The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
Will Paris Riots Scuttle Climate Accord?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow 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

In Katowice, Poland, all the signers of the 2015 Paris climate accord are gathered to assess how the world’s nations are meeting their goals to cut carbon emissions.

Certainly, the communications strategy in the run-up was impressive.

In October came that apocalyptic U.N. report warning that the world is warming faster than we thought and the disasters coming sooner than we thought.

What disasters? More and worse hurricanes, uncontrollable fires, floods, the erosion of coastlines, typhoons, drought, tsunamis, the sinking of islands into the sea.

In November, a scientific report issued by 13 U.S. agencies warned that if greater measures are not taken to reduce global warming, the damage could knock 10 percent off the size of the U.S. economy by century’s end.

At the G-20 meeting in Buenos Aires, 19 of the attending nations recommitted to the Paris accord. Only President Trump’s America did not.

Yet, though confidence may abound in Katowice that the world will meet the goals set down in Paris in 2015, the global environmentalists seem to be losing momentum and losing ground.

Consider what happened this weekend in France.

Saturday, rage over a fuel tax President Emmanuel Macron has proposed to cut carbon emissions brought mobs into the heart of Paris, where they battled police, burned cars, looted, smashed show windows of elite stores such as Dior and Chanel, and desecrated the Arc de Triomphe.

In solidarity with the Paris rioters, protests in other French cities erupted.

Virulently anti-elite, the protesters say they cannot make ends meet with the present burdens on the working and middle class.

Specifically, what the rioters seem to be saying is this:

We cannot see the benefits you are promising to future generations from cutting carbon emissions. And we cannot survive the taxes you are imposing on us in the here and now.

What is happening in Paris carries a message for all Western countries.

Democracies, which rely on the sustained support of electorates, have to impose rising costs on those electorates, if they are to deeply cut carbon emissions.

But when the electorates cannot see the benefits of these painful price hikes, the greater the likelihood the people will rise up and repudiate those whom progressives regard as far-sighted leaders — such as Macron.

Paris shows that Western elites may be reaching the limits of their political capacity to impose major sacrifices upon their constituents, who are turning to populists of the left and right to dethrone those elites.

Trump has been using tariffs to cut the trade deficits America has been running in recent decades, to bring manufacturing back to the USA, and to restore America’s economic independence.

Excellent goals all. But the immediate impact of those tariffs is rising prices at the mall and retaliatory tariffs on U.S. exports. Before the long-term benefits can be realized, the pain comes and the protests begin.


No one wins a trade war, we are told. But an America willing to endure lost access to British imports in the 19th century emerged in the 20th as the greatest manufacturing power history had ever seen, a nation independent of all others, and able to stay out of the great wars of that century.

Are the American people willing to make the sacrifices to restore that independence? Are the British people willing to pay the price that the restoration of their national independence, via Brexit, entails?

Authoritarians have it easier. Morally revolting and socially ruinous as its hellish policy was, China was able to impose, for decades, a one-couple, one-child mandate on the most populous nation on earth.

According to the Paris agreement, poorer nations were promised $100 billion a year, starting in 2020, to cut carbon emissions. Anyone think that the newly nationalistic peoples of the West will tolerate that kind of wealth transfer to the Third World indefinitely?

In the Paris climate accord, China and India were given a pass to produce carbon emissions, while reductions were mandated for the Western powers.

How long will the West go along with that, while paying ever-rising prices to cut their own carbon emissions?

China, according to The New York Times, “consumes half the world’s coal. More than 4.3 million Chinese are employed in the country’s coal mines. China has added 40 percent of the world’s coal capacity since 2002.”

Japan, the world’s third-largest economy, is planning new coal-fired power plants and financing them across Asia.

What we are witnessing is an irrepressible conflict between democratic governments committed to cutting carbon emissions “to save the planet,” and their constituents who can refuse to bear those sacrifices by throwing out politicians like Macron.

Perhaps it says something about the future that the host city for this meeting of Paris climate accord signatories, Katowice, is in Silesia, a region that is home to some 90,000 coal workers — around half of all the coal workers in the EU.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

Copyright 2018

• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: France, Global Warming 
Hide 148 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. In October came that apocalyptic U.N. report warning that the world is warming faster than we thought and the disasters coming sooner than we thought.

    What disasters? More and worse hurricanes, uncontrollable fires, floods, the erosion of coastlines, typhoons, drought, tsunamis, the sinking of islands into the sea. [ shades of Hank Johnson?]

    In November, a scientific report issued by 13 U.S. agencies warned that if greater measures are not taken to reduce global warming, the damage could knock 10 percent off the size of the U.S. economy by century’s end.

    Pat, I’m one of your fans, man, but what color is the Kool-Aid on your planet? You’re usually just naive in the sense of thinking the political opposition is as civil as you are, but now you believe UN reports and the US “government agencies” that purport to model the climate of the entire Earth?!

    There is NO working mathematical model of the world’s entire climate, Pat! (Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, along with Summary – 1 and Summary — 2)

    But when the electorates cannot see the benefits of these painful price hikes, … understand that this is about nothing but more government control, …

    There, FIFY, Mr. Buchanan. No charge, cause I like you.

    In the Paris climate accord, China and India were given a pass to produce carbon emissions, while reductions were mandated for the Western powers.

    True dat. I guess that portion of the article ends [Evil Side of Pat Buchanan mode].

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @follyofwar
  2. Climate change initiatives as laid out by the criminal elite in the Paris Accord are a massive fraud perpetrated to loot the savings and limit future wealth accumulation opportunities of the little people. It is damned right that they take to the streets; I’m surprised more don’t take to the streets.

    Mr. Macron wants more Europe, but what he is getting is more France: How long before they roll out the guillotines for the likes of the “let them do staycations” leadership who want to impoverish and imprison us in the name of the Climate?

  3. Realist says:

    Will Paris Riots Scuttle Climate Accord?


    • Replies: @anonymous
  4. Renoman says:

    The only way they pull this off is to Kill the 1% and use their cash to fix the problems they caused. The World does not believe the lies of their politicians, France is Toast, Germany gone, I live in Canada where everyone thinks Trudeau is a clown and a liar, China, Japan and Russia are just laughing at us and sadly, they are right. War is coming, “Civil War”!

    • Replies: @dvorak
    , @Anonymous
  5. @The Alarmist

    “roll out the guillotines” has a nice ring to it, but it seems a bit old fashioned. What would be today’s equivalent?

    Electrocution and lethal injection seem to take too long and to be too messy. What about giving them a taste of instant enlightenment from one of Tesla’s colossal lightning generators? Zapped like an insect by one of those blue light devises seems poetically apt.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  6. Global warming/climate change is bullshit as everyone here knows. Ask yourself this; what proof of it have you really seen in your own life that can’t be chalked up to the normal fluctuations in temperature and weather patterns that have been part of the earth’s history forever?

    UN scientists offer up proofs that most people can’t possibly verify themselves – parts of a remote atoll in the middle of the Pacific are bleaching, there are 10% fewer Yellow Fin Guppies in Lake Baikal than there were sixty years ago.

    The climate change scam is just the latest way to transfer wealth from White people to everyone else using the same tried and true method that’s worked for slavery and colonialism; white guilt.

  7. anon[104] • Disclaimer says:

    Only temporarily. Wait until someone like Cortez takes over and does for our energy sector what Hugo Chavez did for his.

    “Ocasio-Cortez said. “We do not have a choice. We have to get to 100 percent renewable energy in 10 years. There is no other option.”

    Of course, that’s nuts…but it’s the kind of thing you’d expect from a middling intellect like Chavez, er uh, Cortez. In a sane system, she’d be laughed at. In a democracy, she could be president.

    • Agree: mark green
    • Replies: @follyofwar
  8. @ThreeCranes

    Throw them in volcanoes to experience global warming up close and personal, or strand them in a prison located on the Arctic ice cap and let them see if their theory of disappearing ice-caps will deliver them from imprisonment.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  9. In November, a scientific report issued by 13 U.S. agencies warned that if greater measures are not taken to reduce global warming, the damage could knock 10 percent off the size of the U.S. economy by century’s end.

    no problem

    importing 65 IQ africans will make up for it

  10. Rurik says:

    The most dire issue facing the planet earth and its denizens is exponentially exploding numbers of (consumer / tax slave / cannon fodder) humans. But rather than address this looming and eminent crisis, the elites of the world ignore it, and concentrate instead on schemes to further control, tax and otherwise marginalize their own citizens while extorting their hard-earned wages to lavish on themselves and the Third World, thereby ensuring an even more over-populated planet.

    We’re wiping out species left and right, poisoning the oceans and turning the planet barren in a frenzy of raw, blind, infinite greed. With all the endless lies and hysteria about the fake ‘Global Warming hoax, no one even seems to notice that humans are cutting down the rain forests to make room for endless millions of more consumer humans.

    It’s impossible to overstate just how megalomaniacally rotten and corrupt the world’s elites are.

    They’ll fly in private jets and helicopters to ‘Climate summits’ to discuss more ways to enslave and marginalize the middle and working classes, and congratulate themselves for their collective treachery because they themselves expect to get massively richer from these schemes, so they can buy even bigger yachts and private jets, and because after all, they’re committed to equalizing the citizens of the First World with those of Sub-Sahara Africa and Indonesia, so the lies about climate change are all for a good cause!

    They gladly slaughtered three thousand average Americans on 9/11 as a pretext to Endless War$ with untold millions of people’s lives destroyed, as nation after nation is reduced to a dystopian hell on earth.

    Such a deal!

    And then use the very real threat that humans are to the ecology of the planet – as a pretext to tax and control, impoverish and dominate their citizens even further.

    I remember watching movies of the French Revolution, and being perplexed at the loud cheers as the guillotine blade fell and the grizzly spectacle of the head was lifted from the basket and displayed to the wild celebrations of the crowd.

    I now understand why they would cheer and howl their enthusiastic, joyous satisfaction.

    Dick Cheney, Tony Blair, George Soros, Macron.. the list is long.

  11. @Johnny Smoggins

    Global warming/climate change is bullshit as everyone here knows.

    who cares anyway?

    they’re trying to flood your countries with foreign parasites and eliminate your people so why should any white give two sh#ts about grobal warming?

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  12. @Rurik

    We’re wiping out species left and right, poisoning the oceans and turning the planet barren in a frenzy of raw, blind, infinite greed. With all the endless lies and hysteria about the fake ‘Global Warming hoax, no one even seems to notice that humans are cutting down the rain forests to make room for endless millions of more consumer humans.

    don’t take the blame for what others are doing. Are you the one getting rich by cutting down rain forests?

    Why doesn’t the (((media))) name the owners of these companies and shame them like they do to anyone who dares speak out against the immigration invasion?

    (((They))) want you to take the blame while (((they))) get rich

  13. Rurik says:

    (((They))) want you to take the blame while (((they))) get rich


    A middle class white guy in a SUV is destroying the planet / while billionaires and celebrities flying around in private jets are saving us all and the planet by augmenting an immigration invasion into the West that will exponentially explode the number of fossil fuel costumers, overcoming the ecology of N. America and Europe as the newcomers breed with a war-like intensity.

    So as long as ((they’re)) able to demonize Joe the Plumber, and blame him for global poverty, global warming, wars and strife and melting the Artic with his lawn mower, they can continue to inundate the planet with untold billions of more consumer human$.

    All while lecturing us and posing as our moral betters from the windows of their private jets and behemoth yachts.

    • Replies: @RVBlake
    , @Liberty Mike
  14. TG says:

    Climate change may well be a real threat – but that’s not what this is about. This is about cutting the standard of living for the average person so the rich can jam more people in.

    In the United States, since 1970 per-capita energy consumption has gone down about 15%. But third-world immigration has increased the population by 40%, wiping this out and increasing overall net consumption. We are not conserving – we are living with less to help make room for more people. Eventually, an America with over a billion people could have a very low per-capita energy consumption – but net consumption higher than present. That won’t save the Earth.

    As presently constituted, “Conservation” is a con designed to make the populace love their poverty.

    Suggestion: when a rich person says that the little people need to ‘conserve’ in order to save the planet, our answer should always be: you first.

  15. densa says:

    What is happening in Paris carries a message for all Western countries.

    If only. I’d love to see the American people rise up against the long series of abuses, but I don’t see it happening. And, even if we did, we’d have to drag the elites out of their bunkers and hang them to get any patented change you can believe in. No, if productive revolution were in our future, it would have to be supported by the color revolution specialists or the military or someone with more power than the commentariat possesses. Having a revolution and having a successful one are two different things.

    tl;dr: we’re doomed.

    • Replies: @SafeNow
    , @2stateshmustate
  16. Stick says:

    Its good see signs that Westerners are refusing serfdom in climate garb.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  17. RVBlake says:

    Haha…I had formed an image of DiCrappio’s mug while reading your comment.

  18. @Rurik

    Richard Branson needs a haircut.

    The one good thing I can say about Leonardo DiCaprio is Calvin Candie – the character he played in Django Unchained.

    OT: Yesterday, I heard Ann Coulter say the one good thing about GHWB’s death is that it means the McCain funeral is finally over.

  19. @Stick


    Now, we need another mob over in Rome to raise hell with that so-called Pope they’ve got over there.

    “Is he Catholic?”, we joked ’bout the Pope.
    But this new guy, it’s “Is he on dope!?”
    ‘Tween inviting the schlomos,
    and a penchant for homos,
    we’re gonna need soap-on-a-rope.

  20. AWM says:

    2750 feet per second, far superior to a guillotine.

  21. Some trenchant prose from James Howard Kunstler in his Monday blog:

    “Interestingly, its the people of France who are going apeshit at this moment in history and not the much more beaten-down Americans. For all the deformities of the EU, France still maintains a general quality-of-life so far above what is found in the US these days that we look like some left-behind evolutionary dead end here in this wilderness of strip-malls and muffler shops.”

  22. SafeNow says:

    “we’re doomed.”

    Agreed. Doomed. As a Californian, I see the leading edge of the unraveling: reduced proficiency, conscientiousness, fairness, politeness, and freedom abound here. The elites are fine with this unraveling, as they can pick their neighborhood, doctor, plumber, school, and so on. There is now no credible scenario to reverse the unraveling, because those negatively affected lack power, and always will. This includes a lack of moral power, because even mild critics of policy are now viewed as deplorable people.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  23. neprof says:

    The climate has changed in the past (sometimes violently), the climate is changing now, and the climate will change in the future. Now amount of taxing the poor to support the elite will changes this.

    Per St. Catherine of Siena, “I’m God, you’re not.”

  24. Standing in a grocery line, I overheard a top-20%er mom telling her friend that her family was trundling off to Barcelona for Christmas since her preschool-aged child loved it so much. She could easily be a lecturing environmentalist, like Macron, casually taking frequent international flights that consume far more fuel than 200 car-bound French serfs use in a month, going back and forth to work, doing their chores and indulging in mundane, low-cost entertainment. Smashing some of the finest art on the planet and other mayhem will likely lead to the same result that the Occupiers, USA got: more neoliberalism. But the audacity and hypocrisy of elitist climate-change signalers is maddening. Elites are not discussing the shared sacrifice that their professed environmentalism would require if pursued in a serious way, no more than they are debating other issues honestly, like the issue of absorbing half of the Third World in developed, Western nations, with many of the migrant women producing up to 4 children by their twenties, maximizing their welfare and child-tax-credit cash flow per household via their fecundity. The welfare fountain for so-called working families, legally and illegally pouring into Western nations, increases national fuel and other consumption, multiplying the carbon footprint of the West, but the climate-change proselytizers in the top 1% — 20% have cheap servants and a way to keep wages down for 40-years-and-counting, increasing profits for the 1%ers and conveniencing the entire span of top 20%ers. That is the priority for neoliberal elites, not environmentalism, and yet, elites are not shy about insisting that the serfs make disproportionate sacrifices, scraping together their pennies to put taxes and fees into the climate-change collection plate. This is all done just to keep up appearances, laying on a glaze of fake morality. Four-day trip to Barcelona for the sake of preschoolers whose main concern is Santa and red-nosed reindeers anyone?

    • Replies: @AWM
  25. Buchanan is brilliant, as ever.

  26. AWM says:
    @Endgame Napoleon

    Just make sure you load this 20%er’s co-ordinates into the target computer.

  27. dvorak says:

    The only way they pull this off is to Kill the 1% and use their cash to fix the problems they caused.

    Sorry to tell you, the 1% have no cash. Only assets, real and financial, that throw off a niggardly 3 to 5% income. The very same assets house and employ the population of planet Earth, so you have to be careful with them. Georgism (seize the real estate) doesn’t work and socialism (seize the businesses) doesn’t work either. You can seize the financial assets but they are gossamer anyway.

    If cash were the problem, welfare states would have solved said problem a long time ago.

  28. @Rurik

    Indeed: overpopulation is at the core of much (or all) of what ails the planet. Humanity is displaying every single symptom of a cancer, and the fact that we’re busy overproducing the stupidest among us is just icing on the cake.

    I say enjoy the spectacle. Part of the fun just now is watching the self-styled élite at the NYT trying to make sense of the Parisian riots. They’re genuinely running scared. The contagion might spread!

    What’s not to like about that? I’m buying up the supply of yellow vests for resale.

  29. anon[336] • Disclaimer says:

    “There is now no credible scenario to reverse the unraveling, because those negatively affected lack power, and always will. This includes a lack of moral power, because even mild critics of policy are now viewed as deplorable people.”

    American conservatives are disorganized, short-sighted, greedy, and stupid – as always. The great tragedy here is that the Empire victim’s brought about their own oppression through their own unworthiness. It’s hard to feel sorry for losers like that. Doesn’t make the Empire’s actions appropriate, but it does mean that their victims deserve some of the blame, too.

  30. Seneca44 says:

    Can’t take credit for this quote, but in Darwinian terms,

    “We are selecting for those who cannot figure out birth control”

  31. @densa

    Wait until those pension checks stop coming. Then you’ll see.

  32. anonymous[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Global warming is real, it takes peak stupidity to deny it. But, there is no fix to global warming, other than deliberately collapsing industrial civilization, as the study by Dr. Tim Garrett from the University of Utah shows. But, if we do collapse civilization deliberately, we’d lose the global dimming caused by pollution that is keeping temps 2-3°C lower, which would accelerate global warming to disastrous levels, instantly. Not to mention losing the ability to keep nuclear waste in cooling pools at 449 nuclear power plants around the world cool. With such a dilemma, Homo rapiens is going to keep evaporating earth’s coal beds and oil fields into the atmosphere until it kills off all life on the planet. Do like me—buy a toy-hauler RV and a Harley hawg—and enjoy the short ride to oblivion.

  33. @Rurik

    Well said, Rurik. A massive megafauna extinction now underway. Few notice or care. Human numbers are also exploding. Yet our glorious (((media))) gives this phenomena little coverage.

    Instead, the spotlight and megaphone is focused on the theoretical possibility of catastrophic anthropogenic ‘climate change’ (formerly, ‘global warming’). Yet, in fact, there has been no measurable environmental damage specifically attributable to human-caused ‘climate change’.

    The population of polar bears has not plunged as predicted. Sea levels have not risen. Catastrophic ‘global warming’ has remained nothing more than an over-hyped, overpriced, Nothing-burger.

    The ‘warmist alarm bell’ is being used to arouse fear.

    This fear (and false scientific consensus about ‘climate change’) allows elites to impose taxes on fossil fuels so that free-spending governments can 1) fund their next round of crony-based government projects and 2) use taxation to undermine the economies of ‘hostile’ oil-exporting countries such as Iran, Russia, Iraq, Venezuela, Libya and more.

    Meanwhile, the Amazon rainforest is being burned and trashed. Our rivers and oceans are being used as sewers. This is not theory. This is real.

    There are also tens of millions of additional humans (mostly Third World) added to our polluted planet every year, many of whom are crashing through US borders while American troops protect borders in faraway lands. No matter who gets elected, this oxymoronic political pattern continues.

    This farce will not end well.

    • Agree: densa
    • Replies: @Rurik
  34. MarkinLA says:

    Aren’t fossil fuels the product of decaying plants and animals that inhabited the Earth after it’s cooling off until today. How did those plants and animals who died to give us gasoline ever live in the first place?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  35. Rurik says:
    @mark green

    @ Mr McKenna & Seneca44

    Yes Mark, well said as usual.

    A massive megafauna extinction now underway. Few notice or care. Human numbers are also exploding. Yet our glorious (((media))) gives this phenomena little coverage.

    Almost zero coverage, and it’s maddening, especially as they screech and blubber 24/7, 365 about Global Warming!! (or Climate Change!! or whatever absurdity they’re going to call it next) with a bullhorn in everyone’s ear.

    While the earth is ravaged by exploding billions of people. It’s like Haiti writ large on a global scale. I’m sure at some point someone told the leaders of Haiti that over-populating their half of the island would lead to catastrophic poverty and strife, but only for the masses, while they would profit personally by having more tax slaves and consumer units. Damn the long term consequences.

    I used to get into discussions like this but it always led to despair, because of what motivates those who refuse to discuss this most dire of all of our threats.

    Hate and Greed.

    To simplify these motivating principles, we can just generalize that what motivates the right is an insatiable, infinite greed, whereas what motivates the left, is an equally intractable hatred. Indeed, a genocidal hatred that trumps all other concerns.

    On the right, think the Cato Institute, and the Koch brothers, and the Chamber of Commerce types. All those blowhards talking about the necessity of 3% growth in the economy, or they might stand to lose a few shekels to their bottom lines. Do they suppose that the 3% growth they gush about is sustainable? No. of course not. Because ultimately it isn’t, but for as long as *they’re* alive, they’d like to skull-rape this planet bone dry. Big Oil, Big Pharma, AMA, the Bar, and all the black holes of human greed run amok. They’re half the problem.

    Then there are the people consumed with a netherworld envy and hatred for the white Christians of the Western World. We all know who they are, and they’re the ones who demand open borders to the point of despoiling every last blade of grass on this continent if that what’s it takes to finally, and at long last – put it to whitey.

    One of the most egregious juxtapositions of these two lamentable black holes of vice in the flawed human heart, is the Sierra Club. An organization created to protect the doomed ecology and wildlife of this land from our burgeoning sprawl. Even a fool can see that what’s destroying the environment is too many people, treading over and developing every last inch they can get their greedy hands on, so the Sierra Club decided to be honest and say what everyone else knows, that all of the increases in raw human numbers in North America were coming from prolific Third World immigrants. Duh. But to tell the truth about that is wrought in our time, because of the two pillars of desolation- hatred and greed.

    So to put a damper on any truth about the environment and our vanishing wildlife and fauna, a man motivated by sheer, netherworld hatred; David Gelbaum – bribed the Sierra Club to stay mute on immigration with a hundred millions dollar bag of shekels. So there you have a perfect storm of hatred and greed that is dooming any hope for a continent that we can bequeath to the next generations that won’t look (and smell) like a San Francisco public street urinal.

    Have you ever seen a Florida panther in the wild? Or a grey wolf, or grizzly bear just minding their own business, like they have for tens of thousands of years? Not too many people have, and if David Gelbaum gets his way, soon, no one ever will again. We will bequeath this once ineffably beautiful continent to our progeny bereft of it’s most exquisite wonders. They’ll see wild deer only on newsreels, like the one they showed Edward G. Robinson in the movie Soylent Green. Because out of greed and hatred, man’kind’ will have raped this land clean. As he’s busy doing today with gusto.

    The infinite human capacity for greed and tribal hatred will eventually consume us all, and everything else.

    But if you ask a Climate Change asshole, they’ll tell you it will all be fine if we just give the global elites the power to tax every breath and every fart. Then everything will work out just fine, as we add ten billion more identity-less consumer units to the planet.

    • Replies: @Simply Simon
  36. Anonymous[189] • Disclaimer says:

    How did they ever live in the first place? Because the dinosaurs and other flora and fauna were biologically adapted to the 12°C warmer climate. Cretateous temperatures are earth’s “normal” climate anyway, homo rapiens is merely an ephemeral species in one of the geologically brief cold periods.

    Humans were put on earth by God to evaporate coal beds and oil fields back into the atmosphere, so Earth can return to an earth-normal Cretateous 25°C average global temperature. We’re doing it, and extremely fast. Git-er-done!

    New species will evolve, just like has happened in the previous five mass extinctions. He who evaporates the most carbon will be the most rewarded by God. Of course, God may well be a jellyfish. Anyway, hop on that Harley hawg and ride! There’s no turning back now.

    With no check on emissions, we are on course to see preindustrial levels of CO2 double (from 280 to 560 ppm, or parts per million) by 2050 – and then double again by 2100. In short, we’ll be generating climate conditions last experienced during the Cretaceous period (145-65.95 million years ago) when CO2 levels reached over 1,000 ppm.

    We are heading for a New Cretaceous, not for a new normal

  37. @anonymous

    Let me get this straight, #202. We want to partially collapse civilization, say collapse everyone in flyover country (of all continents), and keep the jetsetters of the coasts and maybe Geneva, Switzerland, and the inner City of London. If we collapse too many people, the lack of particulate pollution will warm things up by 2 – 3 C, negating our gains from the liquidations , I mean, collapsing of civilization. Additionally, it will accelerate the warming of the oceans and fresh water to levels that will not cool down radioactive steam in heat exchangers at nuke plants, meaning greater than the boiling point of water, which is, of course, much higher than 100C, when said steam is under pressure. Yes, if the oceans and lakes are that warm, Houston we have a problem! (oops, Houston’s off the air.)

    Why not go ahead and collapse civilization, but create particulate matter by having just a few people drive around on what remains of the roads with 1960’s Firebirds, Challengers, and Fastback Mustangs with blown rings? These same planet-savers should also be tasked with flying around place to place in mostly empty (due to no civilization and shit) DC-Niners, old 727’s without the hush kits, and maybe John Rivolto’s 707.

    Your theory is that if we don’t eliminate , errr, collapse ENOUGH people, the world will continue heating up or cooling down with unexpected hurricanes, tornados, and chances of snow flurries, much differently than we’ve been used to.

    It sounds like your mathematical model has gotten it all covered … OK, call me if you need any more data …. oh, just one more thing… it’s just some little thing the precinct wants me to …. if you don’t mind sir … about those Ice Ages…. I know the causes of the Ice Ages must be in your model … of course, right … but you didn’t say anything …

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  38. @Anonymous

    How did they ever live in the first place?

    Because the dinosaurs and other flora and fauna were biologically adapted to the 12°C warmer climate.

    God created Homo Sapiens and the Dinosaurs. Willis Carrier made them equal.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  39. MarkinLA says:

    Yet there was nobody burning fossil fuels on that graph prior to the peaks at 125,000, 230,000, and 330,000 years ago. Humans are adaptable. They can simply kill off the necessary number of people needed to survive. Does China really need 1.4 billion people to survive?

    I am sure there will be the necessary rendering plants for the excess population. However that is so far in the future, I won’t see it and I doubt that your great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchildren will either.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  40. Anonymous[155] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    Their theory of disappearing ice-caps is based on reality, a reality you’re ignoring. Given current long term trends, a BOE (Blue Ocean Event, defined as Arctic ice volume in September less than 1000 cu. km.) is likely to happen near 2024, give or take a few years. Sooner, if the ENSO (El Niño-Southern Oscillation) Index goes positive again. Check out this PIOMAS graph of Arctic sea ice volume:

    A time lapse picture illustrating the above:

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    , @The Alarmist
  41. Anonymous[364] • Disclaimer says:

    Among mammals, humans are among the least adaptable species to a dewpoint above 95°F/35°C. Healthy adult humans die after a short 6 hours. Young, old, and infirm succumb in less time. Currently, the highest dewpoint values in the world are about 30-31°C, during the worst heat/humidity events in India, the Amazon, and a few other very humid places. With a 10°C rise in average global temperature, here is what the earth will look like, with the Eastern United States less habitable than Abu Dhabi on a blistering day, enduring dewpoints reaching 40°C near Missouri:

    As a reminder of what is already happening, an area in Missouri in 2016 reached a dewpoint of 32.4°C (Heat Index of 140.4°F):

    Dewpoint. Start watching it on the null school meteorological website next summer around southern Illinois and Missouri, earth’s future hellhole.

  42. MarkinLA says:

    The loss of the arctic icecap won’t change the sea level.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  43. Anonymous[286] • Disclaimer says:

    Strike “dewpoint.” I meant “wet bulb temperature.” 20 hours awake and 3 pots of coffee aren’t mixing well. 🙂

  44. Anonymous[286] • Disclaimer says:

    Duh! Nobody said it would. Where did you come up with that silliness, anyway? Any kid knows that after watching the ice melt in his glass of lemonade on a sunny day; it never runs over. You’re rather inept in your denials of what is actually happening.

    But loosing Greenland’s ice cap will make sea levels rise about 7 meters. Do the math. Get back to me on that, ok?

    And do research what happens after we do loose the Arctic Sea icecap. Sea levels don’t rise, but other things do happen. Things you might not know about right now.

    • Replies: @Simply Simon
  45. @Anonymous

    Exactly whose asshole did that 10C rise in temperature come from, #286/386? If you have a mathematical model in mind that can predict that, then tell us what the temperature and relative humidity will be this summer in not just Ill, but in various places around the world. How about 10 years from now? The fact is, there is NO WORKING MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF THE EARTH’S CLIMATE.

    If there were one, though I wouldn’t expect precision down to +/- 1 C even and +/- 500 miles in location, at least we could be comparing current observations to some model made a few years back to see if the general trends are panning out. That’s how science is done. These colored charts look really pretty, or scary, but garbage in still .EQ. garbage out, no matter how cool your garbage output looks. I’ve written about that already (see my links in comment #1).

    You’re very much like some of the “journalists” I’ve written about. They can read nothing but the conclusion of a scientific paper (if we’re lucky!), so they don’t understand the assumptions, work-in-progress, and uncertainty in results given by a paper. They’ll take the worst-sounding number of the range, spout that out, and they LUV, LUV, LUV those moving colorful graphs, whether they are based on anything sound or not.

    BTW, why don’t you use relative humidity, as that’s a value that most people can relate to from forecasts. I understand the psychometric chart relates them all, but use a quantity that people are used to. Are you trying to snow your audience?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  46. @Anonymous

    Oh, just one more thing … is the exact causes of the Ice Ages known? We are in between Ice Ages right now, so I’d like to know if the onset of the next one is accounted for in whatever model has predicted your scary yellow, purple and red, oh my! graphs that you display. Do you think that any possibly warming trend (like, say 1 C per century from the graphs I’ve seen, though it does tend to depend on your exact time-range) may just be counteracted by the onset of cooling from the next Ice event?

    How about El Nino and La Nina, BTW? I noticed you mentioned them. Are they predictable in advance, or is it, as last I heard, we can find out we are in one only a few months after the symptoms are detected? Are these inputs to the mathematical model, or outputs? I.e., if they are inputs, then their causes must be known accurately, so the model will work, but, if they are outputs, then lets get that damn output and let me know when the next El Nino event will be, OK?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @joekoool102
  47. Anonymous[277] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Let me guess, you can’t keep anything straight. No, we don’t “want” to collapse civilization, it is just what the scientist Dr. Tim Garrett stated would be hypothetically necessary, other than building a nuclear power plant every single day, to stop global warming. Read his paper, dumbass, instead of deliberately misrepresenting it.

    Although earth probably would be heading into another ice age if humans had not invented agriculture, we’re not going to see glaciers pushing down the North American continent for a long time with CO2 at levels not seen for millions of years. See that blue line (c02) rising off the charts in the graph below? Do tell me how the red line (temp) is going to go the opposite direction. Could you explain how that would work?

    And let me guess again, you’ve confused a real glacial ice age with a new Maunder Minimum, often called a “mini-ice age,” which many frosties, like Adapt2030 on u-tube are falsely pushing. That isn’t happening either. Solar radiance changes due to sunspots have little effect on average global changes, and while the last six solar cycles show solar radiance steadily declining these last six decades, global average temperature is going up, up, up.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    , @Sparkon
  48. Anonymous[260] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Well, achmed, I figured you for a damned liar, and you’ve proven it. Luckily, there is a website called “skeptical science” that thoroughly debunks your inanities. For example, you toss out the red herring about models. This answers it:

    How reliable are climate models?
    What the science says…
    Models successfully reproduce temperatures since 1900 globally, by land, in the air and the ocean….

    And maybe you didn’t know it, but wet bulb temperature and relative humidity aren’t the same. That’s just full stupid to think so. Humans have a tolerance for heat well above their tolerance for wet bulb temperature. I don’t think you quite understand the difference. As far as “snowing an audience,” are you younger than 10 years old? My 10 year old son can read and relate to wet bulb temperature. Give it a few years, maybe you can too. Join the boy scouts when you get old enough to learn these complicated subject. Although that sad, faggy organization probably doesn’t teach how to measure wet bulb with a swing thermometer anymore…lol. Just look up an old boy scout manual, ok?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  49. Anonymous[139] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    If you think color coded graphs are, as you put it, “scary,” it’s pretty obvious your knowledge of science is on par with Martha Stewart’s knowledge of TIG welding.

  50. @Anonymous

    Although earth probably would be heading into another ice age if humans had not invented agriculture, we’re not going to see glaciers pushing down the North American continent for a long time with CO2 at levels not seen for millions of years.

    Man, that takes some hubris, there! Are you seriously saying that humans have prevented another ice ages by farming 10% or so of the earth? Now you’ve gone totally mental. Well, OK, your professor has.

    I’m curious about your fixation (get it!) with Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere when water vapor is as a big a greenhouse gas as CO2. You know that the 2 PRODUCTS (not BY-PRODUCTS) of combustion of hydrocarbons are carbon dioxide and water, don’t you?

    See that blue line (c02) rising off the charts in the graph below?

    Yeah, I have no idea where your graph comes from, as though the CO2 data may be known accurately, the temp data is not. It also looks much like the CO2 levels follow those temp. numbers, but that’s just me.

    No, I didn’t mean little ice ages, I meant the big ones. The sun, of course, is the driver of the climate (first definition in weather class – “weather is due to unequal heating of the earth’s surface” – no way around that, but the AMOUNT of said heating matters one hell of a lot).

    Your 2nd graph is a piece of crap too. It doesn’t say where the temperature was measured. Do you think it is some weighted average of all stations around the globe? Really? The red y-axis says “Temperature Change” while the graph itself says yearly and 11-year smoothed temperatures. What exact value is that temperature change taken from? What is the exact right temperature and humidity for place around the world? How have the weather stations held up from 1885 to 2016? I’ve seen many graphs that had no rise at all of this “average temperature around the world” over the last 10 or 15 year period.

    No, I don’t trust any of your data, as I’ve looked at observational data over the years. There could be a + 1 C/century trend over that sort of time period, but even that varies quite a bit depending on the starting point. Where IS a good starting point?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  51. @Anonymous

    Yes, I will believe that one political site over years of bogus predictions by the “experts”. That’s the ticket.

    Hey, can you please look at a psychometric chart? I DID NOT SAY that wet-bulb T equals the dew point. You’ve got to work on reading comprehension before you get all upset and spout off. It’s just that relative humidity is the quantity given in weather reports. Dry and wet bulb T’s are used to CALCULATE the % RH (or Absolute, if you like), as that’s the easiest observation to make in the field with that sling psychrometer. Granted, an auto-weather station can use a dew-point meter, and dew point is used for aviation weather.

    As a former Scout, I was in NO faggy organization, but we didn’t use the sling psychrometer. I think your 10-year old can learn a lot that way, but we used to just go camping and build stuff. My son understands the difference between touching a hot object (say a car hood in the sunlight) at the same temperature as another (say, a piece of wood), that is due to widely differing heat transfer rates. I’m sure that is something you did not know until now, but my son is younger than yours!

    Anyway, there was no reason to get butt-hurt and call me a liar just because you don’t like someone questioning your faith.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  52. @Anonymous

    They’re made to be scary to others, as the public, and much less, the almost-innumerate news reporters, don’t know how to read a scientific paper. Bright red is BAD, mmmkaaay.

    I’m so very sorry for questioning your faith today, sir. What is the punishment for blasphemy in the Science of the Global Climate Disruption (TM)

    Yes, I’m working on a trademark before you all come up with another euphemism.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  53. @Anonymous

    What’s the story on El Nino … input to, or output from, these wonderful climate models? I hate to go all Tucker Carlson on you, but I! GET! THAT! Can you please just answer the question?! [/Tucker mode]

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  54. @anonymous

    … the global dimming …

    Heh! Indeed.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  55. @Achmed E. Newman

    Don’t worry Achmed. The globalist elites already have a plan for depopulation. It’s called WWIII. Coming soon to the middle east near you. The people are blind sheeple to the media propaganda.

    Will the people will become woke to the global warming tax, the elites will use to line their pockets? I doubt it, the media will cry like Henny Penny, you must obey. But France, Belgium are an interesting test case. We will see.

  56. Anonymous[372] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    It doesn’t take hubris, just reading the “Ruddiman Hypothesis” about the “early anthropocene,” such as this:

    A wide array of archeological, cultural, historical and geologic evidence points to viable explanations tied to anthropogenic changes resulting from early agriculture in Eurasia, including the start of forest clearance by 8000 years ago and of rice irrigation by 5000 years ago. In recent millennia, the estimated warming caused by these early gas emissions reached a global-mean value of ∼0.8 ◦C and roughly 2 ◦C at high latitudes, large enough to have stopped a glaciation of northeastern Canada predicted by two kinds of climatic models…

    Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia

    Like I said, it’s painfully obvious that you are as unfamiliar with science as Martha Stewart is with TIG welding.

    You don’t trust data? Aww…You’re projecting again. You’re the one not to be trusted. For instance, you posit that agricultural civilization has affected “10% or so of the earth.” That’s just a bald-faced lie. For example, humans cause desertification all over the globe, which you don’t account for in your percentage. Nor do you account for deforestation. You’re a joke.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  57. Anonymous[830] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    So now wet bulb temperature is ok to mention, because it’s easiest to measure in the field. So much for “snowing an audience” with the overly complicated; I done got you set straight now!

    Faith-based? That’s you projecting.

    Yep, is a great layman’s website to check garbage claims like yours, just like is great to deal with creationists. No, it’s not a “political” website. You’re projecting, yet again.

    Still think color graphs are “scary,” boy?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  58. Anonymous[830] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    What else would account for a measured decrease in the pan evaporation rate? The decrease has been measured all over the world. Pan evaporation rate, something many farmers measure with the simplest of instruments, is what got scientists interested, and how they discovered global dimming. Your scoffing at it is like a Borneo tribesman scoffing at basic electrical theory. It just shows how completely uninformed you are. Search youtube for “bbc horizons global dimming” for a great documentary that even a primitive could understand.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  59. Anonymous[830] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Can you read? Try this:

    They found that ENSO, as measured through the the Multivariate ENSO Index (MEI), had a slight cooling effect of about -0.014 to -0.023°C per decade in the surface and lower troposphere temperatures, respectively from 1979 through 2010 (Table 1, Figure 4)

    Need your hand held? Look elsewhere.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  60. Anonymous[830] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Color graphs in scientific journals are “made to be scary?” Yep, just like radios are scary to a Borneo tribesman, who, unfortunately, is probably smarter than you. What is the punishment for blasphemy in the Science of the Global Climate Disruption? Odd, I never mentioned that, although I did suggest above that one should buy a toy-carrier RV and a Harley and burn as much fossil fuel as you can afford, because there is no solution to the global warming dilemma. See how you lie through your teeth?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  61. @Anonymous

    Their theory is that CO2 levels in the atmosphere is the cause, ergo man is to blame. It is more likely to be the Sun, but they blithely assume that to be in rigid homeostasis.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  62. Anonymous[552] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    Global warming is not caused by solar radiance. I’ve provided a graph above, comment #48, second graph, that proves it. Solar radiance has been going down for the last 6 solar cycles, about 60 years, and yet global average temperature goes up, up, up. Yes, evaporating earth’s coal beds and oil fields into the atmosphere does have consequences. You don’t seem up to admitting that there can be consequences for actions.

    European scientists have dug deep to dismiss once again the old argument that climate change might be a consequence of solar radiation rather than atmospheric chemistry. The world is warming, they confirm, because more greenhouse gases are getting into the atmosphere, and the changes in the solar cycle are not a significant factor.

    Don’t blame the solar cycle for global warming

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  63. @Anonymous

    Two concepts for you: Heteroskedacity and nonstationarity. What is purported to be the science of Climate Change is little more than pseudoscience applied to problemmatic data sets to drive a political agenda to fleece the majority of the developed world’s population of their hard earned savings and deprive them of a substantial portion of their future wealth accumulation opportunities.

    My undergrad major was aerospace engineering with a concentration in remote sensing, so while that does not make me a climate scientist per se, it does make me sit up and take notice when I am told that the world is getting increasingly and significantly warmer over the past four decades according to surface temperature measurements while at the same time learning that atmospheric and satellite measurements have been relatively stable over the same period. This is a problem of heteroskedacity, where variability of sub-groups of a data set are significantly different.

    When you mull that over, you might also reasonably ask, “What’s going on with surface-based temperature sensors?” The answer is, a lot: There are more sensors in more places than ever before, so what we understood to possibly be Earth’s average temperature has moved as more data points are added to the set, a problem of nonstationarity. Furthermore, as old sensors are taken off line and replaced with newer technology, it introduces further heteroskedacity between older sets of observations and newer.

    In other words, you have a lot of crap data that you might be able to massage to support a hypothesis that greenhouse gasses are causing climate change. This, BTW, was based on the observation that Venus is hot and has an atmosphere full of greenhouse gasses, therefore that must be the cause. Then again, Venus is a lot closer to the Sun and has no oceans, so it should be hotter. Oh, Mars is getting warmer too … are our little rovers causing that?

    Then again, maybe climate change is causing increased greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere. The study of solar radiance focused on man-caused aerosols (pollution) and their impact on solar radiation reaching earth’s surface, suggesting anthropogenic effects actually masked their impact on climate change by improving photosynthesis by diffusing light reaching the plants and causing them to sequester more carbon (gee, if that’s why the warming stopped, maybe we need to pollute more), but there hasn’t been much discussion about the impact increased cosmic radiation has on cloud formation and solar radiation reaching Earth’s surface. Wait, I’m confused … have we increased greenhouse gasses or did plants decrease them? What is the right level of CO2 in the atmosphere? (hint: much higher than current levels if you could ask the plants).

    IOW, it’s all interesting for the purposes of discussion, but there are way too many discrepencies to justify jumping whole heartedly into the very costly public policies being put forth as necessary to saving the world.

    As for your Artic ice cap, that it is melting is nothing more than an observation. Connecting that to AGW is based more on the religion of Climate Change rather than actual science.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Anonymous
  64. Sparkon says:

    a “mini-ice age,” which many frosties, like Adapt2030 on u-tube are falsely pushing. That isn’t happening either. Solar radiance changes due to sunspots have little effect on average global changes,

    Really? There were few sunspots seen in the Maunder Minimum during the depths of the Little Ice Age, and our Sun has been virtually spotless in the recent past, when some records for cold weather have been set. If some places on Earth are setting records for low temperatures, by definition, we cannot be experiencing global warming.

    Dec. 31, 2017

    second coldest midnight temperature since 1871 in Central Park.

    According to some sources, the Little Ice Age did not end until about 1850.

    December 26, 2017 – January 8, 2018 Record Cold

    Wikipedia: 2017–18 North American cold wave

    Nine states had their coldest April low temperatures on record: Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Wisconsin.

    April 2018 was the coldest in two decades for the continental U.S. All-time record lows set in two states.

    Meanwhile, deep in the heart of Texas…

    October 16, 2018

    This Tuesday will go down as the coldest Oct. 16 in San Antonio history, according to the National Weather Service.

    Cold front breaks a record in San Antonio

    Nov. 14, 2018

    San Antonio reached a low of 23 degrees at the airport Wednesday morning, which tied for the fourth-coldest low temperature in November on record.

    The cold weather also broke daily records on Tuesday and Wednesday.

    “This shatters the old record low of 28 degrees set back in 1916,” the National Weather Service tweeted of Wednesday’s weather. Tuesday night just before midnight, the city hit 28 degrees, breaking the previous record of 29 set in 1907, records show.

    Cold San Antonio weather shatters 102-year-old record

    In New York City, the annual Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade was said to be the coldest ever in 2018.

    Denver: October 15, 2018

    18 degrees early in the morning on Monday. This was a record low, it had never been so cold on Oct. 15.

    Warming up after record cold

    Bangor; November 22, 2018

    Three Maine cities awoke to record cold temperatures today as an Arctic front from Canada pushed frigid air across the state, lowering temperatures 30 degrees below normal for Nov. 22.

    The air temperature in Bangor Thursday morning was 5 degrees above zero, breaking the previous record in the Queen City on this date of 11 degrees above zero in 1978,

    Arctic front brings record cold to parts of Maine on Thanksgiving

    Of course by now many people know that global warming works in strange ways.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  65. Anonymous[750] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    Quite the bullshitter! At least you admit you’re, as you put it, “confused.” I was going to say that you appear deliberately confused long before you admitted it. So ice melts, but it’s not warming that does it? LOL You’re like some engineers I know who are creationists. Idiot savants who won’t accept evolution because of their religion. And that’s what you have. You won’t accept the science of AGW because it troubles your beliefs about how you desire to view reality.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  66. @Anonymous

    OK, I have to assume that all you anons are the same person, just due to the stupidity, reading ability (or lack thereof), and lack of a handle I can follow.

    It’d be good for you to read through one more time – you show wet-bulb temperature maps. Yes, I know how the psychrometric chart works. Yes, I said that wet/dry bulb measured together give the state of the air (meaning one can get dew point, relative humidity, and absolute humidity). However, my point was, well, have you ever seen the cute weather girl on TV? She will give relative humidity in %. That’s what people know. I am familiar with 95F and 70% R.H. Yes, it sucks. No, you ain’t gonna die. Aviation people use dew-point and T, and the spread between them to figure flight conditions at an airport. Nobody, but nobody, talks about “here is a map of the wet-bulb temperatures”, simply because that doesn’t mean much to most people. Why didn’t the guy make maps showing RH or AH?

    The graphs are scary for people like you who don’t know how to sift through scientific knowledge. That was my point. You’re the one blathering about like Chicken Little. The sky is not falling. The planet will be fine. George Carlin put this pretty well.

    My original comment up top was about the lack of any working model of the earth’s climate. That’s because climatology is like any science, a work in progress. Journalists and people like you get ahold of this fancy red/yellow/purple moving output data and think that’s because it’s precise, it’s accurate. (You do know the difference, right?)

    • Replies: @Anon
  67. Anonymous[815] • Disclaimer says:

    Nothing strange about how global warming works, if you’re not too myopic to actually observe the globe. The “evidence” that you are providing supports an effect of global warming called “Warm Arctic – Cold Continent,” illustrated here:

    Same thing is happening this year. I suggest you put “warm arctic cold continent” in a search to figure out how extreme warming of the Arctic is causing colder weather on land. It’s all well explained.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    , @Sparkon
  68. @Anonymous

    If you can’t address the points raised, why not attack the person raising them? Got it.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  69. @Anonymous

    You’re really at the deep end of the pan, man. Global dimming?! Really? In your words this is caused by particulate matter, right? Particulates are actual, REAL pollution, as in China (along with combustion by-products like the Nitrogen-Ox compounds). Particulate pollution has been a worry for 1/2 century or more, and Americans have done a bang-up job reducing it. The worry was not about some nutball “global dimming” but about the health effects of breathing in the stuff!

    Farmers talk about “drying conditions” which are a function of humidity, solar insolation, and wind. Evaporation can be a function of all 3, but for the simplest measurements, it’s a function of the absolute humidity of the air, i.e. how much more water can that air hold. From your particulate-matter worry (the one about what happens when there is too much “civilizational collapse”) would lead me to think you now think that evaporation of water is lower due to less solar insolation. That’s a function of sun angle and cloud cover, of course, but also a host of other atmospheric conditions. OTOH, if solar insolation is lower due to some new “dimming” in the atmosphere, than that’s gonna put the kibosh on your global warming “modeling”!

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  70. Anonymous[815] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    Oh, you’re a liar too. Look at this whopper! “atmospheric and satellite measurements have been relatively stable over the same period.”

    Wrong, bucko. NASA Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) Satellite data:

    I wouldn’t trust you to engineer a paper airplane, moron.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  71. @Anonymous

    I don’t need an RV and people are getting too stupid on the roads for me to feel safe on a Harley, even with all the noise. I’ll say it again, if you don’t understand science, I can see why you are freaked out by very colorful moving graphs of the precisely-modeled future wet-bulb temperature.

    Let me ask you this – if there’s no solution, why are the politicians trying to still push through that economy-destroying Paris Accords, which put no constraints on India and China? Because if they are wasting their time, you should be out there on your Harley with a yellow vest raising Holy Hell.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  72. @Anonymous

    OK, then, so the land gets colder. You know that most people live on the land don’t you?

    Maybe you should get on the container, bulk-cargo, and oil tanker ship blogs and warn THOSE sailors.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  73. Anonymous[815] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    Butthurt because I tossed your “religion” bullshit back in your lap? Got it!

  74. @Anonymous

    I’ve already glanced at your entirely political blog there, yet you apparently haven’t read my posts on the extreme difficulty of doing math modeling, even on something much simpler that the whole earth’s climate. That kind of brings me to this comment of yours.

    There are loads of processes that must be taken into account (see my blog posts), and they are not all accounted for. Even when they get modeled very accurately, when put together the math models will still need lots and lots of work. Now the ENSO events had a cooling effect, you say, but then we don’t know when each one occurs. So, you can program* in the effects, but can’t program in when these effects will happen, as the cause is not known.

    Do you see what I’m getting at? One more time, for the road: THERE IS NO WORKING MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF THE EARTH’S CLIMATE. Oh, they’ll tell you that they’ve been BACK-TESTED – all that means is that equations were tweeked to make sure the new observations get predicted by those fudge factors. I’ll believe it when I’m told that in 10 years hence, the cloud cover, temperatures, humidity, precipitation amounts will be thus and so, and 10 years later the numbers are just in the ballpark, no need for high precision, just in the ballpark. Instead, I’m bombarded with “It’ll go up 10 degrees C if it goes up an inch!” and “Your kids won’t know what snow is!” and “Hurricanes will come left and right, outta nowhere” (said in the mid-00’s, just before 10 years of quiet season).


    * Not you personally, I mean a numerate, scientific type.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  75. Anonymous[815] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Yes, evaporation of water is lower due to less solar insolation, and you’d know that if you could read for yourself, or just put a pan of water outside and measure it for a few decades. That’s how scientists discovered global dimming. Really.

    But in the 1990s in Europe, Israel, and North America, scientists spotted something that at the time was considered very strange: the rate of evaporation was falling although they had expected it to increase due to global warming.[21]

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  76. Mr Darcy says:

    Good Lord. Pat, it’s not just “Paris,” and it’s not just “other French cities.” It’s the WHOLE COUNTRY, including rural farming hamlets. This is a real popular, identitarian uprising. On social media in France, the call has gone out to shut down the whole country on Monday the 10th.

    There is no global warming now. That ended three yrs ago with the beginning of the current Grand Solar Minimum. Climate is ALWAYS changing. It’s cyclical, just like the Grand Solar Minima. The current one is called The Eddy GSM. This is not a secret. Anybody can look it up.

  77. @Anonymous

    Strange definition of lying you’ve got – “writing that I don’t interpret very well”. I actually meant to write 10% of the land area (is in farmland). I did not write “affected”, so quit lying about what I wrote.

    I didn’t write anything about deforestation and desertification. Some of that are indeed real problems. I’ve not said that the local, or even portion-of-continent-wide climate cannot change due to man. It’s just this Global Cooling, oops, warming, ooops, Climate “Change” that is, though maybe some slight factor, not anything that can be modeled accurately at this time, and not a reason to make it one’s religion.

    I got your Martha Stewart TIG welding joke the first time. Not bad, but she could be taught to weld with inert gas, as she is one bright cookie. Teaching you about mathematical modeling is a non-starter.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  78. Anonymous[815] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Yes, “land gets colder,” briefly in the winter, when the Warm Arctic – Cold Continent effect is in force, while over the long-term average, it warms. This is still happening:

    Maybe you don’t get outside much?

  79. @Anonymous

    But in the 1990s in Europe, Israel, and North America, scientists spotted something that at the time was considered very strange: the rate of evaporation was falling although they had expected it to increase due to global warming.[21]

    Oh, I see, the global warming theory wasn’t panning out, so we had to add on a new theory.

    The proponents of phlogiston could really use a guy like you, Anonymous.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  80. @Mr Darcy

    Good Lord. Pat, it’s not just “Paris,” and it’s not just “other French cities.” It’s the WHOLE COUNTRY, including rural farming hamlets. This is a real popular, identitarian uprising.

    AWESOME! Here I am spending time with these ____, while I should be keeping up with this good news.

  81. anonymous[189] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Politicians like President Trump aren’t pushing economy-destroying accords. The Trump Administration’s EPA just put out a report that predicts 4°C rise from CO2 forcing, this century. Still, the recommendation is to do nothing. Because there is no solution. Go on, read the report. I heartily endorse it, as we ride our mechanical toys into extinction. Woohoo! I’m going to have plenty of fossil fueled fun while the fun lasts.

  82. Anonymous[274] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I’ve not mentioned “Global Cooling.” There is no “Global Cooling” happening. Stop putting words in my mouth that weren’t ever there. There is global dimming, which has fortuitously attenuated global warming somewhat. The confusion that you’re attempting to attribute to me is all yours.

  83. Anonymous[269] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    No, you don’t see, you deliberately obfuscate. Global warming is still in happening, even with global dimming now discovered. As far as last sentence, you’re projecting yet again. Do you do this as a matter of habit?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  84. anonymous[143] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr Darcy

    The current Grand Solar Minimum? LOL Where? Can you provide evidence of it? No, you can’t. Even if your frostie fantasy actually happens, it won’t have very little effect on global warming, as shown here:

    Feulner G., Rahmstorf S., 2010: On the Effect of a New Grand Minimum of Solar Activity on the Future Climate on Earth, Geophysical Research Letters, 37 (March 2010), L05707. doi:10.1029/2010GL042710

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  85. @Achmed E. Newman

    And plugging a seriously flawed dataset into the model just serves to make things worse.

  86. @anonymous

    I’d call a 1 degree change, out of a planetary average temperature of roughly 289 degrees kelvin, over 120 years to be a relatively stable system … the “alarming” part of the curves are all extrapolation.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Anon
  87. @Anonymous

    Do you even bother to look at the scales of the graphs you present as “proof?” If you look at the underlying data, you’ll find the variability is not statistically significant, so the trend cannot be confirmed. If you showed the full Kelvin scale, the line would almost look flat.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  88. Anonymous[372] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    Dumbass, you replied to the wrong post. The graph that disproves your lies is at #70, and there is zero “extrapolation.” Go take a look, it’s current data from the NASA satellites that disproves your lies about the data from the NASA satellites.

  89. Anonymous[372] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    Pray tell how it’s “seriously flawed.” What’s seriously flawed is your honesty, as the chart showing NASA satellite data with ground temperature data at comment #70 demonstrates. Are you deliberately avoiding it, and trying to muddy the waters here?

  90. Anonymous[108] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    LOL! Your lame assertion means that your whole life—or even homo sapiens’ existence—is not statistically significant, because if you show the full geological timeline of the earth over 4 billion years, you (or humans) don’t amount to a single pixel. 🙂 Try another clever trick, joker.

  91. Anon[117] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    Hey, Mr. “Arospace Engineer,” are all aircraft operating limitations graphs and aircraft engine operating limitations graphs not graphed to zero Kelvin statistically insignificant? I do not think you are actually an aerospace engineer. A real one would never say aircraft operating limitations graphs need to include zero Kelvin, much less the biological habitat limitation graphs discussed here.

  92. @Anon

    You are way out of your depth. Spend a little less time watching Bill Nye.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  93. @Anon

    Where did I say anything like that? The statistical insignificance is not affected by the scale, just made pictorially clear by it, SFB.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  94. @Achmed E. Newman

    Even if global warming is real, there’s not a hell of a lot we can do about it. The biggest driver toward global Armageddon, that usually goes unmentioned, is overpopulation. And it’s not overpopulation among whites, whose population is decreasing every year. It’s concentrated in the Third World, most specifically Africa, whose people are desperately trying to enter the First World as they can no longer feed their bulging masses.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  95. @anon

    “Middling intellect?” Perhaps you give Ocasio-Cortez too much credit?

  96. Sparkon says:

    Your arguments were:

    “Global warming is not caused by solar radiance”


    “Solar radiance changes due to sunspots have little effect on average global changes.”

    I have news for you. If the Sun stops shining, or if its output should suddenly decline, it will get very cold very quickly on planet Earth, and you’ll be burning the goalposts to stay warm rather than moving them.

    Our Sun is a variable star with small but measurable changes in total solar irradiance (TSI) over its short 11 year cycle, and even NASA notes that there is a direct correlation between sunspots and TSI.

    During periods of intense solar activity—characterized by peaks in sunspots, flares, and hotspots called faculae—TSI increases by approximately a tenth of a percent. Overall, TSI varies by approximately 0.1 percent—or about 2 watts per square meter between the most and least active part of an 11-year solar cycle.

    — NASA

    I said “short” 11 year cycle because in my view it is highly likely that our Sun also has longer cycles. Unfortunately, our somewhat accurate records go back only to the invention of the thermometer, or more precisely back to the institution of keeping temperature records, which for most locales means about 150-200 years of records, at best, but for some parts of the globe, there are virtually no long-term records at all, and of course even 200 years is a mere blink of the eye against the overall geological age of Earth. Indeed, the entire historical era is only about 5,000 years on a planet thought to be about 4.5 billion years old, so in some very important ways we are virtual ignoramuses about the very planet on which we live, but still the alarmists insist that “the science is settled.”

    Yes we do have some proxy data going back 350,000 years, as shown in your uncredited graph, thanks only to the fact that newly fallen snow acts like an airtight steel trap to encase wee samples of the atmosphere over thousands of millennia, which allows scientific sleuths with long reamers to tease out reconstructions of ancient temperatures and concentrations of atmospheric gases to the most precise degree.

    To paraphrase Tallulah Bankhead, those ice core data are about as pure airtight as the driven slush.

    If our Sun has longer cycles, then we might expect to find accounts of climate change in the historical record, such as the Viking colonization of Greenland during the Medieval Warm Period, and subsequent abandonment of their farms and ranches when the Little Ice Age rendered untenable farming and animal husbandry on the frozen island.

    However, it’s possible—probable, in fact—that the sun experiences sizable shifts in TSI over much longer time scales that could impact climate. For example, a 70-year period called the Maunder Minimum, which featured exceptionally low numbers of sunspots, is thought to be connected to a period of especially low TSI that helped drive Europe’s Little Ice Age.


  97. @Hebraic Hypocrite

    Eugenics was a popular idea among the intelligentsia in the early part of the 20th century, but was abandoned and blamed on the Germans, even though the concept was derived from Charles Darwin. We sure need to start thinking about eugenics today.

  98. Anonymous[132] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    LOL, you first say NASA satellite data shows, no warming, then a graph was provided that shows you lied about it showing no rise. Then you deflect about it being statistically insignificant. You’re the one out of your depth, dumbass. Just look at the graph on comment #70 again.

    You lied. You then deflect. You’re still losing. Not too smart in anybody’s book.

  99. @SafeNow

    Do you mean that Gavin Newson is not gonna stop all the forest fires, and provide free health care for every Californian, as he welcomes a million new immigrants (future democrat voters) into the state every year? (lol)

  100. Wow, this discussion has sure drifted way off from Buchanan’s essay and the Paris riots. In discussing the riots, Pat neglects to mention who might be causing most of the violence and property damage. What I found out from a few different videos is that Antifa is using the justified protests of the working class French, the Yellow Vests, as an excuse to engage in random violence, and that it is they who are breaking store windows as they go about stealing everything in sight. You can tell if Antifa was responsible as they spray paint an ‘A’ onto the businesses that they happily loot and destroy. But the press does not want to talk about Antifa. Sounds like the US and Charlottesville.

  101. @Anonymous

    Good grief, Disclaimer, there is a big difference between the definitions of “loose” and the correct usage “lose.”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  102. @Rurik

    I have seen it happen in my lifetime. While growing up in the 1930s the US population was 130 million and the world 2 billion. At the time China’s numbers were 500 million and India’s 300 million. We thought both were overpopulated. In the short space of my 90 years our population is 330 million plus, the world 7 billion plus and China and India each exceeding one billion. I have no estimates for the continent of Africa. I could sum it all up by saying the quality of life in most places is rapidly being strangled and climate change is not very high on the worry list of most non-scientists.

    • Agree: densa
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    , @Rurik
  103. Anonymous[225] • Disclaimer says:
    @Simply Simon

    Your voluntary efforts at editing the comment section are much appreciated, spelling nazi. Do you scrub toilets for free too?

    • Replies: @Simply Simon
  104. Anonymous[225] • Disclaimer says:

    Maybe you should read the article, which states “the world is warming faster than we thought and the disasters coming sooner than we thought.” Just a thought.

  105. @The Alarmist

    That’s quite right, Mr. Alarmist. The question is, what are the initial conditions? You need a starting point for a model that purports to predict change. Nobody ever says what the starting point is, and how you come up with initial conditions of all these variables.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  106. @Simply Simon

    AGREED!, Mr. Simon. Also, on this:

    … climate change is not very high on the worry list of most non-scientists.

    I’d say most scientists too – not all are attention whores.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  107. Anonymous [AKA "Bullright"] says:

    You got the right perspective, Pat. When you explain that State welfare model it sounds eerily similar to other domestic policy. I expect that poorer country policy works out something like they do here. In short, Gubmint pays states to enact or expand some noble thing. But the G-subsidy sunsets in four or five years, then states must pick up the whole tab themselves. So in four or five years states have a problem meeting that Gubmint mandate. Old problem shifted, new problem created in states.

  108. @follyofwar

    Agreed, but I’m not sure if it will be Armageddon, as seen in the movies, or more like widespread misery. Every single environmental problem, even if you believe the Global Climate Disruption(TM) crap, is exacerbated by overpopulation. Peak Stupidity has a discussion on this, using the simple example of the recycling of trash, in Toward Sustainable Stupidity.

  109. @follyofwar

    Wow, this discussion has sure drifted way off from Buchanan’s essay and the Paris riots.

    My bad. It’s just that Mr. Buchanan started off sounding pretty gullible.

  110. @Anonymous

    Here‘s your first bout of stupidity on display for all to see. This is where the dimming started, both in the conversation and in your brain.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  111. Rurik says:
    @Simply Simon

    in my lifetime. While growing up in the 1930s the US population was 130 million and the world 2 billion…

    In the short space of my 90 years our population is 330 million plus, the world 7 billion plus

    it is very stark and exponentially exploding. It’s like we’re on the Titanic, and the ship is foundering, but the captain is just telling everyone to get a (carbon tax) glass or thimble and just bail out with the thimble as the ocean seas pour in and sinks the ship.

    It’s madness, but you can’t argue with greed or hatred. They are not based on anything rational, so you can’t debate them intelligently.

    If you ask your typical La Raza member if he’d sacrifice every wild animal and red wood tree in California for the successful Reconquista of California from the gringos who stole it, I’m afraid I know how too many of them would answer.

    And likewise, if you ask your typical Chamber of Commerce type if he would be content with a barren wasteland of asphalt and ATMs, where once a national park stood, if it meant another million to his bottom line, well, that’s a no-brainer.

    So greed and racial hatreds will do it all in.

    climate change is not very high on the worry list of most non-scientists.

    or real scientists.

    The climate “scientists” telling us all that the ‘science is settled’, are not real scientists. Rather they’re whores. The Global Warming scam is intended to give the globalist elites the power to tax every last backwater on the planet. A true global enforcement scheme to loot the people and empower the globalist scum. So they’ve been spending billions of dollars buying “scientists” to shill their lies.

    When you hear of “scientists” blubbering about Climate Change, it’s just like “All sixteen intelligence services have all agreed that Saddam has WMD’, or Russia has hacked the election’, or Assad has used chemical weapons on his people’. All those ‘intelligence agencies’ are nothing but paid whores used to rubber stamp the lies du jour of the elite scumfucks who ensure their sinecures.

    It’s exactly the same with the Climate Change “scientists”.

    The real scientists all know that the glaring threat is over-population, but finding them is like finding honest intelligence officers – like England’s David Kelly. They are rare, and getting even rarer.

    Kudos on your many years, and may there be many more.

  112. Anonymous[316] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Global dimming, discovered by reduction in pan evaporation rate, is explained here, simply enough for a high schooler to understand. Might be above your level though.

    Global Dimming
    BBC | Horizon | Global Dimming | Season 41, Episode 9 | 2005

    And Google Scholar has About 4,620 results for “global dimming”, just in 2018. The only stupidity is yours, achmed.

  113. Anonymous[316] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Most scientists too? You haven’t really asked around, have you?

    • Replies: @Fidelios Automata
  114. There may be long-term rainfall and biome problems associated with climate change, but the idea that these extreme weather events are anything but random is pure bunk.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  115. @anonymous

    If climate change was real, the governments of the world would be pouring trillions into discovering an ACTUAL solution, not a stopgap marginal one like solar power. Thorium fission perhaps? This enforced energy conservation crap is pure class warfare.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  116. @Anonymous

    Because anti-warmist articles don’t get past the peer-review gatekeepers.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  117. Anon[324] • Disclaimer says:

    AFAIK, the “greatest manufacturing power in history” is today’s China. Most of America’s “manufacturing” was raw materials extracted from lands of tribes. Now, that the easy pickings are gone, the world returns to China dominance, also seen 300 years ago.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  118. Anonymous[332] • Disclaimer says:
    @Fidelios Automata

    Just like voodoo priest healing articles don’t get past peer review. Such discrimination! LOL

  119. Anonymous[419] • Disclaimer says:
    @Fidelios Automata

    It’s as real as E=MC2, even though nuclear weapons are pure crass warfare.

  120. Anonymous[184] • Disclaimer says:
    @Fidelios Automata

    Your denials are pure bunk.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  121. @Anonymous

    Inflation? In real estate? Ever heard of it? Peeople really like to live at the beach, and it didn’t help when for years their flood/hurricane insurance was subsidized by taxpayers.

    The hurricane that hit Galveston, TX in 1900 killed > 8,000 people. I don’t guess property damage was over a a few $100 million, but that’d be near $100 billion in today’s much more worthless dollars.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  122. @Anon

    Yes, that’s the ticket. There were no years 1940 to 2000… never happened….

    Reading, it’s not just about tweets, people. Give it a shot sometime.

  123. Anonymous[329] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Climate models do have a starting point, dumbass. Today. They model them backwards in time, and see how well the models model recorded climate data. Only if a model is accurate with historical data is is used to predict.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  124. Anonymous[329] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    The chart says “CPI-adjusted,” dumbass. That means adjusted for inflation.

    Can you even read?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  125. @Anonymous

    Modeling them backwards? Oh, yeah, I’ll buy that one, just like I’ll buy a beach house in Galveston, TX that’s not on 10′ stilts (you can put your cars and appliances down below). It’s called fudging.

    Any model made to model historical data can use any formulae/algorithms you want to make the output data work out how one wants. I already explained this to you back here; it would take a model actually accurately predicting the future climate to prove it out (only asking for ballpark numbers, too, as I wrote)*. Unfortunately we can’t do experiments on a whole planet-climate-wide scale, as one can do for some of the processes within (say, the radiation blocking by gases, cloud albedos, etc, water absorption of C02, etc).


    * This is due to the fact that I don’t trust these people any more than I trust next hurricane season to be benign based on some model that doesn’t work. That’s still my point, per comment #1 there, THERE’S NO WORKING MODEL OF THE EARTH’S CLIMATE. I’m not saying the concept of back-testing CAN’T work, but there’s way to much politics and subterfuge and just standard temptation of the scientists doing this math to make the corrections in the “right way” to make it all fit. It’s very easy to add “this correction” and “this other correction” and to rationalize these as just what one needs to “make the model work”. In something like this, it could add up to many thousands of small fudge factors (or really fudge tables, etc.) that show “yeah, it works great!”. Nope, show me some predictions now, save them, and we’ll talk in 5 years, or whatever timeframe you desire.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  126. @Anonymous

    Ahaa, I did miss that.


    a) Does beach real estate follow our government approved (off by ~ 100%) CPI?

    b) Are American beaches more or less populated than they were at the beginning of your time scale? I think I know the answer to that one – I’ve been to the beach a lot.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  127. Anonymous[332] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Modeling them backwards? Yes, with known historical climate data. Duh! If that’s a news item to you, you’re just revealing how utterly ignorant you are. How else would you construct a model, hmm? Oh, and when you bleat out your stupid lies in all caps, it doesn’t make them any more true.

    This is how good the climate models are, dumbass.

    Pretty damn accurate.

    Go piss and moan to NOAA about hurricane prediction models (also modeled first on historical data) and how you think you can improve them to be more accurate, even though they’re quite useful, dumbass.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  128. Anonymous[332] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Oh, the graph off by 100%, so the extreme weather disaster costs are actually worse than the NOAA says? You truly are a dumbass.

    • Disagree: densa
  129. @Anonymous

    I just got done spending time to explain to you, dude: Math models can be easily made to fit historical data. That does not at all mean they will work in predicting the future, which is the entire point of making them and doing the science. It’d take you 10 years to even get to the point of understanding this, but I don’t have the time, and I don’t get paid to argue with retards.

    No, there were 10 years of almost no hurricanes of even Cat I reaching the US, right after the forecasts 10 years ago of extreme hurricane seasons coming. You can’t do worse than that, even playing the one-armed bandits in Lost Wegas!

    I’ve to to go outside. Spending time arguing with retards is not only not-productive, but it’s a real time-suck, it turns out. From your first idiotic warming/dimming/civilizational collapse comment here, your stupidity has shined for all of us like a supernova on a moonless night.

    I’m so sorry, Pat – I don’t know the guy.

  130. Anonymous[840] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Yeah, you just got done, because I’ve humiliated you by showing repeatedly how stupid you are. And you keep doubling down on the stupid, stating that there were “almost no hurricanes.” When exactly was this, dumbass?

    Who knows what the hell you’re blabbering about with your statement “almost no hurricanes,” so lets go all the way back to 1880, with estimates for missing storms, just so the graph isn’t, as you put it, too “scary” for you.

    That data shows hurricanes increasing. But you say “Almost no hurricanes.” LOL

    And the above graphs are just storm numbers, not accounting for increase in tropical storm and hurricane power dissipation. I wouldn’t want you to get your panties twisted too tight.

    Apologize for yourself, dumbass.

  131. Anonymous[148] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I decided to show the increase in both Sea Surface Temperature and Storm Maximum Power Dissipation, just because you’re such a snowflake about all this, as you put it, “scary” data. Because, at heart, I’m such a fun-loving guy. It’s like a Halloween II movie or sumthin’, so grab a pretty girl and enjoy!

  132. @Anonymous

    I expected that reply, although I hoped it would not be a flame. “Loose” was not only a spelling error, it changed the thought of your sentence. Is it not too much to expect the posters on this site who normally possess above average intelligence to use correct grammar and spelling? And yes I have scrubbed toilets, but not for free.

    • Replies: @Anon
  133. Anonymous[260] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Reading your lies a little closer, I notice you qualified the hurricanes to those making landfall. Your full statement was, “No, there were 10 years of almost no hurricanes of even Cat I reaching the US…”

    Can you please show us the 10 year period of time to which you refer?

    And this, dear unz readers, is exactly how climate change denial is done: by bald-faced lies.

  134. @The Alarmist

    This the NWOrder to come…In France they called them the ZIO Jewish Rothchilds TAXES…The Zionist oligarchy will use the Climate Change farse to impose a Global taxes on fuel, Plastics,energy, and ofcourse WATER…the entire global goyim will have to LABOR to pay TAXES to the israeli Central bankers…TAX DEBT slavery…Kosher climate taxes.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  135. Anon[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @Simply Simon

    I hope catching typos helps you with your autism.

    • Replies: @Simply Simon
  136. Anonymous[238] • Disclaimer says:
    @Martin Lutero

    Where do you think the Jews are hiding the missing Arctic Sea ice?

  137. Anonymous[271] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    Where are the criminal elite hiding all the ice missing from Greenland and Antarctica?

    Is it maybe slipping through their greedy little fingers?

  138. Anonymous[139] • Disclaimer says:
    @Johnny Smoggins

    Are the purveyors of white guilt causing the daily mean temperatures for the Arctic area north of the 80th northern parallel to warm above average for 160+ days in a row?

  139. Anonymous[284] • Disclaimer says:

    And after war, human extinction from abrupt climate change, something else Trudeau won’t tell you.

  140. Anonymous[191] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    You should spend a little less time claiming charts you don’t like should be scaled until the trend line is one pixel thick. Statistically insignificant! LOL That’s just dishonest, and why I wouldn’t trust you to design a paper airplane. Go on, sperg about this chart:

  141. Anon[170] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Boston: MTI has announced the cancellation of class EEA 455 Mathematical Models in Electrical Engineering. Achmed, parroting Sarah Huckabee’s White House announcement on models, has effectively destroyed any trust in models. They obviously don’t work to predict anything, so we just won’t use them. Especially when they model things we don’t like. Magical thinking is back!

  142. @Anon

    Dream on. Your errors were not typos.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  143. Anonymous[421] • Disclaimer says:
    @Simply Simon

    Autistic grammar nazis like yourself will soon feel relief from the cage of persistent pain that you endure. The Trump Administration’s NHTSA has assured us of enough global warming this century—and it’ll happen decades sooner from self-reinforcing positive feedback loops—to “wipe out most life on the planet.” Now get back to the important task of popping your bubble wrap.

  144. Anonymous[358] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Do you plan on air conditioning the corn fields?

  145. anonymous[272] • Disclaimer says:

    That’s what I say! Human extinction from climate change—which is shifting into exponentially higher gear as self-reinforcing feedback loops spool up—will be much more fun with A Fistful of Dollars in my hand.

  146. Sparkon says:

    Anyone can draw lines on a graph. I like to call them squiggles. Just as words can be misleading or completely inaccurate, so too can the squiggles on a graph.

    Likewise, one can make a model do whatever one wants. GIGO. Making accurate models that mirror the original perfectly is a much more difficult if not virtually impossible task. As Achmed’s lectures argue, there is no valid working model of Earth’s climate. If there were, we would be able to predict the weather far into the future.

    This most recent graph you’ve posted from the NSF shows the predicted results of a climate crop model. Alas, actual reports of corn yield in Illinois and Iowa prove that particular climate crop crap model is completely inaccurate and entirely worthless, save perhaps to shysters depending on inaccurate corn yield forecasts.

    This graph reflects reported corn yields in Illinois since 1970. The dips in 1988 and 2012 were caused by drought, not heat.

    In 2012, the year of the major drought, average corn yield in Illinois was 105 bushels per acre, 64 bushels per acre below the 169 trend yield for that year. Since 2012, all Illinois state yields have been above trend: 13 bushels above trend in 2013, 32 in 2014, 3 in 2015, 22 in 2016, 22, 21 in 2017 and 23 in 2018.

    In its August Crop Production report, the National Agricultural Statistical Service (NASS) estimated the 2018 average yield for the state of Illinois at 207 bushels per acre. The 207 bushels would be an all-time record yield for Illinois, eclipsing the previous high of 201 bushels per acre set in 2017.

    In short, Illinois has had record corn harvests in the recent past despite all the hysteria about runaway global warming. In my experience, the dangers to Midwestern crops are floods in the Spring, and Summer drought, but hail storms and tornadoes can destroy crops too.

    Like the graph, that photograph you’ve posted has little value without location and date. As it is, the image looks pretty much like any Midwestern cornfield in October after harvest.

    But I’ll readily concede that your picture does show clearly that the sky is falling.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Anonymous
  147. Anonymous[281] • Disclaimer says:

    Achmed and you both parrot the bald-face lies widely available online, no different than the lies previously told by big tobacco, that it doesn’t cause cancer. In reality, there are accurate models of the climate, as demonstrated in this skeptical science article.

  148. Anonymous[315] • Disclaimer says:

    Regarding the corn: I stated that humans were put on earth by God to evaporate coal beds and oil fields into the atmosphere so that Earth can get back to it’s most stable climate, a Cretaceous-like hot house. Achmed suggests humanity’s only need would be air conditioning, and my retort was to remind him that we won’t be able to grow corn in Iowa in a Cretaceous hot house. Do you really think corn will be a viable crop in Iowa in a Cretaceous hot house? Do tell.

    As far as you trying to comfort yourself, you’re like a 40 year old smoker with incurable cancer who claims he feels just fine. It’s not a bad attitude, may as well go out happy when you can’t do much about it. That’s why I said in my very first post to buy a toy-hauler RV and motorcycle and burn as much fossil fuel as you can afford as we ride into extinction. I’m in agreement with the Trump Administration stating that we’ll see a 4°C rise, but damn all the expensive regulations on pollution. Conservation won’t change much, per Jeavon’s paradox, as Tim Garrett’s article, which I referenced, states. We’re on the Highway to Hell!

    P.S. If you think that corn picture looks like a typical October, take a closer look, and show me a single ear of corn. Those are stressed corn plants before they have even tasseled. Maybe you think kernels are just meaningless little squiggles too. 🙂

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
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS