the earth. While the goal of the Paris Climate Agreement is a limiting of warming increase ti 1.5 degrees, the actual projections are for one half a degree over the next 100 years. In other words, nothing.
Now you know.
WHO are the real science deniers? Those dumbasses who get their 'science' from the Dailey Caller, Anthony Watts, and the like. It's people like this that are easily manipulated by fake news, and Russian propaganda.
ReplyDeleteA study by the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre of the NRC and the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) reveals that in 2008 alone, more than 20 million people were displaced by climate-related sudden-onset natural disasters, such as floods and storms.
For example, up to 800,000 people were displaced when Cyclone Nargis hit Myanmar. Many of them have still not been able to return. In Brazil, almost 80,000 people were displaced by heavy rains and floods.
The Syrian civil war started after an extreme drought in Syria between 2006 and 2009, was likely due to climate change, and that the drought was a factor in the violent uprising that began there in 2011.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/science/earth/study-links-syria-conflict-to-drought-caused-by-climate-change.html
The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyze, we've reached a clear scientific consensus.
Try again douchebag.
Your opinions about the Daily Caller and Anthony Watts are meaningless, precisely because they (your opinions).
DeleteFloods and storms happen all the time . . . . . all the time. Your example from the OCHA) IS MEANINGLESS. This is what you clowns on theleft do, you take an disaster and turn it into proof of glorbal warming. The kid next shoots somebody and you blame global warming for creating an "atmosphere" that exacerbates frustration and harsh behavior; you take the storms of 2008 and assume "global warming" in spite of the fact that next year, and the next and the next and the nest year, those terrible storms and flooding did not exist in the extremem numbers of 2008. Now, if that region saw 2008 as the beginning of sustained period of storms and excessive flooding up to the present time, you would have a point, but, to bring up one anecdotal example after another is just plain silly.
The 500,000 dead and the 11 million refugees out of Syria is the result of Barck Obama funding ISIS, leaving behind billions of dollars worth of military equipment, ammunition, guns and other weaponry AND not going in and killing ISIS as he led us to believe he would.
Foinally, the notion of a flat earth was a consensus opinion, as was eating too many eggs, or eating too much pork, or believing that a man can simply say he is a woman, and BAM he is a woman. More than this, there is no reason to believe that man can significantly reduce the temp of this earth. The UN goal with the Paris Accord hopes to reduce the projected rise in temperature by 1.5 degrees. That is a goal. Most folks do not believe the Accord will result in a .5 degree of change, and no one could prove that point, even if true. YOU are the science denier and YOU look like a fool in your denials.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration released its 11th annual Arctic Report Card, which compiles data from 61 scientists in 11 countries.
ReplyDeleteA conspiracy involving 11 countries?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/14/world/arctic-report-card/index.html
Like I wrote using pro-climate change site is this: The goal of the Paris agreement was a 1.5 degree reduction in the rise of global temperatures, whatever that will be. That's the goal. Understand that "1.5" degrees, is a feckless marker in view of the fact that no one knows the actual rise in temps 100 years from now.
Delete