Climate Cult Exploits Harvey

[Dashinka 23,199]

By Julie Kelly| September 1, 2017

 

Shortly before Donald Trump’s inauguration in January, meteorologist and climate writer Eric Holthaus unleashed a Twitter torrent confessing his depression about the new president. Holthaus admitted he was seeing a counselor due to his “climate despair” and whimpered that it was difficult to work or do much of anything. 

“We don’t deserve this planet,” Holthaus tweeted. “There are (many) days when I think it would be better off without us.”

But Hurricane Harvey has apparently boosted Holthaus’ spirits. He is working at a feverish pace now, churning out a number of “I-told-you-so” articles and interviews. By Monday, Holthaus had already penned an overwrought article for Politico, where he wags a literary finger at us:

.

.

.

Roger Pielke, Jr. is a leading expert on extreme weather; he has been personally and professionally attacked by climate alarmists for his scientific evidence debunking the false claim that climate change causes more extreme weather events such as hurricanes. “Scientific assessments, including those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the U.S. government’s latest National Climate Assessment, indicate no long-term increases in the frequency or strength of hurricanes in the U.S. Neither has there been an increase in floods, droughts, and tornadoes, though heat waves and heavy precipitation have become more common,” Pielke wrote in Friday’s Wall Street Journal. 

He denounced those politicizing Harvey, noting “without data to support their wilder claims, climate partisans have now resorted to shouting that every extreme weather event was somehow ‘made worse’ by the emission of greenhouse gases.” Pielke suggests a better solution is to focus on preparing for weather catastrophes rather than assigning blame.

But alas, laying blame is what liberals and Democratic politicians do best. Rather than make a compelling case based on science or evidence, they exploit tragedy to advance their agenda, which has less to do with science and everything to do with control. Whether it’s a massive storm, violence in an American college town, or a mass shooting, these folks only know how to reflexively respond with emotion. A destructive deluge in America’s fourth largest city is no exception.

 

https://amgreatness.com/2017/09/01/climate-cult-exploits-harvey/

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

29 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

By Julie Kelly| September 1, 2017

 

Shortly before Donald Trump’s inauguration in January, meteorologist and climate writer Eric Holthaus unleashed a Twitter torrent confessing his depression about the new president. Holthaus admitted he was seeing a counselor due to his “climate despair” and whimpered that it was difficult to work or do much of anything. 

“We don’t deserve this planet,” Holthaus tweeted. “There are (many) days when I think it would be better off without us.”

But Hurricane Harvey has apparently boosted Holthaus’ spirits. He is working at a feverish pace now, churning out a number of “I-told-you-so” articles and interviews. By Monday, Holthaus had already penned an overwrought article for Politico, where he wags a literary finger at us:

.

.

.

Roger Pielke, Jr. is a leading expert on extreme weather; he has been personally and professionally attacked by climate alarmists for his scientific evidence debunking the false claim that climate change causes more extreme weather events such as hurricanes. “Scientific assessments, including those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the U.S. government’s latest National Climate Assessment, indicate no long-term increases in the frequency or strength of hurricanes in the U.S. Neither has there been an increase in floods, droughts, and tornadoes, though heat waves and heavy precipitation have become more common,” Pielke wrote in Friday’s Wall Street Journal. 

He denounced those politicizing Harvey, noting “without data to support their wilder claims, climate partisans have now resorted to shouting that every extreme weather event was somehow ‘made worse’ by the emission of greenhouse gases.” Pielke suggests a better solution is to focus on preparing for weather catastrophes rather than assigning blame.

But alas, laying blame is what liberals and Democratic politicians do best. Rather than make a compelling case based on science or evidence, they exploit tragedy to advance their agenda, which has less to do with science and everything to do with control. Whether it’s a massive storm, violence in an American college town, or a mass shooting, these folks only know how to reflexively respond with emotion. A destructive deluge in America’s fourth largest city is no exception.

 

https://amgreatness.com/2017/09/01/climate-cult-exploits-harvey/

Favourite climate myths by Roger Pielke Sr

https://www.skepticalscience.com/Roger_Pielke_Sr_arg.htm

 

Below are many of the climate myths used by Roger Pielke Sr plus how often each myth has been used.

Climate myths by Pielke Sr	What the Science Says	Usage
"Models are unreliable"	Models successfully reproduce temperatures since 1900 globally, by land, in the air and the ocean.	5
"Oceans are cooling"	The most recent ocean measurements show consistent warming.	3
"Global warming stopped in 1998, 1995, 2002, 2007, 2010, ????"	Global temperature is still rising and 2010 was the hottest recorded.	2
"Sea level rise is decelerating"	Global sea level data shows that sea level rise has been increasing since 1880 while future sea level rise predictions are based on physics, not statistics.	2
"IPCC is alarmist"	Numerous papers have documented how IPCC predictions are more likely to underestimate the climate response.	2
"Arctic sea ice has recovered"	Thick arctic sea ice is in rapid retreat.	1
"It's not happening"	There are many lines of evidence indicating global warming is unequivocal.	1
"The IPCC consensus is phoney"	113 nations signed onto the 2007 IPCC report, which is simply a summary of the current body of climate science evidence	1
"Skeptics were kept out of the IPCC?"	Official records, Editors and emails suggest CRU scientists acted in the spirit if not the letter of IPCC rules.	1
"It's cooling"	The last decade 2000-2009 was the hottest on record.	1
"Increasing CO2 has little to no effect"	The strong CO2 effect has been observed by many different measurements.	1

[Dashinka 23,199]

So tell me how global warming accounts for the fact that 14 major tropical cyclones made landfall in the US between 1926 and 1969, but only 4 have done so from 1970 through 2017?  Aren't we much warmer now, so shouldn't the frequency and intensities of storms be reversed for those periods?

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

[Dashinka 23,199]

4 minutes ago, Il Mango Dulce said:

Predictable.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

17 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

So tell me how global warming accounts for the fact that 14 major tropical cyclones made landfall in the US between 1926 and 1969, but only 4 have done so from 1970 through 2017?  Aren't we much warmer now, so shouldn't the frequency and intensities of storms be reversed for those periods?

 

 I don't know your data is right. Source? 

 

 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

6 minutes ago, Il Mango Dulce said:

 I don't know your data is right. Source? 

 

 

  I don't know where this discussion is going to end up, but I'm pretty sure facts aren't going to help.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

Just now, Steeleballz said:

 

  I don't know where this discussion is going to end up, but I'm pretty sure facts aren't going to help.

I know right, I needed the typing exercise so there is that.

[Dashinka 23,199]

19 minutes ago, Il Mango Dulce said:

I know right, I needed the typing exercise so there is that.

You are right the fact that 1926-1969 had more major landfall storms by a factor of 3 than the period of 1970-2017 won't matter to the followers of Reverend Al Gore.  You will also most likely attack the person stating the fact, but historical records don't matter to the true believers.

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/29/harvey-blamed-on-climate-change-despite-hurricane-/

 

 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

7 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

You are right the fact that 1926-1969 had more major landfall storms by a factor of 3 than the period of 1970-2017 won't matter to the followers of Reverend Al Gore.  You will also most likely attack the person stating the fact, but historical records don't matter to the true believers.

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/29/harvey-blamed-on-climate-change-despite-hurricane-/

 

 

 

Are you attacking my faith? 

[Dashinka 23,199]

3 minutes ago, Il Mango Dulce said:

Are you attacking my faith? 

So you admit it is pure faith?

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

13 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

So you admit it is pure faith?

Nothing I say, do or believe if pure so no.  I just didnt want ot you to breach the TOS be attacking what you are calling fath.

[Dashinka 23,199]

Just now, Il Mango Dulce said:

Nothing I say, do or believe if pure so no.  I just didnt want ot you to breach the TOS be attacking what you are calling fath.

So I am still waiting for a global warming reason for the number of major storms hitting the US question.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

So I am still waiting for a global warming reason for the number of major storms hitting the US question.

I am still waiting for apoligies fo attacking my faith. 

[Dashinka 23,199]

Just now, Il Mango Dulce said:

I am still waiting for apoligies fo attacking my faith. 

My question was first, but if you feel my statement was a violation to the TOS, feel free to hit the report button.  Keep in mind that doing this admits that global warming is in fact a religion.