Good News: Prince Charles Extends His Doom From Climate Change Prediction!

High flying, fossil fuels using, big carbon offender Prince Charles has changed his mind on when doom comes

(Washington Times) Prince Charles is warning that there are only 35 years left to save the planet from climate disaster, which represents a 33-year extension of his previous deadline.

In March 2009, the heir to the British throne predicted that the world had 100 months “before we risk catastrophic climate change,” as pointed out by Climate Depot’s Marc Morano.

“Prince Charles gives world reprieve: Extends ‘100-Month’ climate ‘tipping point’ to 35 more years,” says the Tuesday headline on the Climate Depot website.

The British blog Not A Lot of People Know That announced in a July 19 post, “Charlie Gives Us a Reprieve!”

He had predicted doom by 2017.  Yet another failed prognostication from a Cult of Climastrology bigwig. Pushing it out 35 years means no one will remember the updated prognostication.

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

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

12 Responses to “Good News: Prince Charles Extends His Doom From Climate Change Prediction!”

  1. Dana says:

    I do not know whether Her Majesty the Queen wishes that she had the royal authority of her predecessors such as King Richard CÅ“ur de Lion, or the first Queen Elizabeth, but even she must be glad that her son, as King, will not have much power.

  2. JGlanton says:

    How embarrassing for the Prince. Nobody knew that he wasn’t flawless. Doubtless his first science advisor is lost in the dungeons, and his new one took note and wisely gave himself 30 years of free air.

    Fascinating to observe science at work in this day and age.

  3. Phil Taylor says:

    The world might start to warm again around 2030, if the way the earth warms and cools is based on the warming or cooling of the Pacific Ocean by the Sun.
    Apparently this happens in 20 to 30 year cycles. The last phase ended in 1998 when the world stopped warming and is now actually cooling.
    This according to RSS and UAH datasets.

    By that time the West will be brainwashed to make manditory payments to third world countries for compedsation for C02 emmissions. There will be a whole generation of kids brought up as environmentalists whose guilt will make them willing to pay.
    Their standard of living will fall and not do much to raise the third world’s standard of living. Only innovation by the West to grow their economies to compensate for this or a wake up call to the public will prevent it. An earlier blog mentioned that most of the third world does not even know about Climate Change. That is because the lobying is aimed at democratic first world countries that need concensusus from their public to change the laws to make them pay. Dictatorships and poor countries are not the target as they do not require this.

  4. Dana says:

    One wonders if King Charles III will meet the same fate as King Charles I.

  5. Jeffery says:

    Third world countries are not the cause of global warming, the US, Europe, Russian,China and India are. On the other hand, many developing nations will bear the brunt of global warming, having fewer resources to adapt.

    Certainly there are no cooling trends seen in the RSS and UAH datasets unless one starts from the El Nino generated high of 1998. But no honest scientist would do that, would they? All the thermometer based datasets show about 0.15C increase per decade since 1979, when highly adjusted satellite data collection was initiated. UAH shows 0.14C warming/decade over that period and RSS shows only 0.12C warming/decade.

    Although there exist natural rhythms to the warming, why is the trend upward in the past century? The Sun is not hotter. So why are the oceans, the land and the atmosphere retaining more heat?

  6. Phil Taylor says:

    Don’t forget that AGW was blamed for 1998 until recently and now they blame el nino. However, you can also choose 2005 or 2010 till present.
    They are all el nino years and are all cooler than 1998. Why did you choose 1979? Because that was the year the world ended it’s cooling phase from 1945 to 1979 when the pacific ocean started to warm and therefore the earth also warmed. Our abilty to better measure the temperature also likely added to the minor warming in temperature since 1987 as a result of satellite involvment.

    This article from NASA’s website has Nasa scientists also confirming the world has cooled.
    From the article.

    “Greenhouse gases continued to trap extra heat, but for about 10 years starting in the early 2000s, global average surface temperature stopped climbing, and even cooled a bit,” said Willis.

    They also go on to claim that the reason is that they finally found warm water in the Pacific and Indian oceans to account for this. However, they also mention that the pacific ocean may be warming as part of it’s natural cycle. Regardless, I think the first step is that the public needs to be aware of this cooling trend and the fact that there are efforts to hide it from them is a red flag for me. The scientists may be honest, but the media is not.

    Read the full article here.

  7. John says:

    I thought that the “pause”
    Meant it wasn’t going to get any hotter ?

  8. Jl says:

    “Prince Charles 33 year extension of gloom and doom…” Like has been said before, no different than the affixed sign at your local bar “free beer tomorrow”

  9. Jeffery says:

    1979 was when the satellite systems came online.

    1998 was a very strong El Nino year, transferring a great amount of heat to the atmosphere. Why was the Pacific absorbing so much heat? Was the Sun warmer? No.

    Since 1998 may have been the strongest El Nino recorded, it should be the warmest year ever, right? Yet, the Earth has continued to warm, with several later years warmer than 1998.

  10. Phil Taylor says:

    What years were those? RSS and UAH say no. 1998 was the warmest year on record.

  11. Jeffery says:

    All the other datasets say differently.

  12. Phil Taylor says:

    They do not count. Land and sea measurements are not covered widely enough. They are only estimates. There is no measurements taken in the Congo, Mongolia, Amazon, North West Territories, many parts of Russia, China, and South America. Also there is very credible evidence that NOAA datasets are fudged. The claims of tampering is not only made by skeptics but by true believers who are experts in the field who are very concerned with how NOAA manages their raw data. If you choose to believe them, they still do not count as satellite trumps Land/Sea.
    Regardless, if you take the worse case scenario of NOAA Land. If it only 100th’s of a degree warmer than 1998. Well within the margin of error.

    This is from NOAA 1979 to 2015.

    Trend: 0.0268 ±0.0060 °C/year (2σ)

Pirate's Cove