Look, when it comes to the climate alarmists, there is a range that goes from plain silly, to moonbat, on to barking moonbat, unhinged tools, DERP, then there is “dude, you should be involuntarily locked up and the key thrown away.” Guess which one this is
If someone told all the parents of the world that there was a 98 percent chance that radical environmental changes in the next 10 – 50 years will wipe out half of all known life forms on earth, and that famine, plagues, floods and droughts on a scale not seen in thousands of years would become routine for billions of people, you would think they would tell their kids.
I think most would tell their kids to stay away from the crazy man in the dirty raincoat, and then call the cops on the dude who took too much PCP.
Well most climate scientists in the world have been telling us that, but we don’t do anything about it.
Really? Where? When? Could you perhaps supply some links to some scientific papers on the subject that tell that story, Rich?
It’s way past time to start talking about climate disruption. If we don’t have the courage and common sense to begin this conversation, it’s pretty unlikely we will ever find the resolve to fix the problem.
You nutters have been having this conversation for 20 years, Rich, yet, you never change your own behavior. Why is that?
h/t Tom Nelson.
Oh, but we conservatives (and AGW deniers) are supposed to be the wacky ones, the scare mongering loons? Puh-lease. This is bordering on dangerous, and Mr Wiles ought to be checked into a hospital for a psych evaluation!
hmmm.. Teach, seems they have been screaming for over 40 years now. Before it was the coming ice age. Then, coming heat age. Now, its just the coming radical change age.
Love how he puts charged political catch phrases in to the environmental change talk…. “radical”.
If weathermen can’t get a weather report correct a SINGLE DAY before a storm arrives, then how in the hell are we supposed to believe non-weathermen’s suggestions of weather 10-100 years from now?
Get this timeline…. from OK.
Feb 1: Predicted bad snow storm. Result: we got bad snow storm 4 hours early.
Feb 4: Predicted 30% chance of light dusting to nothing snow. Result: We got 2-5 inches of snow from an all day long snow storm.
Feb 6: Predicted 2-4 inches of snow. Result: mostly light rain with temps above 32 degrees.
Feb 8-9: Predicted 8-18 inches of snow throughout OK with 4-8 inches on the fringes of state. Result: N-OK and NE-OK got over 10 inches with 25 inches in small part of NE-OK, central OK got about 4 inches and Southern half of OK barely got any snow.
These predictions came either the day before the storms showed, or even the NIGHT before. Local weather guys know how hard it is to predict what our complicated weather will do due to enormous and vast number of variables. How can we get accuracy 100 years from now down to the tenths of a degree?
I have been crunching the numbers for years now. I have been researching the data because I use the data extensively in ground water analysis and environmental impact studies.
My conclusion is that if mankind were to reduce his CO2 footprint by 25-40 percent the reduction in the PPM of Carbon would be on the order of 3-5 PPM in the atmosphere by the year 2100.
The facts are undeniable. The burning of fossil fuels produces on the order of 26-30 Billion tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere each year but when compared to the 850 billion tonnes produced each year by the rest of the natural cycle you can clearly see that mankind and fossil fuels are responsible for only 3.5 percent of all c02 entering the atmosphere each year.
Reducing this 30 billion tonnes by 40 percent would reduce the amount of co2 entering the air each year by 12 billion tones or to put it in perspective..the 12 billion tonnes of co2 reduced divided by the total amount of co2 entering the atmosphere each year amounts to .0136 percent or barely over 1 percent reduction in the co2 entering the atmosphere.
Destroying entire economies for the sake of a 1 percent reduction in co2 entering the atmosphere each year is taking absurdity to new limits.
Now the real culprits is the industrial release of many noxious and potentially debilitating chemicals into the air and need to be heavily regulated and overseen by the EPA to keep our air safe.
No doubt. Pollution and the stewadship of our planet is a must. Recently I have been involved in analyzing Shale fracturing and the highly secretive process by which companies do this parallel drilling while keeping their slurry mixtures top secret is something the epa must step in and regulate. As an engineer who has spent his life in the oil and gas industry I can tell you it causes me concern even though a 2004 EPA investigation found that shale fracturing is safe.
But CO2? My recomendation to the global warming crowd is to start their own corporations and build gigantic CO2 scrubbers around the world and charge their respective countries a billion bucks a year to scrub the co2 from the atmosphere….
(It wont help one dayum bit) but they will feel better about themselves and will be able to pat themselves on the backs every night when they tuck themselves in and dream about malaria which THEY have caused to run amuck again because of the UN banning of DDT which literally destroyed Malaria for decades before the Envirowhackos decided DDT was a danger to mankind….more so then the 50 million who die from malaria.
Go figure….Its always been about redistributing wealth….always.
[…] Alarmist Richard Wiles Takes Climate Insanity To A Whole New Moonbat Level You nutters have been having this conversation for 20 years, Rich, yet, you never change your own behavior. Why is that? […]