Yesterday was, of course, yet another climate strike by school children in effort to save the planet. Ever notice how they never do these strikes on a Wednesday? So they have to come back to school the next day and deal with the feedback from their noble efforts? Yeah, funny how they always make their sacrifice into a holiday weekend isn't it?
Anyway, here's my thing on this -- everyone is using the word existential about man-caused or anthropogenic climate change, though they drop the man-caused part because it is easier to bludgeon opponents into silence by claiming they are climate deniers as though people like myself deny climate exists or something. Orwell would be proud of this torturing of language. But I'm not sure existential is the right word to use. I suppose they mean it as relating to existence, but I'm still not sure if that's the right word. But my vocabulary isn't that overwhelming, so I could be wrong here.
But what we're hearing, from everyone on the left and all these poor children who've been terrorized by the liberal school system is that we have 10 to 15 years until the planet is dead. You've heard it -- we're one generation away from the Earth being unable to sustain life. Some of those kids were testifying in front of Congress (don't get me started on that) and saying we had mere months before the damage to the Earth was unrepairable. And so on.
Okay, let's start from that assumption. We would need to be on the brink of an apocalyptic level of destruction seen only in disaster movies. And with that coming in mere months or years, we should easily be able to point to a multitude of indicators that something is happening adversely to our planet.
So . . . point to something. Anything. I'll wait.
Yeah. Exactly. They can't. No one pushing this supposed threat can. They mouth scary scenarios and fancy words, but can't do anything but flap their gums.
We've heard the nonsense about the planet being on fire. What rubbish. Climate scientologists tried to point to the fires in the Amazon as proof, but that quickly got squashed as the news that those fires were mostly set by farmers prepping the land for the upcoming planting season.
We hear all the time about global temps rising. But how much are they actually rising? Let's look at some data:
This graph shows global temperature trends from the 1850's through 2019. The grey lines with the wild divergences are the 12 month averages. They look crazy. And that shows what happens when you take only a small subset of data into account. Look at the dark blue line made from averaging temps over a ten year period. It's barely a ripple. And that's the point -- it's easy to jump to hysterical conclusions over short term trends. Also shown is that despite steadily climbing planetary CO2 levels, the global temps have barely risen. In fact, we've seen a slight cooling trend recently and with a Grand Solar Minimum starting, we may see even more cooling in the coming years or decades.
So as we've seen over and over again, from actual data, not hysterics on Twitter, CO2 is not acting as a greenhouse gas (as many reputable scientists have tried to point out and been shouted down by actors, musicians, tv pundits and other faux scientists) and warming the planet. We are just now coming out of a 25 year period that climate hysterics have referred to as The Pause because temps were flat-lined. The last couple of years have seen fluctuations of a fraction of a degree Celsius and actually within the margin of error. So no one can say with certainty that the planet is warming alarmingly.
We've heard for years that Arctic ice was melting at a dangerous rate. In 2007, Al Gore famously predicted there would be no polar ice in ten years. Well, here we are 12 years later and polar ice is still there, just ask those idiots who had to be rescued from their climate apocalypse excursion this week. In fact, we had record ice growth just two years ago and arctic ice is doing what it has always done for as long as we've been able to watch it -- it grows in winter and melts in summer. F*cking duh!
Moral coward Pete Buttigieg said in a recent Presidential Debate that there would be entire countries wiped off the map in a few short years because of rising sea levels. Really Pete? Okay, name one. *crickets chirping* Planetary sea levels have been rising that the same rate for 160 years -- 1.7mm per year. The rate of change for sea level rise is zero (for you math majors out there), that means the rate is not changing or accelerating, despite hysterical claims that it is. NOAA, NASA and other organizations that no one in their right mind would consider conservative leaning or Trump supporting verify this data. The former bartender with the bad boob job representing NY14 recently said we were on the verge of watching Miami disappear into the ocean because of climate change. Yeah, if you consider 896 years a "verge" then I guess we're on it. How serious are rising ocean levels? Well former President Obama just paid $15million for a waterfront mansion in Martha's Vineyard, so he doesn't seem too worried. Neither is Al Gore who also owns ocean front property. If they're so convinced we're facing an extinction level of global flooding, wouldn't they be buying homes in Montana or something. It's almost like they don't believe the bullsh*t they're dishing out to the rest of us.
But think about it, if catastrophic sea level rise is right on us, shouldn't we be seeing reports from somewhere that seas are encroaching on coastline cities? This isn't the frog in the pan of water here, with the temp slowly increased until it boils (and has anyone ever tested that old meme?), according to climate hysterics the water's already boiling and the frog is just hanging out doing the backstroke while he cooks. That's what the left and the children they've terrorized are claiming.
Bottom line, as I've posted time and again on this blog -- there are no increases in the number or severity of hurricanes, tornadoes or other extreme weather events. No increase in droughts or flooding. We are not setting record highs or lows at an unprecedented rate. The planet is doing what it has always done -- change, fluctuate, evolve . . . a living ecosystem that has thrived for millennia, and there is absolutely no evidence anything we are doing is adversely changing that. No matter how loud the socialist left yells.
And though there is no evidence that current CO2 levels are harming the environment, there is data showing benefit of more food for plant life on Earth:
NASA satellite imagery is showing a distinct greening of the planet as plants, that feed on CO2, are flourishing everywhere, rebuilding forests and increasing vegetation worldwide. Current planetary CO2 levels are no where near historic highs that occurred during the age of prehistoric era, and I am certainly not advocating pumping metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere willy nilly, but seeing as how the US has already reduced it's carbon emissions and the rest of the world that signed onto that stupid Climate Treaty are violating it like crazy, perhaps Presidential candidates and students and climate hysterics might want to look at those who aren't acting as responsible stewards of the planet.
The long and short of it is that there really isn't some looming disaster here. And it's a shame that intelligent people are so invested in a political agenda that they are pushing this scam. There are no food shortages, there is no water shortage, lifespans have increased, we have access to living conditions beyond the wildest dreams of those living just a century ago. Sure, there are sh*tholes in the world. And each one of them run by totalitarian governments that starve their populations while hoarding resources for the leaders and elites of those countries.
And not surprisingly, that's what those calling for these draconian changes want in this country. AOC's own chief of staff stated that their Green New Deal was never about climate change but rather a way to implement the socialist economy they envisioned for the country. Ever since the first nonsense about anthropogenic climate change came out, opponents have tried to warn that it was more about wealth redistribution than anything else. Wealth redistribution and total control over our lives. Listen to the Democratic candidates as they tell you they're going to tell you what to eat, take away your car, take away your heating and a/c, tell you where to live and so on. It's not about saving the planet from some imagined impending disaster, it's all about totalitarian control.
And I pity the fools that are falling for this.
No comments:
Post a Comment