Global warming err Climate change HOAX

[/dev/null]

http://www.city-journal.org/2015/cjc0402vdh.html

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Global Warming Climate Change Disruption Chaos has gotten so out of control that it has spread to Mars

 

According to Giorgio, Mars was destroyed by a nuclear war between ET species...

 

So. It's probably that.

[gr8billsfan]

 

Of course I'm talking in the future, not immediately. But you're wrong, this planet cannot sustain billions and billions of people, the issues are resources and space -- both of which are extremely limited for the 7 billion people we have now -- let alone the projected 20+ billion by the turn of the century. 13 billion more people are expected to be on this blue marble within the next 80 years.

 

Greed is the result of scarcity and competition, not natural state of humanity or even our society despite the hype. And greed will only become more of a Darwinian trait of survival the more we populate our one and so far only home.

Of course that's apart of the problem, along with many others. I think it's the individuals who notice things like this, usually for the most part want to help. I believe that people want to help each other, naturally, unless threatened right? It's irresponsible that we're doing this to ourselves. Is there a plan? I'd like to think so of course, duh.

[Greg F]

-- let alone the projected 20+ billion by the turn of the century. 13 billion more people are expected to be on this blue marble within the next 80 years.

 

Where are you getting these projections? To reach 20 billion by the end of the century world fertility rates, which have been declining since the mid 1960's would have to start increasing. Even if fertility rates remained unchanged for the next 85 years, which is highly unlikely, the world would only hit about 16 billion by the turn of the next century.

[B-Man]

The Mask Slips on the Climate Scam

by Stephen Hayward

 

Forget the scientific argument over climate change for the moment, or for that matter, assume that climate catastrophe is a certainty for purposes of discussion. From the beginning the climatistas and their media cheerleaders have confined all policy discussion to one single track: suppress fossil fuels, even though no affordable, scalable substitutes for hydrocarbon energy is in sight.

 

The practical ideas for the suppression of hydrocarbon energy have taken two forms: the favorite is emissions trading (“cap and trade”), which failed in Congress when Democrats still enjoyed large majorities in both houses, chiefly because the Waxman-Markey cap and trade bill was so chock full of special interest deals and cross subsidies that it became apparent even to honest environmentalists (yes—they meet in a phone booth at DuPont Circle) that the bill was a mockery of serious climate legislation.

 

The second idea, which finds some favor among some conservatives and even libertarians, is a carbon tax. To be sure, in the abstract, a carbon tax would allow the diffuse mechanism of prices to dictate how people should change the energy mix, which is far superior to the arcane world of emissions trading. And it is often suggested, as I observed George Shultz doing here a little while ago, that a “revenue-neutral” carbon tax could be rebated to taxpayers, or used to reduce other taxes (corporate income? capital gains?) that retard economic growth and efficiency.

 

All of this is prologue to understanding why our political class can’t be trusted with a carbon tax, no matter what you think the evidence for global warming is. The New York Times today reports that Washington state governor Jay Inslee wants a carbon tax . . . to pay for education and transportation:

 

He has proposed collecting a new charge on emissions from oil refineries, power plants and other industries that would reap an estimated $1.3 billion in the first year. But in contrast to similar systems in California and the Northeast, energy experts said,

Mr. Inslee’s plan would use most of the new revenue for education and transportation rather than on climate or energy projects.

 

 

We’re always told that revenue from emissions trading or a carbon tax will be used for energy and climate change adaptation purposes. But Inslee has let the mask slip and made obvious that it is a lie. Liberal politicians especially are drooling for a carbon tax as a new revenue source. It isn’t going to be rebated to taxpayers. It isn’t going to be used as a bargaining chip for a decent tax reform. It’s going to be used to pay for more government goodies.

 

Inslee isn’t the first to let the mask slip. In California, Jerry Brown is planning to use emissions trading funds to pay for his high-speed-rail-to-nowhere project, on the ludicrous grounds that high-speed rail will reduce emissions. (The opposite is likely the case.)

 

No one should fall for the carbon tax trap.

 

 

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/04/the-mask-slips-on-the-climate-scam.php

 

 

.

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Where are you getting these projections? To reach 20 billion by the end of the century world fertility rates, which have been declining since the mid 1960's would have to start increasing. Even if fertility rates remained unchanged for the next 85 years, which is highly unlikely, the world would only hit about 16 billion by the turn of the next century.

 

That particular stat was found up my ass, I confess. It's only 11 according to the highest projections.

[DC Tom]

That particular stat was found up my ass, I confess.

But it's still scientific if there's consensus.

[Very wide right]

Glad too see my post has opened some eyes to the fake religion of Global warming .Just returned from the Caymans where I spend my winters.Heard Buffalo had record cold last February for the entire month!!! I wonder how the libs were able to spin that ! LOL

[Jauronimo]

Glad too see my post has opened some eyes to the fake religion of Global warming .Just returned from the Caymans where I spend my winters.Heard Buffalo had record cold last February for the entire month!!! I wonder how the libs were able to spin that ! LOL

Very wide, I'd like you to meet gatorman, birddog, Clayton, and jugdish. Super, you should have lots to talk about!

[Dante]

So much like there hasn't been any new power plants built in Cali there also hasn't been any new reservoirs built since the 70s maybe? So the combination of doubling the population in Cali since then not a lot of rain the last couple years we have kind of manufactured water shortage. All this to charge us more?

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/jan/31/pols-cant-make-rain-can-build-reservoirs/?#article-copy

[DC Tom]

Glad too see my post has opened some eyes to the fake religion of Global warming .Just returned from the Caymans where I spend my winters.Heard Buffalo had record cold last February for the entire month!!! I wonder how the libs were able to spin that ! LOL

You're an idiot.

[Dante]

You're an idiot.

Ok now I have to protest. Guy winters in the Caymans he's not a idiot!

[DC Tom]

Ok now I have to protest. Guy winters in the Caymans he's not a idiot!

He comes back...

[Beef Jerky]

Glad too see my post has opened some eyes to the fake religion of Global warming .Just returned from the Caymans where I spend my winters.Heard Buffalo had record cold last February for the entire month!!! I wonder how the libs were able to spin that ! LOL

And the west had a horrible drought... I don't think you understand any of this.

[Dante]

He comes back...

lol..he really is a idiot.

[Chef Jim]

He comes back...

Super duper first class idiot.

[3rdnlng]

Ah, let's mix global warming climate change and class warfare on the government's people's dime:

 

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2015/04/obama-climate-war-immigrants-people-of-color-limited-english-proficiency-at-highest-risk/

 

President Obama has unleashed the federal government’s vast resources to combat global warming and the ammunition of choice is a cornucopia of fraud science, executive fiat, misuse of private health data andSolyndra-style corruption.

It’s a costly war initiated by the commander-in-chief last year and this week Americans are getting an update on the first batch of casualties. The mission’s name is Climate Data Initiative and it mobilized the entire federal government to stimulate innovations that empower communities and businesses to boost their own resilience against the impacts of global warming. This week the administration announced some of the findings of these new taxpayer-funded committees which are charged with helping us better understand, communicate and reduce the health impacts of climate change, especially in minority communities that the administration assures will be disproportionately impacted.

The big announcement includes a special report published by an Obama-created entity called U.S. Global Change Research Program that coordinates the climate change activities and research of more than a dozen federal agencies. The draft offers a peek into global warming’s projected impacts, including change on human health in the United States, weather and climate extremes, air quality, vector borne diseases, water and food-related issues, mental health and wellbeing, and risks facing vulnerable segments of the population, such as children, the elderly and people with existing health conditions. The 21-page reportopens in dramatic fashion, proclaiming that “climate change is a significant threat to the health of the American people.”

The document largely blames “human-induced” climate change for global warming and asserts that “every American is vulnerable to the health impacts associated with climate change.” However, certain demographics are more vulnerable and will experience more suffering, according to the special global warming committee findings. “While all Americans are at risk some populations of concern are disproportionately vulnerable, including those with low income; some communities of color; those with limited English proficiency; immigrant groups; persons with functional disabilities; and persons with preexisting or chronic medical conditions.”

[OCinBuffalo]

That doesn't prove this isn't global warming. It could be

Right, and now it's left to us to prove it isn't, and therefore, we have to prove a negative. No. You say Global Warming, its on YOU to prove what you say, everything, all of it. "Could be" is not "is", and therefore, you fail. Now run along and go find conclusive, reproducable results, or STFU. It should be no trouble for you, since "consensus", "settled science", and it's only ~1 year from me opening my Battery Park Kiaks business.

 

I'm inviting everyone at PPP to come down for my Grand Opening in 2016. It's going to be hilarious. This is the 1 and only thing I can guarantee.

I don't care what you call it, but here's my take on it. Within the last couple hundred years, humans have polluted our world in numerous of ways, with the majority leading to air pollution. The climate changes in multiple regions across the Earth is because of it, the poles are heating up, and some particular locations get random "cold fronts" or "heat waves" that may be out of the ordinary. I do know that the records that mankind has been recording for the last several decades does show that the carbon dioxide levels in our atmosphere have increased, DUH. That's widely given that we have hundreds of millions of cars eating up gallons of gasoline a week. The emissions that pollute our airwaves definitely effect our atmospheric environment. There's also the fact that we've lost a lot of biodiversity around the globe. Along with that is the limitless population US humans are producing, which in turns eats up more resources, making the resources thinner until we're eventually screwed.

 

It doesn't matter if the world is heating up, the motion is in place, what we can do is prepare for it or at least strategically put together a plan for our countries well-being. This world is a crazy place and anything can happen, just live on, do your best, inform others, and try to reach a state of harmony. As hippie-ish that may sound, it's better than violence, lol.

 

At least we're confronting the issue, my question is What can we do about the inevitable climate change, it'll happen whether our pollution is speeding the process or not?

Within the last 3 million years, all sorts of things have polluted our world, with all sorts of things. Volcanoe have done more polluting than man....by a lot. And, wrong: The South Pole is not "heating up", in fact, the opposite is happening, but, you don't know that, do you? Ask yourself why you said "the poles are heating up". Why did that piece of non-fact just roll so casually off your keyboard? I know why, but you don't.

 

I wonder how much biodiversity was lost during the last Ice Age, or solar flare bombardment, or when thee comet that we think killed the dinosaurs hit? All of these have a hell of a lot more data backing them up, than, once again, your fact-free assertion that we "have lost a lot of biodiversity". Compared to what? What's the baseline for that? The same answer as last time: you're parroting something you've heard, but don't understand.

 

If you actually thought about this for yourself, you'd be asking "compared to what? What is the baseline?", and you wouldn't require others to do it for you. But you aren't, are you? Why not? DUH Because you haven't done any personal review of the material/expended any personal thought on this topic/applied any of your own intellectual rigor to this topic whatsoever. You're not in the habit.

 

Well, here at PPP? You're going to develop new habits, I assure you.

 

Seems like the rest of the killers here gave you a newbie pass. Fine. I can respect that. My respect for that ends with this post however, meat.

 

This planet is beautiful and can provide for the needs for billions of people, the problem becomes greed. However, that's the society we live in . If we were to leave tis planet, I don't believe Mars is a great option of sustaining the human population, quite yet.

Greed is not the problem. Stupidity is. Humans have always had much more to fear from the stupid than the greedy. Greed requires a plan. Stupidity requires nothing. Sure, greedy people can create stupid plans, but not near as often or as likely as stupid people creating stupid plans, or no plan at all.

 

Right now we have both stupid AND greedy people taking half-baked science, or no science at all, pretending it is 100% settled and then trying to enforce massive, sweeping policy changes on the entire world, with the very real consequences of causing, not preventing, a global economic crisis, which would cause, not prevent, a global war. And what's worse? Most of them are doing it purely because of greed for power and/or $. It's all short term gain: so it doesn't matter if the "science" ever holds long term. All that matters is can they take they today $ and run?

 

This is, by definition, stupidity. The only thing the "science" has proved so far? We have no idea what we are doing. It may even be that we are preventing/delaying an Ice Age by sheer accident.

 

But, we should stop using oil immediately because "they say so"? F them. As I said, I'd rather trust a greedy Wall Street guy with plan, than a moron enviro with her "cap and trade" == Solyndra x1000 plan. Yeah, there was no greed involved with any of the "green" venture capital projects that Obama has wasted billions of our $s on. Yeah, no enviro is ever greedy, and AL Gore hasn't made any $ on this scam at all.

 

Speaking of stupidity, why are you so willing to trust the same people who gave us Obamacare? What, do you think their intellectual capacity/performance auto-improves from one issue to the next? (Never understand: LBJ was an "idiot" for Viet Nam, but Medicare/Medicaid/Welfare are all "smart"? WTF? No they aren't, and not one of them is currently operating as intended or designed.)

 

Mars ain't the kind of place to raise a kid. In fact its cold as hell.

Please come to Mars to save the planet,

it's canyons are so deep if you fall in, then you cain't be found

You can grow oxygen-deprived mutations

Please come to Mars

She said "No, boy, would you come home to me".

 

Of course that's apart of the problem, along with many others. I think it's the individuals who notice things like this, usually for the most part want to help. I believe that people want to help each other, naturally, unless threatened right? It's irresponsible that we're doing this to ourselves. Is there a plan? I'd like to think so of course, duh.

The natural state of people in the USA is: indifference. Especially to happy horseshit "causes". Sure if they see a neighbor that needs a quick hand, you got it, but "Global Warming"? No. That's why we now use marketing as philanthropy here. As in: "Yes, here's my $1 for whatevertheF, now give me my Taco Bell and STFU, because I gotta go".

 

This is not Europe. We have schit to do here. We don't relish an adulthood spent F'ing about in college bars/bistros 6 hours a day and pretending that = being a productive member of our society. However, these bars/bistros are the very places from which nonsense like Obamacare, Global Warming, the Stimulus, and every other stupid idea that Obama has tried and failed originate. Then, when they fail, the people who failed are held accountable for nothing, and promptly return to their 6 hours a day of college bar BS.

 

That is precisely why the enviros had to go with words like "denier". They had to shake people out of indifference. However, once again, they went full stupid. While shaking people out of indifference is good, it doesn't guarantee what will happen next. However, in typical college-borne lazy/arrogant fashion, they thought the "denier" plan would be more than enough to drive all of this through. "They had this." Especially since they think we are all idiots.

 

However, unfortunately for them, and, as you will see over and over here with gatorman: amongst large swaths of the US population, and certainly here at PPP, the liberals are usually the dumbest people in the room, not the smartest. The enviros never considered that when you shake me/people like me out of indifference, you better have a damn good reason. I WILL ask why, and start poking holes in the reason given if it sucks. And, if you start trying to put an "=" between me...and a F'ing Holocaust denier ...for doing that, because you can't prove what you are saying?

 

Forget poking the bear. No. The bear is now going to eat you whole.

Ah, let's mix global warming climate change and class warfare on the government's people's dime:

 

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2015/04/obama-climate-war-immigrants-people-of-color-limited-english-proficiency-at-highest-risk/

 

President Obama has unleashed the federal government’s vast resources to combat global warming and the ammunition of choice is a cornucopia of fraud science, executive fiat, misuse of private health data andSolyndra-style corruption.

It’s a costly war initiated by the commander-in-chief last year and this week Americans are getting an update on the first batch of casualties. The mission’s name is Climate Data Initiative and it mobilized the entire federal government to stimulate innovations that empower communities and businesses to boost their own resilience against the impacts of global warming. This week the administration announced some of the findings of these new taxpayer-funded committees which are charged with helping us better understand, communicate and reduce the health impacts of climate change, especially in minority communities that the administration assures will be disproportionately impacted.

The big announcement includes a special report published by an Obama-created entity called U.S. Global Change Research Program that coordinates the climate change activities and research of more than a dozen federal agencies. The draft offers a peek into global warming’s projected impacts, including change on human health in the United States, weather and climate extremes, air quality, vector borne diseases, water and food-related issues, mental health and wellbeing, and risks facing vulnerable segments of the population, such as children, the elderly and people with existing health conditions. The 21-page reportopens in dramatic fashion, proclaiming that “climate change is a significant threat to the health of the American people.”

The document largely blames “human-induced” climate change for global warming and asserts that “every American is vulnerable to the health impacts associated with climate change.” However, certain demographics are more vulnerable and will experience more suffering, according to the special global warming committee findings. “While all Americans are at risk some populations of concern are disproportionately vulnerable, including those with low income; some communities of color; those with limited English proficiency; immigrant groups; persons with functional disabilities; and persons with preexisting or chronic medical conditions.”

Ah I knew it!

 

Global Warming is a Racist! That's it! Sensitivity training for 4 weeks! No time off.

 

Or is it....

 

Well, clearly Global Warming has a problem with systemic racism. Boy, if that hurricane hears broken English, oh man, no matter what, it's going after those people, while it tends to leave others unscathed. I mean these are the statistics. Poor people tend to live on the coasts, especially new immigrants, because for some reason they don't move inland. (I don't think having little $, not knowing the country, or finding communities of their former countrymen has anything to do with it.) Global Warming is going to cause 3 ft of water in NYC. But, that nothing to do with this. Duh, the immigrants are going to get hit because of systemic racism that is pervasive within the Global Warming system. Oh, and Global Warming really hates retards, so gatorman is in big trouble. He's going to come home one day and find half his trailer has been melted.

 

It's always a shock when people of means are less affected by natural disasters then the poor. I mean, it's not like they have better houses, live in the suburbs/on higher ground, have insurance or more/better insurance, or can afford to miss a few weeks of work/will still have a job if they do. And what's worse, none of these things are a result of them working hard/making good choices/sacrificing/sound long term planning. Nah. The guy who Fs around playing the lottery all day at the convenient store? Nobody knows why he is more likely to end up dead in a natural disaster. It's a mystery.

 

But somehow, white male privilege is going to be at the root cause of this. It always is!

Edited April 10, 2015 by OCinBuffalo

[boyst]

WSJ Californias Farm Water Scapegoat

 

 

....The reality is that farm water has already been rationed for more than two decades by the ascendant green politics, starting with the 1992 federal Central Valley Project Improvement Act. Federal protections for the delta smelt, salmon, steelhead and sturgeon (2008-2009) further restricted water pumping at the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, so 76% of inflows, mainly from the Sierra Nevada mountains, spill into San Francisco Bay.

 

​...Meanwhile, the Bay Area currently imports a large share of its pristine water (among the cheapest in the state) and some of its hydropower electricity from the glacial Hetch Hetchy valley in Yosemite. So its water isn’t diverted to protect fish. But imagine if the government mandated that Hetch Hetchy be restored to its pre-development state. Water and power rates would spike. Marijuana growers and distributors—cannabis consumes about twice as much water as lettuce—would shut down or (horrors) raise their prices.

 

Blame the potheads.

[Gary M]

Ah, let's mix global warming climate change and class warfare on the government's people's dime:

 

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2015/04/obama-climate-war-immigrants-people-of-color-limited-english-proficiency-at-highest-risk/

 

“While all Americans are at risk some populations of concern are disproportionately vulnerable, including those with low income; some communities of color; those with limited English proficiency; immigrant groups; persons with functional disabilities; and persons with preexisting or chronic medical conditions.”

 

 

And all along I thought that the rising oceans would only hurt evil rich white people that live on the coast.

Edited April 13, 2015 by Gary M