As the Republican led House, and many Republicans, and some Democrats, in the Senate look to keep the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases, Mr. Obama has quietly implemented his own rules
On March 4th, in a move surely designed to side-step Congress, Obama’s Council on Environmental Quality issued instructions to all federal agencies on how to adapt to climate change. All agencies, from the Food and Drug Administration to the Department of Defense, will be required to analyze their vulnerabilities to the impacts from climate change and come up with a plan to adapt. Thousands of governmental employees will be trained on climate science, like it or not.
The changes aren’t limited to just federal agencies. Countless numbers of private businesses that sell, build, provide logistics or maintenance, or anything else to the government will be forced to comply with new Federal climate adaptation guidelines—all because of Presidential Executive Order 13514.
Got that? Any company that has dealings with the Federal government will have to implement all the requirements of EO 13514, which include things like
- Appoint a Climate Adaptation specialist
- Establish an Agency wide Climate Change Adaptation Policy and Mandate by June 2011
- Participate in Climate Adaptation workshops and then educate all employees throughout 2011
- Identify and analyze climate vulnerabilities that would interfere with accomplishing the Agency’s mission by March 2012
- Implement the adaptation plan by September 2012
No wonder Obama has avoided most talk about “climate change”: he’s stealthily implemented the Warmist idiocy.
Say, I wonder if this would apply to anyone paying taxes?
It also “requires Federal Agencies to set a 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target within 90 days; increase energy efficiency; reduce fleet petroleum consumption; conserve water; reduce waste; support sustainable communities; and leverage Federal purchasing power to promote environmentally-responsible products and technologies.”
So, the power of the federal government will be used to push one product over another. So much for a fair and impartial government.
Now that Tim Pawlenty has announced that he has formed a presidential exploratory committee, it is time to start looking at his conservative credentials. Overall, he would appear to be a great candidate. But, there is one problem I see
A video created by a Democratic state legislator in Minnesota captures Tim Pawlenty, the former Republican governor and a 2012 presidential candidate, repeatedly calling for a cap-and-trade program for carbon dioxide emissions to fight climate change. The video was aired during a hearing on a Republican bill to lift restrictions on coal-fired power plants. Mr. Pawlenty now describes his past support for cap-and-trade as “stupid.” [MinnPost]
Here’s what T-Paw had to say
“As to cap and trade, almost everybody who’s run has got the same problem,” Pawlenty said last month during the Conservative Political Action Committee conference in Washington. “If you look under the hood, you’ll see that I, like everybody else potentially running, looked at it, flirted with it and then decided it was a bad idea.”
“So have I changed by position? Yes,” Pawlenty said at CPAC. “But I’m not going to be cute about it, hem and haw, be dippy and dancy about it. Just saying yeah, it was a mistake, it was stupid. It was wrong.”
I’ll give him points for honesty in saying he was wrong, but, is this something he truly believes? Or, is it just something he is saying to placate the Conservative base? He has some questions to answer
- Have you truly changed your position on cap and trade, along with the climate change hoax?
- Will you state specifically that you will forswear from pushing cap and change legislation and/or signing cap and tax legislation?
- What is your position on anthropogenic global warming?
Feel free to chime in with some questions of your own.
More and more brown bears are embracing the single life — at least that’s according to an extensive, decades-long study of the animals in Alaska’s Kodiak wilderness. Researchers have observed a dramatic change in the bears’ relationship statuses in recent years, warning that shifts in seasonal patterns may be behind this new-found unwillingness to settle down and give their parents some darn grandcubs already.
Biologist Bill Leacock of the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge recently presented the findings from the longest-running bear survey of its kind, and it would appear that traditional couplings are falling out of fashion in the world of brown bear relationships. “So, we’re seeing a lot less family groups,” he said. “Whether this is a long-term trend or not, we don’t know yet.”
Obviously, it’s all globull warming
Climate change has already been linked to anomalies in seasonal changes, which, in turn, have had recorded impact on plant, bird, and insect species throughout the world. For some animals, like bears, shifts in seasonal triggers could throw off the balance our their hibernation patterns and ultimately their mating habits — meaning more bears stay single and less cubs are born.
Ah, but, is it globull warming, or something else?
Leacock notes that changes in seasonal patterns, namely the late arrival of Spring, may be contributing to the shift in bear behavior — but further study may be required to better assess the trend.
See, it’s all about greenhouse gases making the world warmer and …….. wait, what? The late arrival of Spring? Doesn’t that mean that the Alaskan winter is lasting longer than it used to, ie, frickin’ cold?
And the answer to stopping climate change raising the water levels is to….well, talk about it, spread awareness, and, well, that’s it
While the economy may be the most immediate issue, climate change is on our doorstep, said Melanie Reding, education coordinator for the Jacques Cousteau Coastal Education Center in Little Egg Harbor.
Reding spoke Saturday about sea level rise and what warming oceans mean for New Jersey’s coast, to an audience at the Long Beach Island Foundation of the Arts and Sciences.
“New Jersey has a real issue,” Reding said. “Sixty percent of our population lives within the coastal region. We have low elevation and high population.”
The sea level at Atlantic City has risen about 14 inches since records began in 1912, half because of the rise in sea level and the other half to subsidence — sinking of the land.
So, let’s see, that means that the seas at Atlantic City (which is basically swampland) have risen 7 inches in the past century, which, science and physical records tell us is……..well within the average for sea rise over the last 7,000 years, since the last glacial period came to an end. That average is 6-8 inches per century.
Say, with all that subsidence, why isn’t New Jersey having tons of earthquakes? Doesn’t land subsidence from melting glaciers caused by someone driving a fossil fueled vehicle cause earthquakes?
Oh, and then there is that whole thing in NJ about erosion due to close in currents. As someone who grew up in NJ at the Shore, I can tell you, you would see the erosion every year. There’s a reason the state and cities spend a lot of money on rock jetties, dredge the inlets, and dump lots of sand at the beaches. Take a look at an overhead shot of the Manasquan Inlet, and witness the power of nature.
Over the cold and snowy winter, something we had been told was a thing of the past, we were treated to a raft of stories saying “this is what globull warming looks like!” Now, the Warmists seem to be pushing the meme that all the earthquake activity is caused by the climate change hoax, with The Montreal Gazette being the latest to join the moron brigade
Severe earthquakes in Haiti, Chile and now Japan have experts around the world asking whether the world’s tectonic plates are becoming more active — and what could be causing it.
Some scientists theorize that the sudden melting of glaciers due to man-made climate change is lightening the load on the Earth’s surface, allowing its mantle to rebound upwards and causing plates to become unstuck.
Except, there are a few problems with that meme: the subduction zone that caused the Japanese earthquake is not even remotely close to a melting glacier, and, is in fact, covered by tons of water. The one in Chile isn’t close, either. As for Haiti, the Caribbean Plate wasn’t even covered by glaciers during the last glacial period. Same with the Indonesian meg-thrust quake.
These scientists point to the historical increase in volcanic and earthquake activity that occurred about 12,000 years ago when the glaciers that covered most of Canada in an ice sheet several kilometres thick suddenly melted.
The result was that most of Canada’s crust lifted — and is still rising.
Wait, Man was driving SUVs back then? Say, why aren’t we having massive earthquakes and volcanoes in Canada, and why is there a sparse record of earthquakes in that area?
Scientists have discovered that the accelerated melting of the Greenland ice sheet over the last 10 years already is lifting the southeastern part of that island several millimetres every year.
Yet, we aren’t having massive earthquakes in Greenland. We aren’t having them in most places where glaciers are retreating. You’d think they would be constant and huge in places like the Himalayas, where the Indian plate is diving under the Asian plate…..what’s that? What they are proposing is that melting glaciers thousands of miles away are causing the earthquakes? Hmm. Why, yes, the climate morons are insane.
All hail anthropogenic global warming, which has created more than usual snow in California. For a change, Treehugger decides to not actually mention “climate change” (they’re actually avoiding global warming and climate change quite a bit over the last week), and just shocks us with the awesomeness of the natural world
With what might cause a whiplash-like doubletake, California has some happy news about its water supplies. The Sierra snowpack is larger than normally expected at this time of year. Up to 60% of California’s water comes from the Sierra snowpack, and it’s a pleasant twist that after quite a few dry years, there’s finally a lot of it. Part of the reason has been some crazy rain and snowfalls unexpected with the current La Niña year, but researchers wonder if it will hold out.
The SFGate reports, “The water content of the snow in the Sierra is well above normal for March, according to measurements taken manually and electronically throughout the state. The mountains statewide actually contain more frozen water than what would be standard a month from now, when snowpack in California is typically at its peak.”
I will give Treehugger props for not delving into the silly “globull warming causes snow” meme. Very few posts even attempted to go that route. And they even mention La Nina, a natural event.
Anyhow, funny how our warming world is creating more snow, eh? And then there is this
Of course, the relief is great, but underscores the state’s struggles with water. California’s rising population of people, and it’s role in providing a significant portion of the nation’s fruits, vegetables and dairy, has the state strapped for water. Plus, finding a balance between human wants and ecosystem needs is a struggle, especially around the San Joaquin River delta. While there’s plenty of snow this year, only about 60% of the water requested by cities will be able to be delivered, due to pumping restrictions to protect endangered fish.
So, let’s let humans do without, to protect a freaking fish. Look, I’m all for the environment, but, seriously, a fish? Let it adapt or die out. Darwinism, anyone?
Looks like the climate morons are trying out a new meme to try and explain just why hurricane activity has decreased since 2005
Models suggest that there may be fewer, but more powerful, hurricanes as the world warms
Are these the same models that originally stated that there would be more and more hurricanes due to anthropogenic global warming?
There’s tremendous variation in hurricane activity over time and from place to place. Various studies published since 2005 indicate that the number and/or strength of hurricanes have increased in various regions, especially since the 1970s. However, it’s likely that some hurricanes at sea went unnoticed in the days before satellites and hurricane-hunter aircraft, and that complicates the assessment. There’s no doubt, though, that hurricane activity has stepped up since the mid-1990s in the North Atlantic, where ocean temperatures have risen through long-term warming and an apparent multidecadal cycle in Atlantic currents. The tropics are part of a global trend toward ocean warming that goes hand in hand with atmospheric warming, and warm oceans provide the energy to drive hurricanes. As for the future, computer models tend to point towards fewer hurricanes overall (for reasons that aren’t yet firmed up) but a general strengthening of winds and rainfall in the hurricanes that do form.
Isn’t that nice of The Guardian to bury the natural multidecadal cycle causation in the middle? But, hey, they’re floating a meme that hurricanes will become less frequent by more powerful. Unfortunately, the above excerpt comes from a book the Guardian is pushing, which also goes on to say
Trends aside, a catastrophic storm can strike in any year, and it’s impossible to tie any single hurricane or other weather event directly to global warming.
Whoops! Of course, that doesn’t matter, because the alarmists will read the headline, scan the short article, and have their talking points that hurricanes will become less frequent but more powerful. Interestingly, the trend for U.S. hurricane strikes has decreased since the 1880’s, as CO2 went up, and the effects of the Little Ice Age ended. I’m sure it’s all caused by….Cubachi using energy to power the blog.
This is why AGW is a cult, not science: they’ll say anything to back up their assertions, and what they are pushing constantly changes.
The headline at Grist is an attention grabber: Maybe no one cares about climate change because we’re wired for extinction. Yet, the article doesn’t really support that, as George Black goes on a tear that our brains are wired wrong
In my unending (and thus far, I have to confess, largely fruitless) attempts to figure out why Americans aren’t more alarmed about climate change, one of the more intriguing ideas I’ve heard recently was put to me by a psychologist named Andrew Shatté.
Well, it’s easy to understand: you’re hypothesis is a bunch of mule fritters, ripe with lies, distortions, hysterical crystal ball pronouncements, idiotic talking points, little actual scientific method, scare tactics, and you say everything is called by Mankind’s release of greenhouse gases, from drought to flood to hot to cold to snow to no snow to….you name it. Most people aren’t that stupid. They catch on to reality. At one point Pet Rocks were the hot thing, then people realized they were paying $ 3.95 for a …… rock, which they could find outside for free.
Anyhow, after a discussion of some extinct Irish Elk, we get
So why are we like the Irish elk? The problem is the human brain, Shatté says. Our evolutionary development has not yet caught up with the change in our circumstances. More specifically, the problem is our brain’s fear triggers. Our instincts are still paleolithic; our fear reflexes respond to all the wrong things. They lie dormant in the face of climate change, no matter how ominously scientists predict its probable consequences. But we’re programmed to pump adrenalin at the sight of spiders, snakes, and other mortal threats slithering into our caves. We still run a mile from snakes, although they only kill about five or six Americans a year. The most recent annual figure for fatalities from lightning strikes is 58, but would you go anywhere near a golf course in a storm?
See? It’s because our brains haven’t caught up enough to be scared from the climate changing into a warmer one. Or, perhaps, we have a collective remembrance of what it was like during all the cool periods back to the last glaciation period, and the hardships, pestilence, and crop failures that resulted. Na. Your brain must be stooooopid.
Of course, American brains are even worse, because Americans believe in “climate change” even less than the rest of the world. You should read the whole hilarious thing, way to much to excerpt without creating a massive post, but, hmmmm
I don’t really buy that. I spend a fair amount of time in the West, which is experiencing at least three spectacularly visible impacts of global warming: prolonged drought, raging forest fires, and the destruction of forests by the mountain pine beetle. Sit on your front porch in Wyoming or Idaho and you can almost see the trees dying in front of your eyes — and then hold your breath to see if they will burst into flames come summer. The conundrum, though, is that these states are among the reddest in the country, the most likely to distrust the science on climate change and the most hostile to any government effort to reduce carbon emissions.
The rest is funny, especially the part about trees spontaneously combusting, but, focus on the bold part, and let’s see who George is
OnEarth’s executive editor has reported from five continents, chronicling civil war in Central America, the democracy movement in China, and climate change in countries from Bangladesh to Peru. His next book, Empire of Shadows, to be published by St. Martin’s Press in Fall 2011, …is on the 19th century exploration of Yellowstone.
So, apparently, George’s brain is wired wrong, because he is certainly killing Gaia by using trees to publish his next book, and taking unnecessary fossil fueled flights around the world, which apparently doesn’t scare the daylights out of him.
So, all the climate morons are going ga-ga over a new report that links extreme rain (what we used to simply call “rain”) to globull warming. But, does it really?
Global warming helped drive a rise in the intensity of extreme rain and snowfall across much of the Northern Hemisphere during the last half of the 20th century, a new study has found.
Wait, I thought snowfall was a thing of the past? The past like during the last glaciation period, where “extreme snow” was part of what created those glaciers that buried what has become NY City in a mile of ice.
The work builds on previous research that established broad trends in extreme precipitation events over the 20th century. Those studies suggested a link between climate change and heavy precipitation, based on the atmosphere’s ability to hold more moisture as it warms.
But, according to the research team that conducted the new study, those studies stopped short of presenting evidence for a direct link between human-triggered global warming and extreme precipitation.
Until now,”there has not been a study that formally identified this human effect in precipitation extremes,” says Francis Zwiers, a climate scientist who heads the Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium at the University of Victoria in British Columbia. This new study “provides specific scientific evidence that that is indeed the case.”
So, the new study does provide that link? Er, not so fast
But the study also shows a gap between models and the real world that some researchers say warrants caution in claiming to have discovered the smoking gun linking warming and the more extreme precipitation.
And therein lies the problems: the warmist wankers rely way too much on models, which do not fully jibe with the real world. There were plenty of floods prior to the 2nd half of the 20th century from extreme rain events. Furthermore, they fail to explain the warming that started in the mid-1800’s as being caused by mankind, nor the prior warming periods, nor why the Earth came out of a glaciation period, nor why this warming period is different from the others as being caused mostly or solely by mankind.
But, hey, we all need to change our lives at the barrel of government decree, pay lots more in taxes, and give up our freedoms for “climate change,” what used to be known simply as “weather.”
Sea rise is so dangerous, and so prevalent, that the climate morons have to…….fake it, because they can’t find the real thing! (via Steven Goddard)
Want a glimpse of what a warmer world with higher sea level might look like?
A local environmental group is asking Orange County residents to help them create that dramatic picture — by taking pictures themselves.
“King tides” should be crashing into the Orange County coast over the next three days. The plan, says Ray Hiemstra, associate director of Orange County Coastkeeper, is to get residents to submit their photos of tidal encounters — waves hitting Balboa Island sea walls, for example, or the ocean front at Seal Beach.
The king tides, he says, are unusually high tides.
“It’s a name for these very high tides that come along occasionally, when everything lines up just right,” Hiemstra said. “The idea is to get people thinking about sea level rise, and what we may expect in the future.”
In other words, nature is happening with natural very high tides that have been happening for billions of years, and, since actual catastrophic sea rise isn’t happening (unlike, say, at the end of the last glaciation period, where sea rise was measured in feet per century, rather than inches, or during the era of the dinosaurs, where North America was bisected by a shallow sea. Damn those nature channels for telling me that!), the climate morons have to make it up. They’re still banging the drum bong and saying there could be a 2-6 foot sea rise by the end of the century. It’d be nice if they could tell us how much the seas will rise this year, and if it will be above the normal rise that has been going on for 20,000 years.
The mountains of snow that have buried the Northeast this winter will have a sweet – and just slightly bitter – taste for the region’s maple syrup producers.
Sweet because an abundance of snow actually helps with the production of the sap that is boiled down to produce syrup. But bitter because, well, too much snow is just as much a chore for maple syrup producers to deal with as it is for the rest of us.
Stupid globull warming snow is just so inconvenient.
A freeze in Mexico and cold weather in Florida and Texas are creating a tomato shortage.
This is expected to drive up prices at the grocery store.
I blame…..Kate at small dead animals for living a modern life that release copious amounts of greenhouse gases that warm the Earth and create cold weather.
Mights and coulds and maybes. Silly Louise Gray brings this breathless scaremongering.
Researchers at the University of Alberta looked at how melting sea ice in the 1990s effected the breeding success of polar bears.
During the spring and summer months the females are hunting seals on the ice to build up energy for the autumn and winter when they will hibernate for up to eight months and give birth.
The study found the early melting of the ice made it more difficult for the bears to hunt seals successfully and build up energy.
Therefore there is less chance of a successful pregnancy.
In the early 1990s 28 per cent of energy-deprived pregnant polar bears in the Hudson Bay region failed to have even a single cub.
Of course, this means
The polar-bear population of western Hudson Bay is currently estimated to be around 900 which is down from 1,200 bears in the past decade.
The number of polar bears across the Arctic is estimated to be between 20,000 and 25,000.
Silly Louise forgets to mention that the the polar bear population grew from 5,000 to 10,000 in the 50’s to that 20K to 25K number. And, it was colder in the 50’s. Yet, as the climate warmed up due to natural forces from the 80’s on, the numbers increased. Silly Louise should also work on her grammar (yes, I do make mistakes myself, but, then, I’m not a professional, nor am I actually paid.) And silly Louise should perhaps worry more about the crocs and manatees
The Florida Fish and Wildlife Service documented at least 244 manatees killed by cold, leading to a one-year record for total deaths. A plunge in ocean temperatures all but wiped out corals in shallow waters from Biscayne Bay through much of the Florida Keys and left hundreds of sea turtles dead or stunned and sick. The 100-plus carcasses of rare North American crocodiles represented about 10 percent of the coastal population.
The cold snap also produced one of the largest fish kills seen in decades.
That was from last year’s cold snap. And we have seen the same thing this year, with manatees dying all over the place, sea turtles being “shocked” by the cold waters, and much of the same as last year. No videos of lizards falling frozen from trees, but, interestingly, the biologists have found that many of the species which had problems last year have adapted and their numbers exploded. Ain’t global cooling grand?
For a place that is freaking cold and snow in the dead of winter ….. say, why does it snow so darned much in Niagara when the water and air are very cold? ……. you’d think more warm days would be something people would look forward to. Not in Climate Alarmist World
NIAGARA FALLS — More golf days and less icewine could be the fate climate change hands the Niagara region, says the Niagara Parks Commission’s parks department director Debbie Whitehouse.
Changes in long-term weather trends should prompt government agencies like the Niagara Parks Commission to pay attention to the consequences of global warming and to consider its own role as an environment leader, said Whitehouse, who oversees its environmental initiatives.
“Our extremes are getting more extreme. We’re experiencing a lot of volatility,” she said during a presentation Tuesday where she outlined some of the long-range effects climate change could have on the Niagara region.
Hey, Debs, it’s called “weather.” It happens. And, look, there’s that uber scientific world “could” again. Niagara Falls has an average snowfall of 93.6 inches. Obviously, they have had snow falls for a long time.
In Niagara, the number of winter days where the temperature is lower than -20°C has been dropping over the last 40 years. But the number of summer days where temperatures are over 35°C is increasing, Whitehouse said.
More days where the temperature is over 35°C could be one of the consequences for Niagara, she said.
Personally, I’m not seeing the down side to this. More days for people to visit and dump tourist dollars into the economy. And she says that the number of golf days, which has increased by 13 over the past 40 years, could increase by 3 more by 2100. EVERYBODY PAN……hit the links. But, it could affect their ability to make icewine, and
“Our icewine industry might be affected soon,” Whitehouse said.
Global warming’s consequences could be more dire and more far-reaching than merely hurting the wine industry, she warned.
Hmm, freezing to death in -8C weather to make wine, or, standing on the links in the warmth. Obviously, we must get other people to change their behavior to make sure the people of Niagara continue to freeze their buns off.
In Niagara, the water level on the Great Lakes could drop one metre by 2050.
????? Isn’t globull warming supposed to make the waters rise? Or, are the alarmists hedging their bets by also claiming that AGW will make the seas lower, kind of like how they now blame snow and cold on ……. Brian Maloney living a fossil fueled life? Sheesh, it’s not like globull warming is reducing malaria or something.
Today’s dose of “seriously?”
The Imperial War Museum in London may seem like a strange place to launch a report on climate change. But that’s where I am this morning, along with speakers from the Tyndall Centre for Climate Research, the Women’s Institute and the museum itself.
Why? Two reasons. First, climate change is one of the greatest threats to our country since the last world war. It’s not only environmentalists who are saying this. Business leaders, prime ministers, major charities and generals have all recognised the level of risk.
Second, if we are to overcome this threat – and the alternative is simply too awful to contemplate – then we need to mobilise as a nation in a way we haven’t seen since 1945.
I can see where she is coming from, because, according to the 2007 IPCC bureaucratic report, 20th century temps were up a massive 0.74 ± 0.18 °C (1.33 ± 0.32 °F)! OMG WE’RE ALL GOING TO……adapt? But, hey, nothing better than staging yet another crazy alarmists stunt, instead of, well, you know, actually going out and changing her own behavior. Good news on the behavior change front, though
We’re also launching a competition to find the best ways in which the wartime posters and public education campaigns can be re-imagined to help today’s society understand the dangers of climate change and what they can do to help. Wartime slogans such as “Is your journey really necessary?” remain relevant today when so much business travel could be replaced by video conferencing.
Oh. Damn. I thought they were going to actually Do Something Themselves to reduce their own GHG footprints to zero. Guess not.
I’ve no ideas for a WWII type poster. What’ve you got?
We hear all the dire warnings, we read all the unhinged predictions, and they tell us we need to spend money hand over fist to stop global warming, er, climate change, um, sudden climate disruption, oh, whatever they are calling it today. Nowadays, they tell is globull warming will cause it to get high, cold, wet, dry, even snowy and icy. Bitterly cold. And it will be bitterly cold, the coldest week of the year so far, in the Northeast and north Midwest, starting this week. Alarmists usually like to make their predictions for 50 or 100 years out, and, there is a big reason why the alarmists do not want to make specific predictions about what is going to happen currently
Ever more alarming facts are emerging to show how Brisbane’s floods were made infinitely worse by cockeyed decisions inspired by the obsession of the Australian authorities with global warming. Inevitably, the country’s warmist lobby has been voluble in claiming that such a “freak weather event” (as the BBC called it) is a consequence of man-made climate change. But far from being an unprecedented “freak event”, the latest flood was nearly a foot below the level of one in 1974 and 10 feet below the record set in 1893.
For years, Australia’s warmists have been advising the authorities that the danger posed to the country by global warming is not floods but droughts: not too much rain but too little. One result, in Brisbane, was a relaxation of planning rules, to allow building on areas vulnerable to flooding in the past. As long ago as 1999, this was seen as potentially disastrous by an expert Brisbane River Flood Study (which was ignored and for years kept secret). Instead of investing in its flood defences, Australia spent $ 13 billion on desalination plants. (Queensland’s was recently mothballed because of the excess of rain.)
The warmists looked into their crystal balls and said “Drought.” So, Australia planned for that. And they were not only wrong, they are culpable in the deaths of all the people who had been left with the decisions to plan for “globull warming will cause drought.”
The warmists have been telling us to plan for warmer winters. Good thing most cities and states, and people, did not plan for that this winter, or last. I support wind power, but, is it really the best thing to rely on wind turbines which freeze when globull warming doesn’t co-operate with the computer models? Not that this winter, or the past few, have co-operated with the computer models. Nor have the past 15 years, which have been been above the average of the years during the Little Ice Age, granted, but, have also been relatively stable, when they should have continued to rise, according to the theory hypothesis raving delusion that rising CO2 is the only thing that affects Earth’s climate. And, before someone says “2010 is tied for the hottest year ever!!!!!!!1!!!!”, consider that the NDIC’s own website refutes that.
I doubt the computer models predicted snow in Australia during the summer. Yet, the Warmists want us to spend trillions on solutions based on ever-changing looks into their crystal ball. Tell you what: once they actually make predictions as to what the climate will do this year, next year, and the next decade, along with living the lives they say everyone else should live, the warmists should be ignored. They cost everyone else money, and put people’s lives in danger.