With Climate Change, Christmas Might Be Cancelled!

If it is a day ending in a Y, it must be a day where the climate alarmists are trying to scare kids. Build-A-Bearville.com goes completely chicken little with an attempt to scare kids with a 3 part video (via Big Government, found via Climate Depot). Here is part 2

The transcript (1:07-2:22):

Girl Elf: Santa, it’s gone!

Papa Elf: It’s gone, It’s gone!

Santa: What’s gone?

Girl Elf: Tell ‘em, Dad!

Papa Elf: The North Peak.

Santa: A mountain? A mountain’s gone? How is that possible?

Ella the polar bear: Santa, sir, that’s why I’m here. That’s why we’re here. The ice is melting!

Santa: Yes, my dear, we know, the climate is changing. There’s bound to be a little melting.

Ella: It’s worse than that, Santa, a lot worse! At the rate it’s melting, the North Pole will be gone by Christmas!”

Santa: My, my…all of this gone by next Christmas? I don’t think so.

Ella: No sir, not next Christmas, this Christmas! The day after tomorrow!

Big Government says the rest of the videos are just as bad, and, they are correct. Parts one and three here and here.

Why do you do this, Climahysterics? If the science was so sound, it could stand on its own, instead of you folks constantly going bat sh*t crazy and trying to scare people. I mean, heck, The Guardian is saying that globull warming needs a Pearl Harbor moment. Do you agree with this kind of insanity?

BTW, world leaders were avoiding Obama in Dopenhagen. And Arctic Sea ice decline has been much bigger than today.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

6 Responses to “With Climate Change, Christmas Might Be Cancelled!”

  1. Trish says:

    Propaganda, insipid biased TV shows and kid movies and the vast indoctrination of our children in schools as well is how the (commie/marxist/anti-American) world will achieve the “change” they are hoping for, dontcha know. It is so terribly wrong, and so terribly predictable.

  2. brs says:

    Creepy stuff like this wouldn’t be necessary if folks like you would not proffer opinions on topics you are completely unable to adjudicate, like AGW.

    Unfortunately, your ilk has come up with such a disinformation campaign that this sort of thing has to be done to counter it.

    You lie about scientific consensus:



    But everyone else has to play nice?

    And on what basis do you disagree with AGW when
    1. YOu cannot adjudicate the evidence yourself for lack of expertise

    2. Most scientists disagree with you

    What argument that the tiny minority (see above) of QUALIFIED (i.e., scientist in THAT field, not some CS guy who signs a bogus petition) scientists is so compelling vs. the majority?

    What about the majority’s work to answer those scientits do you find not compelling?

    And I ask again: what evidence WOULD you find convincing? If the answer is nothing, then my point is proven

  3. brs says:

    Thanks for proving my point Trish. You have no idea whether AGW is true or not.

    “Marxists, Commies… No AGW!”

    …is not ascientific reasoning.

    YOu cannot answer scientific questons with political answers.

  4. Most scientist, huh? Actually, no. Thousands upon thousands have signed petitions saying AGW is a load of bunk.

    Global warming is real, man caused global warming is not. The method from the alarmists goes

    1. it has gotten warmer
    2. Man releases CO2, which is a greenhouse gas
    3. Man must be at fault
    4. CO2 continues to go up, yet, the temps in the 40’s to end of the 70’s went down, and the current trend is flat or going down, so, we’ll call it climate change, and blame cold weather on a greenhouse gas.

    It is up to you alarmists to prove your hypothesis. The rest of us can stand on billions of years of history.

  5. brs says:

    “It is up to you alarmists to prove your hypothesis. ”

    1. Science doesn’t prove things. This is not a trivial distinction – we NEVER say prove for good reason.
    2. AGW isn’t a hypothesis. The prediction that x or y will happen consistent with a particular theory is a hypothesis. But it is up to scientists to show, through conformation of many hypotheses (convergent evidence being esepcially important here), that AGW is the theory that best explanations what’s happening
    3. Short term fluctuations cannot in themselves confirm any hypotheses regarding long term trends.They are a big problem, but not insurmountable.
    4. YOur argument is a straw man – there’s much more covergent evidence than this notion of “temp” in a vaccuum – which reminds me….
    5. …to simply say temperature is going up or down w/o specifying ocean, air, which depth or altitude is simply absurd, and demonstrates that you’re not familiar with the science being done. “Temp”, alone, is meaningless for this discussion for many methodological reasons.
    6. You’ve thought a lot about this, yet in your brief communication you say the following:
    “Global warming is real, man caused global warming is not.”
    “the current trend is flat or going down”
    So is it getting warmwer or not? MAybe you’re speaking generically of how the Earth traps more heat than it’s black body temp? If so, why isn’t this process effected by more GHGes?

    So basically, you seem to be lacking in your basic understanding of how science works and you mistate (probably becasue you don’t understand, I’m not saying you’re lying) the arguments behind the current best understanding.

    Yet, you feel good that you know better than vast majority of the scientific community?

    Now, you might be right by mistake. But you are in no position to know one way or another, as you’ve amply demonstrated.

    Science is not politics

  6. Otter says:

    Most of BSr’s talking points have been disproved. I invite him to visit C3


    Where he will find links to a great many peer-reviewed papers which counter virtually every claim made by the heavily biased, data-manipulated-and-cherry-picked, hide-the-decline scientists who are quoted in the IPCC reports.

Pirate's Cove