The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJohn Derbyshire Archive
Why the West’s Elites Prefer the Climate Change Gnat to the Great Migration Camel
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

[Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively through]

Above, the border between Poland and Belarus. (And a camel.)

This week’s text is from the Gospel According to St. Matthew, Chapter 23, Verse 24

Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

Jesus really nailed it there. That’s our ruling class and their media lackeys to a “t” … actually, I guess, since the Savior was speaking Aramaic, to a taw. They make a great fuss, a great show of struggle and passion, trying to swallow a gnat; but the camel goes down with one smooth gulp.

  • Huge black junkie hoodlum dies of an O.D. while under restraint by small white cop? Nationwide struggle, passion, writhing, straining. Black cop shoots unarmed white female veteran trespasser with no warning? [Crickets.]
  • Republican president’s National Security Adviser makes courtesy calls to Russian ambassador? Top-level investigations, endless prosecutions, years of struggle and straining. Democratic vice-president’s son’s laptop reveals multi-million-dollar influence-peddling deals with Chinese and Ukrainian entities? [Crickets.]
  • Citizens protesting a rigged election get into the Capitol building, break a couple of windows, take selfies? Insurrection! Just like 9/11, says Nancy Pelosi. No, like Pearl Harbor, says Steve Cohen. The worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War, says Joe Biden. Rage, passion, a Congressional Select Committeestraining. Anarchist mobs loot, burn, and kill in cities all over. Dozens of deaths, billions in property damage. [Crickets.]

For the last few years, our news has been all like that. If you look closely at the big headline issues, the ones generating all the heat and noise in the mainstream media, there is nothing much there—just a gnat.

If you want to know what really matters, what is really nation-changing, you may, if you’re lucky catch a glimpse of it from item number eleven in your evening TV news, or on page 23 of your broadsheet newspaper, or in fringe internet outlets like, well,

Thus on November 12th, the UN Climate Change Conference, COP26, wound up in Glasgow, Scotland, after two weeks of presentations, discussions, partying, and celebrity schmoozing. The Great and the Good came from far and wide to express their concern for what is, according to them, an existential challenge to the human race.

Is it, though? The Earth’s overall mean temperature has risen by one-seventh of a degree Fahrenheit per decade since 1880. So in my lifetime our planet got one point one degrees warmer. I suppose I should be ashamed to say it; but honestly, listener, I didn’t even notice.

How much hotter will the planet be at the end of this century? That of course depends on whether we go on doing just what we’re doing, or do something different.

If we go on doing what we’re doing, estimates go all the way up to 8.6 degrees, although—I’m quoting here from Discover Magazine: “some climate researchers caution that it’s more of an upper bound possibility and is unlikely to occur.”[How Hot Will Climate Change Make the Earth By the Year 2100?, by Nathaniel Scharping, February 15, 2021]

Probably I would notice that, if I were around to notice it.

We’re not going to go on doing what we’re doing for the next eighty years, though, any more than we’re doing today what we were doing in 1940. Even without nagging from the climate alarmists, even if we don’t all start eating beetles and traveling by rickshaw, technology changes of its own accord, generally in a cleaner, more efficient direction.

Population changes, too: World population has more than tripled since 1940; it’s extremely unlikely to triple again by 2100. In the biggest energy-consuming nations of today, it will actually have declined, unless someone figures out how to encourage people in these countries to make more babies, which so far no-one has.

All things considered, my bet would be on a world-wide temperature rise, absent lifestyle upheavals like beetle-eating and rickshaws, in the range 3½ to 5½ degrees—three to five times what I have failed to notice in my own lifetime. Existential crisis? Nah, we’ll adjust.

But Derb (I hear you cry) what about rising sea-levels?

The numbers come out similarly non-existential. Global mean sea level has risen about seven inches in my lifetime, again without my noticing. The IPCC thinks a one to three feet further rise will happen if we go on doing what we’re doing, but the same arguments apply.

Again I end up guessing that, even if we ignore the nagging from British royals, Swedish goblins, and Hollywood airheads, the actual rise will be three to five times what I’ve failed to notice in my own lifetime. Meh.

Yes, there’ll be localized issues, some of them locally existential. The world’s lowest-lying country is the Maldives, an archipelago in the ocean south of India, average natural elevation five feet above sea level. If that dwindles to three feet, the Maldiveans are in a pickle. There are only half a million of them, though, and I’m sure India will take them in if no other solution can be found (world’s first floating nation?)

Humanity always has problems to face, and we’ve successfully faced far bigger ones than global warming. All right, it’s bigger than a gnat—a housefly, perhaps. For sure it doesn’t justify the hyperbole, hysteria, and celebrity virtue-signaling we’ve gotten this last two weeks from Glasgow.

The camel, in this extended analogy I’m running, is demography: more precisely, the Great Migration of people from poop-hole countries with high fertility to civilized countries with low fertility.

Three recent items from the non-headline news:

  • First item:The EU, the European Union, is being challenged by floods of migrants, most from the Middle East, trying to break into Poland, Lithuania, and Latvia, which are all EU members, from Belarus, which isn’t. The migrants are being flown into Belarus deliberately by that country’s President-for-Life Alexander Lukashenko. He then sends them to the borders with those aforementioned EU members as revenge for EU sanctions against him. The degree to which this is Lukashenko’s brainchild, as opposed to Vladimir Putin’s with Lukashenko just Putin’s cat’s paw, is unclear [Poland border: West condemns Belarus at UN over stranded migrants, BBC, November 13, 2021].
  • Second item:Britain’s no longer in the EU, but that hasn’t spared the Brits from illegal immigration woes. So far this year more than 22,000 illegal immigrants have arrived in boats, crossing the Channel from France[Migrant crossings reach 22,000: At least 100 crossed the Channel overnight to arrive in the UK today after 695 made dangerous journey yesterday, by Jack Wright, Daily Mail, November 11, 2021].
    The British government has made clucking noises but no real effort to stop the flow. The illegals are still officially referred to as “asylum seekers,” although no-one in government has explained what’s wrong with France as an asylum destination.
  • Third itemA huge caravan of illegals from Central America is on its way north through Mexico. It should arrive at our southern border later this month. The caravan has a vanguard of young, violent aggressive men in the front [Migrant Caravan Approaching the Border Appears Increasingly Violent, by Wyatt Goolsby, KTRH, November 8, 2021]. Mexican police barricades have been no match for them. The Biden administration has so far expressed no concern, or taken any action.

This is a huge and growing crisis, far more pressing than climate change and with few signs of world elites—including American elites—having any clue what to do about it.

Such hopeful signs as there are come from Europe—especially from Eastern Europe, from countries that only thirty years ago regained their sovereignty after decades under the Soviet heel.

Poland is responding sturdily to Lukashenko’s attempt to flood them with illegals. They now have multi-layer barriers of barbed-wire coils the entire length of the border, and Poland’s parliament has authorized the building of a wall [Poland to build Belarus border wall to block migrant influx, BBC, October 29,2021]. Lithuania and Latvia are showing similar resolution.

And the EU itself seems to be waking up. The Union’s political leadership, in its plodding way, has begun the process of helping fund border walls:

European officials and EU diplomats said that a number of governments were still reluctant to directly fund border walls because it is politically controversial, but several noted that a majority is tilting in favor of the demands by frontier states.

That marks a profound shift from a near-decade long reluctance to pay for barriers …

Europe Weighs Border Walls as Migrants Mass in Belarus at Poland’s Frontier, by Drew Hinshaw and Bojan Pancevski, Wall Street Journal, November 11, 2021

(The subhead is The European Union is adopting a tougher stance toward migration in response to what officials see as a hybrid attack from a close Russian ally, as if tens of thousands of Muslims illegals only become a problem when Putin is involved.)

Given the speed at which things move in EU executive politics, Fortress Europe is some years away yet. It looks like it may happen, though.

Fortress Britain and Fortress America are nowhere in sight. The Brits are totally cucked. The most common statements from the government there about the Channel boats is concern for the safety of the invaders, as if that was anyone’s business but the invaders’ own.

As well as being cursed with spineless politicians and a defeated, apathetic public, Britain is further blighted by exceptionally wide-ranging so-called “Human Rights” laws and a large and vigorous establishment of “Human Rights” lawyers working them.


These “Human Rights” seem to apply only to foreigners, especially illegal aliens. Just this week the British government tried to deport 37 illegal-alien criminals to their native Jamaica, but the plane took off with only four people on board [Jamaica deportation flight leaves with just four people on board, by Adina Campbell & Doug Faulkner, BBC, November 11, 2021]. “Human Rights” lawyers had blocked the rest through legal action.

And the British government I’m talking about here is in the hands of the Conservative Party! If Britain’s more progressive party was in charge, they’d be chartering luxury cruise ships to bring the invaders in.

Readers are I’m sure familiar with the U.S. situation, especially since last month’s fiasco with the Haitians and the ongoing seeding of red states with Afghans.

Given that no-one ever supposed Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were conservatives, though, we are at least less crazy than the Brits. What is more important for a Conservative Party to conserve than the country’s borders?

So that’s my thesis. Peering forward through the coming decades, there are lesser things to worry about, and then there are much, much greater things. There are gnats and there are camels.

Climate change is a gnat: mass migration of peoples from crappy places to nice places, is a camel. Our elites fuss and shout and strain over the gnat, but swallow the camel in silence.

The one thing has an influence on the other, of course, as my example of the Maldives shows.

That’s a trivial example, though. Let’s suppose you live in the West African country of Niger, where the Total Fertility Rate is 6.9 children per woman. And let’s suppose that at some point between now and year 2100, climate change makes agriculture in Niger, which is today only very difficult, absolutely impossible.

Then you, or your 6.9 children, or your 47.61 grandchildren, will likely be wanting to move to somewhere more salubrious.

Note please that even without climate change, Niger’s current population of 23.6 million will by century’s end have increased to several hundred million—more than the current population of the entire EU. Note also that Niger is only one of the 28 countries with Total Fertility Rate greater than four, all but one of them in sub-Saharan Africa. (What is the one? Afghanistan).

So yes: looking forward at the decades to come, humanity faces at least one colossal problem, and it’s not climate change.

So why, then, are the Great and the Good—royals, movie stars, pop singers, progressive politicians—jetting around the world for solemn conferences about climate change, when this greater and far more intractable problem is looming in plain sight?

Why aren’t the Beautiful People congregating in Glasgow to discuss the defense of the civilized world against swelling hordes of desperate migrants?

Part of it, I think, is just fashion. Once a critical mass of jet-setters have embraced a cause, others will naturally be attracted.

Another part is the opportunities for status display. Even the humblest climate cultist can drive an electric car. If you are a royal, you can heat the palace with solar panels. If you’re a politician, you can promote world-saving legislation.

All right; but why is climate change the gnat, mass migration the camel? After all, there are opportunities for status display in mass migration, too, as witness the trend of elite women adopting Third World infants.

Is it race? Is it because the inevitable—it really does look inevitable—the inevitable course of events leads to the civilized nations of the world, twenty or thirty years from now, defending their borders with major force against great hordes of desperate migrants, most of them black?

I doubt that. The Great and the Good are too innumerate to grasp the inevitability there; and all respectable people in the Western world have trained themselves never to think about black people in any other than uplifting terms.

Part of the answer I think is in humanity’s religious instinct. Climate change is easy to work up into a cult. You can feel yourself and your fellow cultists to be righteous, waging war against sin. You can display emblems of your righteousness: your solar panels, your electric car. And there is, as with Marxism, a New Jerusalem to look forward to—a world without sin, the world in which the climate has been stabilized.

The coming mass-migration crisis, by contrast, doesn’t lend itself to that kind of cultification. What would it mean to be righteous about it? “Let ’em all in!” might work, and there are a few enthusiasts—some of the crazier kind of economists like Bryan Caplan (author of Open Borders: The Science and Ethics of Immigration) for instance—but it doesn’t have much market share.

I suspect, though, that most of the answer is political suppression. The progressive regime doesn’t mind people babbling about climate change. It doesn’t interfere with anything they want to accomplish; and as a side benefit, it gives them opportunities to look busy and virtuous without actually breaking a sweat.

Mass migration, though, is a key part of their agenda—their secret agenda. Why do you think they are flying migrants into Red States at three o’clock in the morning? [ ‘Send them to Delaware’: DeSantis threatens action over secret migrant flights , by Haley Brown, NY Post, November 10, 2021]

This is something they want to keep going: to feed their donors with cheap labor, and to replace the obnoxious, uppity, spoiled, lazy legacy population with a more submissive kind of serfs.

To keep it going, though, they have to keep it quiet. Chatter all you like about climate change; but if you chatter about mass migration, the Regime will frown, close your PayPal and Facebook accounts, cancel your conferences, intimidate your lawyers and accountants.

Gnats may be strained at as noisily as you please. Camels must be swallowed in silence.

John Derbyshire [email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him.) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. He has had two books published by com: FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle) and FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT II: ESSAYS 2013.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
Hide 66 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Sure. You’re absolutely right. Technology usually changes in a “cleaner, more efficient direction.”

    However. The Rocket Scientists on here insist that any technology which is cleaner and/or more inefficient is, I don’t know, the work of the devil or something, I don’t really understand their obtuseness, but at any rate, they absolutely hate cleaner and more efficient.

    Because, apparently, dirtier and more inefficient is the way to go, according to these wonderful genius Rocket Scientists with their graphs and charts and studies and other proofs of their absitively posolutely wonderful genius.

    Of course. Dirtier and more inefficient is better. Why didn’t I see that from the start?

    • Replies: @Getaclue
  2. As you wrote a whole book about….WE….ARE…..DOOMED!

  3. It’s interesting how stupid, but arrogant in their ignorance, the anthropogenic climate destabilisation denying Dunning-Krugerites are. If you’re worried about refugees flooding the US-you ain’t seen nothing yet. Northern Mexico is rapidly drying out, because of climate destabilisation, so millions must move or die.

  4. Anon[409] • Disclaimer says:

    A few thoughts about John’s column.
    The Maldives is a tourist destination which relies on money from, mainly, Australia and South Africa. To ensure that this source of income remains unchallenged they have built three new international airports over the last thirty years. They are obviously extremely concerned about rising sea levels. No?
    The hypocrisy of the European Union is enough to sicken a pig, far from “protecting “Europe’s borders” this is simply a ploy to put even more pressure on Belarus for daring to not crumble to the colour revolution started by the Western powers after their last election. Just witness the reaction against Italy and Greece when they tried to erect a fence to keep these, self-same, migrants out when they came from Turkey. The talk about “European values” and how the migrants human rights were being abrogated and that it was a “European principle” not to hinder free access to human beings in need. Apparently the migrants cease being “human”when the come from Belarus or Russia.

    • Agree: Joe Levantine, Rob McX
  5. TyRade says:

    Funny, sort of, that one of the arguments you hear that ageing in the West need not matter is that we only need to import enough dusky young bucks to do the even light lifting. It’s all doubleplus good think! Never mind the evidence of your lying eyes; in the UK the latest grudgingly defined ‘terrorist attack’, aiming to blow up Remembrance Day commemorators in Liverpool, was by a Muslim (‘converted’ to Christianity) who lost his asylum case in 2014 so should not have been here. In the previous terrorist case of the week an MP was stabbed to death while seeing constituents by…a second generation Somali. The cancer keeps getting more malignant. Maybe the climate ‘solution’ – we all rub twigs and hunter/gather (said twigs) – is actually designed for a more tropically-savvy new population?

  6. The climate is the best victim in our culture that upholds the victim as the ultimate hero.

    The climate can’t argue, talk back, tell you your help isn’t wanted or needed. You simply do what you want and then game the results to either support your actions or insist that more needs to be done.

  7. Given the speed at which things move in EU executive politics, Fortress Europe is some years away yet. It looks like it may happen, though.

    The Jews will never let this happen. It would be wonderful if Europe could remain European, but I believe that it is the Jew’s project to reduce Europe and North America’s white population down to about 20% to 25%. I believe that they would like to see Christianity dwindle down to nothing, also part of the project.

    Another question, Derb: Why would Lukashenko spend his nation’s small treasury on flying in immigrants just to flood the west? Or Putin his larger treasury? I’m not sure that this is how Putin’s mind works. Is it possible that someone in the George Soros – Barbara Lerner-Spectre vein is paying for the flights?

    But the article is correct that, for the average white First-Worlder, the mass immigration of Third-Worlder’s into our midst is more of an existential threat. What will daily life be like in America after half of Africa, Haiti, and the Muslim world come here? Will whites be able to relax at all, or live under the constant strain of looking over their shoulders to not be hustled and victimized? Will our First World economies and infrastructure function as we are used to? I think we can see it faltering already. Plus the emotional stress of and low quality of life from living around violence and noise pollution and rapeugees. These are all costs that I don’t look forward to bearing.

    Honestly, I am from coal country, and am not a tree hugger, but I feel like I have been observing climate change in my lifetime. But like you, Derb, I haven’t obsessed over it. I realize that there will be people that stand to lose in this change. But history is full of winners and losers isn’t it? So the West will probably have to take those drowning Maldivians in, too.

    • Replies: @animalogic
    , @loren
  8. Getaclue says:

    Nice Strawman BS–Maurice Strong, a Rockefeller Lackey POS, came up with the Global Warming Hoax at the UN perfecting the Club of Rome strategy to make humans “the enemy”–people like you think you are brilliant geniuses pushing their propaganda as “fact” but you are really just a tool for the Peon hating Oligarchs who have planned out and financed this utter bs as a method to depopulate the Peons and reduce those remaining to Serfdom i.e. you are a traitor to humanity and a POS–hopefully you will feel all the pain you are helping to unleash on the rest of us–sick of your kind and your brainwashed BS

  9. Climate change? Global warming? Maybe it’s supposed to happen.

    Wasn’t the global cooling caused by a cataclysmic extraterrestrial event.

    It’s all bullshit, Greenland was colonized by the Norse because the climate supported animal husbandry. Four hundred years later, it didn’t, because temperatures had dropped. Carbon? How about friction? Every motor, internal combustion or electric, produced heat. Producing electricity causes heat. Every tire turning on a road produces heat. We have devices to heat and devices to cool, both of which produce heat. Lights produce heat. The list is endless. The reality is that no one really has a clue what is happening and why.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  10. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Refugees are flooding the US…[since] Northern Mexico is rapidly drying out because of climate destabilization.

    Mexican and Central American ‘refugees’ have been sneaking into the US since Eisenhower and before. Even Caesar Chavez called these lawbreakers ‘wetbacks’. This unwanted migration began decades before the term ‘Climate Change’ was even coined. Reagan tried to fix ‘illegal immigration’ back in the 80s. And Reagan’s grand political compromise was right on the heels of the so-called ‘Global Cooling’ crisis (which also never came to be). Illegal immigration into Estados Unidos was not about the climate then and it’s still not about (or due) to changing weather or climate. That’s complete malarkey.

    Reagan’s grand bargain failed because Mexico and the nations in Central America are hopelessly non-competitive with the US. So they remain poor. They are also mismanaged. Thus the underclass of these failed states are following the gringo’s money. These Spanish-speaking gate-crashers are here for economic reasons. Health care. Free education. Welfare. Paved roads. Indoor plumbing!

    ‘Undocumented immigrants’ from way down south are here for obvious reasons. The US remains more orderly, innovative, and prosperous than the lands in which they were born. Science, technology, and wealth do not occur by accident. It’s the people in any given society who make such miracles occur. Exceptionalism is rare. This explains why nonwhites keep moving into nations which are full of (‘racist’) White people. It’s where the money is!–(and a higher civilization.)

    • Agree: John Regan, RoatanBill
  11. Because the climate change is being and can be use to create a super barrier to modernization for all developing and 3rd world countries.

    Which is why I believe if india doesn’t modernized soon, india will stay a shit hole forever.

  12. R.C. says:

    Well this ain’t true:

    That of course depends on whether we go on doing just what we’re doing, or do something different.

    If the author meant that to indicate the warped nature of the views of idiots, he should have better explicated it.
    Likewise with this:

    All things considered, my bet would be on a world-wide temperature rise, absent lifestyle upheavals like beetle-eating and rickshaws, in the range 3½ to 5½ degrees—three to five times what I have failed to notice in my own lifetime. Existential crisis? Nah, we’ll adjust.

    Someone appears to have bought into the MSM climate hysteria and ought to research it more. We are almost certainly entering into a solar minimum and temperatures are going down! (And no, we can’t do a God damned thing about it!)
    Mr. Derbyshire, I’ve read with approval most all of your stuff. This is strangely disappointing, but maybe that’s because you follow the social sciences more than you do the hard sciences.

  13. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    On the other hand, it’s totally uninteresting how stupid, and arrogant in their ignorance, the anthropomorphic climate hoax promoting Denny-s-Kroger’s-ites are. Northern Mexico is doing fine because there is no such thing as climate destabilization and as it gets colder in the States, thousands will be flooding into Northern Mexico. Millions have figured it out: move south to avoid cold climates or die.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  14. Mr. Derbyshire, this was one of your best columns in terms of putting the issues of the day, both gnat-sized and camel-sized, together. What you laid out in such an organized fashion is called Anarcho-Tyranny, a term that you must have known from good old Sam Francis long before I had.

    Perhaps you think the term only applies to the relatively smaller-scale stories, such as the Jan 6th protest vs. the summer long BLM/antifa-Commie arson, looting, and mayhem. I think the same term, Anarcho-Tyranny, describes what looks like the stupidity of the elites with their concentration on the Global Climate Disruption™*. It’s all a matter of whether you think these people are stupid or evil.

    I would love to chalk it all up to stupidity, as after all, I have the URL. However, the elites know very well that this Climate Crisis! is bullshit, or they wouldn’t build houses at sea level and go flying around in jets that burn 4,000 lb/hr of jet fuel in cruise. Well, they might do the latter out of selfishness anyway, but no, they really don’t buy it. Note that China and India don’t get any grief from the elites due to their top levels of “emissions”, and even from their REAL polluting ways, such as sending tons of plastic trash down the rivers. As the Instapundit, Glenn Reynolds has been known to say, “I’ll believe it’s a crisis when the people telling me it’s a crisis act like it’s a crisis.”

    At the same time, I’m sure the Globalist elites know very well what moving a couple of billion Africans, with a few tens of millions of Moslems and others thrown in, into formerly White countries is doing and will do. It doesn’t matter so much to them, because they will stay above the fray.

    The Globalists practice their own form of evil Anarcho-Tyranny at their high level. Many of those who follow their lead, yeah they are stupid and will strain at gnats as they swallow the camels.


    * I went through all the trouble to trademark that one, so they call. it the Climate Crisis now.

    • Agree: loren
    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
  15. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    ‘Northern Mexico is rapidly drying out, because of climate destabilisation, so millions must move or die.’

    (a) wouldn’t it also have a lot to do with them cutting down all the trees in a landscape that was pretty arid to begin with?

    (b) what proportion of those leaving would have had a viable income from agriculture in any case? Doesn’t the exodus owe a lot more to the massive population explosion Mexico has undergone in the last hundred years?

    Unlike many here, I don’t doubt the reality of global warming. I just question whether the exodus from Mexico would be much less even absent it.

  16. @mark green

    Very good comment, Mr. Green. Mr. Mumblebrain has got both his history and science pretty mumbled up. (Has someone ever explained to us what climate “destabilization” means? Does that mean the weather doesn’t match what the Farmer’s Almanac says?)

    Anyway, I wasn’t sure what you meant by Reagan’s “Grand bargain”. You may have meant this, but his grand bargain, domestically, was his deal with Congress to sign the 1986 Amnesty bill (supposedly going to be a million Mexicans – turned into 3 million or so) in return for the D-controlled Congress passing legislation about serious border control and workplace enforcement.

    Well, what’dya’ know? You can’t trust a D-controlled Congress anymore than you could trust the USSR. Ronald Reagan should have “trusted but verified”, meaning not trusted them at all. That he signed the amnesty bill was one of Mr. Reagan’s a biggest regrets.

    • Agree: mark green
    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  17. Rob McX says:

    Note also that Niger is only one of the 28 countries with Total Fertility Rate greater than four, all but one of them in sub-Saharan Africa. (What is the one? Afghanistan).

    They could push it up to five if they’d cut out the buggery.

  18. @Getaclue

    You are so fucking stupid you don’t even know what I said.

  19. These whites are dummies. White Dummies = Whummies.

    Sacrifice your life for Jewish Supremacists who hate your race and fund & unleash Antifa and BLM violence in your neighborhoods(and opening the floodgates to illegal invasion).

    Simple Rule: Don’t be a Whummy.

    • Thanks: mark green
  20. Brexit is going to result in the UK replacing Polish and Rumanian immigrants with Africans. One could call that an ironic result but it was always fairly obvious that was actually the plan.

  21. @Achmed E. Newman

    However, the elites know very well that this Climate Crisis! is bullshit, or they wouldn’t build houses at sea level and go flying around in jets that burn 4,000 lb/hr of jet fuel in cruise.

    The elites are incredibly selfish and not scientifically literate. The scientific evidence that the world is headed for massive disruption due to climate change is clear. In Europe the change is already obvious – we are growing wine in SE England, ski seasons are shorter every year, it hasn’t really snowed hard in Vienna in a decade. But the elites don’t care, they know they will be ok in any case and may even benefit financially. Lip service is all they are prepared to offer. Fighting climate change requires taking elites on head on, which is why we are screwed as a species.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  22. @Curmudgeon

    Just because YOU have no clue, about anything plainly, does not mean that more intelligent, better educated, and better informed people do not.

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
  23. @Achmed E. Newman

    The human race grew to great size during the relatively stable Holocene. Unfortunately the vast amount of heat captured in the Earth system means that that stability is gone. The climate system tends to chaos, and therefore is subject to the Law of sensitivity to initial conditions, the so-called ‘butterfly effect’. A small shove in any direction in a chaotic system can rapidly lead to huge changes. The current ‘shove’ is the greatest forcing of greenhouse gases emitted to the atmosphere in at least 55 million years. Hence the huge and increasing extremes of climate and weather. Any half-smart high school youth could understand this-why can’t you?

  24. @restless94110

    An omega imbecile. And proud of it, apparently.

    • Replies: @restless94110
  25. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    A zeta imbecile calling names and spewing nonsense, evidently.

  26. @Peter Akuleyev

    You do know that there was a reason Greenland was named Greenland, Peter? Are you familiar with history of Europe’s Medieval Warm Period from the mid-900’s AD to the early 1200s and the “Little Ice Age” from the early 1400s to the early 1800s? That latter was 400 years, Peter! The Earth’s climate has never been static on the scale of millennia or even centuries, and there is really no such thing as the “normal”. NOAA climate data, etc. sometimes give “normal”, but just spelling out “30-year average” is more accurate.

    We don’t need to fight ANYTHING. There is no certainty that ANY of the latest slight warming is due to the simple “greenhouse effect” due to higher CO2 levels. The Earth’s heat balance involves a lot of processes, and that is just one of them. I would agree with you more, Peter. if I’d ever seen proof of a working climate model. By that, I mean simply a solid piece of scientific literature that predicted basic changes in average temp, humidity, precip, etc. for very general areas of the globe that were borne out after 10 years or so. Nope, there has been no such thing.

    Peak Stupidity has been all over this Global Climate Stupidity since our early days. Our main point is that there is no working model of the entire Earth’s climate, dammit! A link bomb follows:

    On the modeling of the climate, from engineering modeling experience:

    Part 1
    Part 2
    Part 3
    Part 4
    Part 5

    A 2-part summary of the reason honest climatology modeling studies are turned into sky-is-falling events: Part 1 and Part 2.

    On the politics of it all, with discussion of the idiocy of the journalists that cannot read scientific papers and their use of this phony “crisis” to gain viewers and readers (fear sells!), an occasional scientist even, cough, Carl Sagan, cough, cough who values being in the limelight over science, and then the elites who use this both to show virtue (Mr. D’s point) and for control:

    Part 1
    Part 2
    Part 3
    Part 4
    Part 5

    (Part 5 has a nice wrap up with 5 nested IF statements, all of them not proven true, that show us how much of a farce this all is.)

    No, the elite DO care, Peter. They are very glad to have this issue, interrupted for a couple of years by an even better one, the Kung Flu PanicFest, to use to scare the public, take more control of the economy and the people, and feel more virtuous at the same time. Literally, no, they don’t care about spewing CO2 (a stable gas that is one of the trace gases of the Earth’s atmosphere) “emissions” on the way back and forth to Glasgow.

  27. Living in England for decades you do notice climate change.

    School days – hard autumn frosts, ice slides on pavements and in playgrounds. Don’t get that now.

    Student days – snow on Ben Nevis in August, for the top 2,000 feet. Now it’s a few patches on the north side at that time of year. Scottish skiing is worse.

    It’s over half way through November. Leaves falling, but lots left and quite a few (oak for example) are still green. They used to be pretty bare.

    Been a very dry, still autumn so far here. Vancouver seem to have got all our rain.

    Between 1947 and 1963 there were some right chilly winters. You may remember.

    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
  28. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Do you understand what an energy* balance is, Mr. Mumbledbrain? Of course there is stability. The warmer the surface, cloud cover, etc. get, the more heat transfer to space there will be. The cooler, the less. The climate is NOT a chaotic system. You are confusing the climate with the weather, something the Climate Crisis enthusiasts will tell you too – one point on which I agree with them.

    The “butterfly effect” is about the weather. That’s why weather is hard to predict in most places for more than 4 days out. For aviation weather, the forecasts (TAFs) only go out 30 hours.

    Using the principles of thermo and heat transfer, the energy balance of the Earth (Transfer in + Internal Generation – Transfer out = Accumulation) is used to try to predict changes. It’s not chaotic, but there are processes that are very complex, such as cloud cover/albedo, heat transfer from changing land cover (including snow fall, which greatly increases the albedo of the earth when the ground is covered), loads of processes involving the ocean (which is 3/4 of the surface after all), etc.

    I have respect for Climatology as a field of science. However, the “journalists” that make the “news” narratives , oops, stories can’t read any more than the Conclusions or Summaries of scientific papers. A paper itself may give information on assumptions made – which require further study to narrow down appropriately for an accurate model – but the journalists don’t read that. They don’t see the wide tolerances from the assumptions and descriptions of further work required. They take the worst of the output and run with it.

    It’s even better for them when output of models, accurate or not, are given as green/yellow/red pseudo 3-D graphics, scaring the living daylights out of (or delighting, depending on the personality) the journalists that see this. It’s even better if you can make them move around, and the red part metastasizes and envelopes the globe. OMG! Only thing, precision is not accuracy. Ooops, leave that out.


    * You need to use the word “energy” rather than “heat” in this context anyway. A good Thermodynamics professor would slap you silly for that.

  29. @YetAnotherAnon

    1946-7 and 1962-3 were certainly chilly winters in the UK ( fortunately, during the latter, I was safely esconced in Singapore). However, neither were remotely comparable to the recent Winter of 2010-11.

    The winter of 2010–11 was a weather event that brought heavy snowfalls, record low temperatures, travel chaos and school disruption to the islands of Great Britain and Ireland. It included the United Kingdom’s coldest December since Met Office records began in 1910, with a mean temperature of −1 °C (30 °F), breaking the previous record of 0.1 °C (32.2 °F) in December 1981. Also it was the second-coldest December in the narrower Central England Temperature (CET) record series which began in 1659, falling 0.1 °C short of the all-time record set in 1890.[1] Although data has never officially been compiled, December 2010 is thought to be colder than December 1890 over the United Kingdom as a whole, as Scotland was up to 2 °C warmer than England. Hence, it is thought to be the coldest December across the UK as a whole since before 1659.[2]

    This from that compendium of Globalist ( Warming ) BS, Wikipedia. Please note that December 1981 was also colder than December 1946 and December 1962.
    Winter 2011-12 was also cold. Then there were the record breaking snowfalls of March 2018, widely over the UK. Parts of Glasgow had their highest snowfall amounts ever – 50cm ( 20 in ).

    YetAnotherAnon, take of those rose-tinted specs and look at reality !

  30. @Verymuchalive

    I remember all of 1963.

    1981, one of the best motor cycle journeys of my life on the Friday, 35 miles home from work at maybe 7-10 mph, back wheel all over the place, keeping yourself upright also kept you warm as you fought with it, past stuck cars and lorries uphill, then out into a deserted white world where I and the odd tractor were the only things moving, home 4 hours later, the cars on the drive disappeared under the snow which was still coming down. Next morning the snow was drifted up to the bedroom windows – you opened the front door and there was a white wall facing you.

    But 1963 is different because of the time it went on for. The snow on the ground on New Year’s Day, and the paths we’d made through it in the garden, were still there at half-term in February and beyond – it was below zero between Boxing Day and early March, and we’d already had cold and snow in December.

    1981 was only a couple of weeks – my next door neighbours, visiting 4 miles away, didn’t get home for a week because the snow was up to the hedges on both sides of the road.

    In 2010 I think I missed two days work – it was certainly worse in Scotland. Maybe snow on the ground for two and a half weeks and roads shut for two days? Still nothing like 1963.

    (Don’t forget “the beast from the East” in 2018, when our central heating was awaiting repair and the house was covered in huge, lethal icicles. We got through so much wood that February.)

    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
  31. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    The sun controls the climate along with the earth’s orbit. In the long history of the earth, there have been numerous ups and downs in temperature and CO2 concentration. Solar cycle 25 is predicted to be very low in sun spots and that usually means a cooling event is near. Just the timing of the cycles that are known predicts we are nearing the end of a warm interglacial; that means we’re heading into a colder period.

    The climate frauds haven’t ever produced a model that can even reproduce the known events by feeding in known history to have them accurately output what we already know occurred. Why you would trust that the climate frauds know anything more than where grant money comes from is a mystery.

  32. “Climate change” is also a convenient deflection from real problems requiring actual environmental stewardship.

    IOW, environmentalism versus globohomoism, choose one. The elites have chosen globohomoism, so “climate change” is their status-signaling cause, versus actual environmental stewardship to deal with urbanization, solid waste disposal, toxic runoff, etc.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  33. @YetAnotherAnon

    In 2010 I think I missed two days work – it was certainly worse in Scotland. Maybe snow on the ground for two and a half weeks and roads shut for two days? Still nothing like 1963.

    In 1963, road clearing methods were much more primitive, and money spent on such matters was very much less, even taking inflation into account. So direct comparison regarding transport between 2010 and 1963 is not applicable.

    PS In 2010 I didn’t miss a day’s work at all in snowy Scotland. In 1963, I didn’t have to work at all, as I was a two-year old. So, no comparison, direct or otherwise !

  34. I just wonder how much of the border “invasion” is inspired, run, and paid for by our beloved well-born lefty activists.

  35. MEH 0910 says:

  36. @The Anti-Gnostic

    Anthropogenic climate destabilisation will destroy humanity if not addressed. What in the moronic inferno of your hive mind could be worse than that, or more ‘real’?

    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
  37. @RoatanBill

    You are so brainwashed that you cannot comprehend SIMPLE facts. The Sun is by far the main driver, BUT IT IS NOT THE ONLY ONE! Is that simple enough for you? You lie, or are brainwashed, with the nauseating tripe that climate modellers have NEVER reproduce the events of the past. As in all human activities that use modeling, experience, greater information and improving computer power have steadily improved weather and climate prediction. But there is NO improving, now or ever, the brain-dead denialist ‘mind’.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  38. @Verymuchalive

    Why do you poisonous imbeciles only take notice of cold extremes? Cold extremes were more prevalent than hot until c.1980, and now the hot outnumber the cold by quite some distance. Moreover climate science readily explains how climate instability will cause some cold extremes, while the trend is inexorably to greater warmth and hot extremes. Why don’t you waddle off back to Watts Up With That, more your intellectual and spiritual milieu?

    • Replies: @dimples
  39. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Please reference just one climate model that was used to process significant known historic data and produced, from the model, an output largely consistent with what actually happened in fact.

    My bet is you can’t produce such a model run. The models are consistently wrong in their predictions by a wide margin. At some future time models may get to the point where they are reasonably accurate, but as of today, they are very unreliable.

    Please explain why CO2 and to a lesser extent CH4 are the main focus of the push to reign in those greenhouse gases when water vapor is a far more powerful GHG. Why is there no push to limit water vapor in the atmosphere?

    If you could educate me about these topics, considering your superior expertise as declared by you, I’d appreciate it. If you could do it without calling me names that would be most appreciated.

  40. @Sir Launcelot Canning

    “Another question, Derb: Why would Lukashenko spend his nation’s small treasury on flying in immigrants just to flood the west?”
    Not sure that Belarus is paying for the tickets.
    But an associated point — should the EU etc succeed – as is quite possible – would Belarus really want to take the chance of having to keep all these
    M.E immigrants?
    On another issue — Derb speaks of climate change & demography as if they are separate issues — which they certainly are not.
    His faith in future uninvented technologies is heart warming… but perhaps a little … casual.

  41. @mark green

    Agreed. That’s the “push” factors.
    The “pull” factors? Cheap labour? Stick it to uppity “native” citizens?
    Should the US want to stop the flow? Change immigration law & pay off the Mexicans (cheap at twice the price) .

  42. dimples says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Why do climate imbeciles only take notice of hot or dry extremes?? Recall the ranting, pearl clutching, brain dead, alleged ‘intellectual class’ (bwahahaha) apocalyptic carry-on over the 2019 Australian summer bushfires. These were caused mostly in fact by a preceding very dry spring, but no matter, it was the end of the world, the monster bushfires had been massively caused by climate change, and you were an imbecile if you didn’t get it.

    The following year of course it rained, and in fact rained quite a lot. There were floods in embarrassing places. The current year 2021, is noticeable for also having a rather wet spring, in pleasant contrast to 2019. So where is the ‘climate signal’ that caused more bushfires??? Nobody has explained it. Of course, nobody is going to explain it either, climate imbeciles are not supposed to ask questions, merely believe.

    Admit it Mulgabrain, you were screaming that climate change caused bushfires in 2019, but if it rains or gets a bit chilly, then need we ask why are you whistling, looking about at your feet and shouting “Look look over there denialist!”

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  43. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    In case you missed it:

    Ball had turned over all of his data during discovery. The court ordered Mann to turn over his. Mann missed the deadline and then refused.
    If his data was so convincing, why wouldn’t he have turned it over to support his claim of defamation.
    Ball has been studying climate change since the 1960s. He acknowledges the climate is changing but has consistently stated the “science” used by frauds like Mann is just bad science.

    • Thanks: mark green
    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  44. @Curmudgeon

    How old are you curmudgeon? The monicker indicates senescence, so you may escape the introductory cataclysms. If so, your children and grandchildren will experience them, and they won’t think of you kindly. Michael Mann is but ONE of tens of thousands of scientists, EVERY Academy of Sciences and scientific societies on Earth etc, who ALL concur with the anthropogenic climate destabilisation theory, which is DAILY reinforced by observable weather and climate changes. And your rabble of life-hating psychopaths has an handful of loopy, deranged or straight out corrupt ‘scientists’ and millions of Rightwing ideological thugs. No contest.

    • Replies: @loren
    , @Curmudgeon
  45. @dimples

    I am ever impressed by the sheer baboon, sorry, insect, stupidity of creatures like you. The science does not posit a one-way trip to Palookavile. It will NOT be hotter and drier EVERY year. The climate is a chaotic system-did you miss that high-school science lesson?
    The fires in Australia, BY FAR the worst since White settlement, came after years of drought, and record high temperatures. The conditions were set, and fire chiefs warned from about April that the conditions were apocalyptic, and THEY, with decades of fire-fighting experience, blamed ‘climate change’.
    Then, months later, after the cataclysm, it rained, and rained a lot, like in BC this week, where it caused land and mudslides in areas devastated by fires. And gibbering imbeciles like you screech that rain, after drought and fire, disproves 200 years of science and decades of observation. I’ll need a new thesaurus to find words to describe how much I loathe your omnic9idally vicious species.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  46. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    – As we are on the same wavelength two thirds of the time,
    it pains me to have to say this …
    but Malthus is going to bite us in the derrière long before Arrhenius.

    All you have to do is shoot every goat and every -fucker, and the Sahel is lush
    within two years – and everybody knows it. The same with Madagascar,
    only worse. The freaking Red Center was lush (grant me a little artistic license, will ye)
    before the blackfeller burned it down to get at the witchetty grubs; now, yes, you have an anthropogenic (heh) mini-climate that would take centuries to remediate.

    – Let us for the sake of argument assume all is as you say: Sea levels rise ->
    shelf seas grow, deserts shrink, overall biological productivity increases,
    for maybe 500 years;
    historically it has always been the cold spells that resulted in famine, pestilence,
    revolution and migration. And if a few stinking islands go under, so what?
    They do it all the time (did I mention less than 5% of the plastic in the oceans are from Europe or North America?).

    Your prescriptions – electric SUVs, Mo´Vibrancies (+/- Legalize It) –
    are the effusions of terminal brain rot. It will be unfunny enough in reality.
    – Repatriation NOW!!! And no child left behind (I know the White Australia policy was killed 100 years ago, but you want sacrifices -> social cohesion).
    – The 1-liter Diesel car (250mpg for our backwards readers) is easily doable.
    – Water rationing where necessary (and nationalize it).
    – Public transport where feasible; everybody is green now, so light greens to the front, dark greens in the back of the bus.
    – Ban air condition.
    – Feel free to add, I´m always open for ideas 😀

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  47. @nokangaroos

    Great comment, NoKangaroos. Mr. Mumbled Brain is not erudite enough to understand my comment in which I explained that the energy balance of the earth is NOT a chaotic system. That’s his stupidity, and he’s stickin’ to it!

    I will have to correct you on one minor point, Sir. I am very familiar with Bill Cosby’s monologue, but let me tell you, we light greens are scared to even GET ON the freaking bus these days!

  48. @Achmed E. Newman

    Very perceptive 😀
    Far from being motivated by any animosity towards dark greens
    the problem is getting light greens on the bus again. Detroit should have had
    Rosa Parks cast in bronze – but go and tell that to some Green sometime.

  49. @Peter Akuleyev

    not obvious to the gormless retards (Rotherham) who voted for it!!!

  50. @Achmed E. Newman

    My point was that, while solar radiation waxes and wanes on the solar cycle, thereby reducing or increasing the quantity of energy entering the Earth system, it cannot be called chaotic. But what I observed is that that heat energy drives the global climate system, which definitely IS a chaotic system. So when there is a great forcing to the quantity of energy trapped in the system, this time by increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, thus the quantity of re-radiated heat sequestered in the system rather than being re-radiated into space, the degree of chaos, of climate and weather instability must, ceteris paribus, increase. I’m surprised that you seem unable, intellectually, to grasp that, and/or misrepresent my position. Your appeal to ‘erudition’ is Dunning-Krugerism on steroids.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  51. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    You know nothing of physics, including heat transfer and thermodynamics, Mulga, so don’t try the cut and paste job to fool anyone here. You have observed exactly Jack Squat. “The heat energy” as a phrase doesn’t even make sense. Increased “greenhouse gases”* are not in themselves energy.

    Your next sentence is nothing more than a reiteration of the whole idea of the greenhouse effect, something known for a century. As I wrote a few comments back, that’s just one small part of an energy balance that involves a myriad of processes, many of them not that well predictable. The use of the phrase “sequestered” shows you are no kind of physicist or engineer and don’t understand basic thermo or heat transfer. Let me ask you this, so you can show your ignorance: “In what form is this energy ‘sequestered’”?

    Then, there’s the Latin. Haha, yes, that makes it all better!

    No, the climate, on a long-term basis, in years, is NOT chaotic. It is only chaotic on a short-term basis, which is what we call weather – where the air-mass thunderstorms will build tomorrow, whether the high cloud cover will stay through the day, impeding the “burning off” of the low fog layer, when the cold front will pass through, how close the temperature will get to the dew point overnight… etc… that sort of thing.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  52. @Achmed E. Newman

    I don’t need to be an expert in climate science. There ate tens of thousands of those, who are 99% in favour of the anthropogenic climate destabilisation theory. As for sequestered, 90% or so of the extra energy accumulated over recent decades has gone into the oceans, 150 zettajoules worth (ie 10 to the 21st power)raising their temperature, and causing thermal expansion, and already guaranteeing millennia of climate instability. And the expression used there is ‘sequestered’. Crawl back under your rock.

    • Troll: BuelahMan
  53. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    I’m sorry, Mulga, but the term “sequestering” seems to be the one used by the Global Climate Disruption™, ooops, it’s “Climate Crisis” now, pushers*. For an engineer it’d simply be termed energy “accumulation”. OK, fine, glad to talk some numbers here. I will just take your 150 x 10^21 joules of energy accumulation as a good number.

    What I did look up is the mass of the world’s oceans. It’s around 1.35 x 10^24 kg. That means this energy accumulation is around 9 J per kg of ocean water, but let’s call it 10 J/kg. Now, salt water has a slightly lower specific heat than distilled water, right at 4,000 J/kg-C at 0C. I LUV LUV LUV round numbers, you can see! That means the average temperature of the ocean has been raised by 1/4oo of a degreee C = 0.0025 C. Wow! I’m feelin’ HOT HOT HOT!

    Sure, I doubt it’s even over the depth of the ocean and over the area, exposed to widely varying solar insolation, currents, cloud cover, winds, oh, crap, this gets complicated.

    Still, it’s not the end of the world, 0.0025 C. Now, as to your insistence that this temperature increase of the earth’s mass, whatever the value, causes this British-misspelled destabilisation, well, that’s just some bull. When you get a temperature rise, you get more heat transfer – in this case it’s about radiation heat transfer from the earth to space. There’s nothing unstable about it.

    This new destabilization mantra is the thing now, so that any single tornado in Indiana, or a bad hurricane season**, or a vicious cold front with thunderstorms that flood parts of Texas are due to this Climate Crisis!! No, we’ve never had big floods before, or tornadoes, or hurricanes. Things are getting DESTABILIZED!!

    Keep coming up with these new ones every decade. People get wise to the scam otherwise.


    * You read of these 99% because the guys who write papers that have the more reasonable descriptions of the uncertainties and work remaining of/for climate modeling don’t get picked up by the Lyin’ Press.

    ** We had a decade of very good (in a sense of keeping your beach house intact) hurricane seasons not that long ago, but nobody mentioned exactly why. I wouldn’t expect them to, as it’s hard to predict. Yet, after some bad years, our “experts” seem to know why. Tell me about the next decade – maybe I want to live on the beach for a while…

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  54. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    – Just stumbled over this one … it´s a bit Guide to the Perplexed-y but not bad.
    It is hard to explain to those not from the field what all Gaia has already buffered.
    Enjoy 😉

    Video Link

  55. @Getaclue

    It still amazes me how close the relationship between utter stupidity, pig ignorance and utterly unjustified arrogance is, and what Evil imbeciles it produces. The malignant moron who thinks it is a genius. And, as the evidence of rapid climate destabilisation mounts and mounts, notice how aggressively threatening and intimidating the insect plague are becoming. Nassty times, straight ahead. Humanity fulfilling its destiny.

  56. @Achmed E. Newman

    First you have the ‘Lyin’ Press’ (scientific press one assumes) conspiracy theory. Another gigantic conspiracy by ‘them’ to keep the ‘truth’ hidden. The ‘paranoid style’ of the Rightwing Authoritarian thug in full flow. And ‘hurricane seasons’ in the sense of the USA ONLY, typical denialist racism, part and parcel of the Rightwing package.
    One need only consult NASA and its ocean heat content measurements to see the utter stupidity and fraudulence of your ‘back of the envelope’ calculations (but it’ll impress the Dunning-Krugerites, won’t it, Prof?).Measurements made from satellites, Argo buoys and other measuring devices. Since 1955, 326 +/- 2 zettajoules sequestered in the oceans. The last decade and 2020 the hottest decade and year measured in the oceans, and in coral reefs, a canary if ever there was one, bleachings caused by high temperatures, unknown for millennia in coral core records until the 70s and 80s, occurring with increasing frequency and savagery, including several in the last ten years on the Great Barrier Reef, leaving it in ‘very poor’ condition over much of its extent, according to the body charged with its ‘preservation’. Crawl back under your rock, will you.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  57. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Since 1955, 326 +/- 2 zettajoules sequestered in the oceans.

    Hahaa! Yes, these scientists know the enthalpy of all areas of the world’s oceans to all depths to within less than 1%, and even knew the same values in 1955? Yeah, go tell your friend who’s trying to read climatology papers for you to read harder. (BTW, how’d you get from 150 to 326 zettajoules? That was quick. Was it that much energy accumulation since you wrote last time?)

    As for the hurricanes, well, we hear all the BS about the cause being this Climate Crisis when there are 2 in a season bashing Florida, but yet only crickets about it when there’s a low season. Trying to model the whole Earth’s climate without knowing some “normal” initial conditions, data from grid points ALL OVER the world (including the depths of the oceans), and nailing down all the myriad processes that are involved*, is like tryin’ to reason with hurricane season. Thank you for the great title, Jimmy Buffett, even if it’s not one of my favorite songs.

    MM, your panicked outlook reminds me of the Kung Flu Panickers. I am hoping that Mr. E. H. Hail, of the very thoughtful Hail to You blog, will come up with an interesting post about the overlap of these two groups of freaks. Do you ever just relax and notice that the sky has not fallen yet? Have you never been mellow? Have you never tried, to find a comfort from inside, eye-eye-eyed you …? Have you never been happy, just to read my comm-ommm-ments, have you never let some other blogger be strong tell you what a dumb shit you are on the internet?


    * I can tell you haven’t read the Peak Stupidity posts that I linked you to. It’s OK, many people prefer to remain stupid. That is perfectly within your rights. Don’t let anybody tell you otherwise!

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  58. loren says:
    @Sir Launcelot Canning

    What will daily life be like in America after half of Africa, Haiti…uh, I believe 1 in 4 Haitians is already here.
    The christians keep feeding them and the africans, as long as that happens, you know the rest.

  59. loren says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    8 billion people.
    how many millions of scientists among us?
    and a few or 10s of 1000s are on the gravy train. If you want grant money, research climate change.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  60. @loren

    Don’t talk gibberish, you novel cretin. There are thousands of scientists working on this problem. They, not dullard fanatics like you, have the knowledge to speak on this vital subject. Idiot Dunning-Krugerites like you have opinions that are worth NOTHING, but your arrogance makes you,stupidly, believe that your malignant imbecility is equal to scientific knowledge.
    As for research money, ALL scientists rely on such moneys, from time to time, and their ordinary salaries. Meanwhile fossil fuel financed denialists receive hundreds of thousands from their Masters. Why don’t you just eff off.

  61. @Achmed E. Newman

    It’s on the NASA website-you ask them how they calculated it. There is nothing you psychopaths will not deny, no group or individual that you will not slander or defame in your Evil crusade to destroy Life on Earth.
    I am in no way concerned by the pandemic, the peddlers of which hysteria are more akin to climate destabilisation denialists than climate realists. In fact the powers that be downplay the true horror of our climate situation, and refuse to take the necessary actions to avert catastrophe. They are far closer to fanatic denialists like you, than realists like me.
    If you are NOT suffering from morbid stupidity yourself, and it is all simply Rightwing ideological fanaticism and misanthropic arrogance, then, of course, you are Evil. Live with it. I do hope you are young enough to see your lies exposed, but the repercussions will not be pleasant, for your conscience. I really hope that you have no children, because explaining your actions to them would be a terrible task.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  62. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Which one did they calculate, the 150 or the 326 x 10^21 joules increase? Tell your friend to answer the simple question.

    Thank you for this one data point, MM. I see now where you lie in the Venn diagram.

    1) Flu Manchu Panicfest? — not a participant
    2) Climate Crisis snow job? — totally down with it.

    I will tell you that, in the realm of these peddlers, as you rightly dub them, they are down with both of these purposeful sky-is-falling scenarios. Oh, I don’t mean the peddlers believe all of it, if any, but this stuff is just excellent for putting increasingly tight controls on the populations of the world. I’m sure they appreciate the help of Climate Crisis™ dupes like you and young Greta.

  63. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    I’m old enough to remember when the crisis was going to be global cooling.
    If they have found rain forests under Antarctic ice sheets, and coniferous forests under Greenland ice sheets, do you think maybe, just maybe, it was warmer there at one time?

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All John Derbyshire Comments via RSS