Climate Change Means The Death Of Our World And Start Of Another Or Something

Another day, another scary fable. Many within the Cult of Climastrology have recommended, even pleaded, that Warmists stop with the horror stories of future doom. Don’t expect the Cult to listen, despite the failure to move the needle

Climate Change Means One World’s Death and Another’s Birth

A FEW YEARS ago in a lab in Panama, Klaus Winter tried to conjure the future. A plant physiologist at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, he planted seedlings of 10 tropical tree species in small, geodesic greenhouses. Some he allowed to grow in the kind of environment they were used to out in the forest, around 79 degrees Fahrenheit. Others, he subjected to uncomfortably high temperatures. Still others, unbearably high temperatures—up to a daily average temperature of 95 F and a peak of 102 F. That’s about as hot as Earth has ever been.

It’s also the kind of environment tropical trees have a good chance of living in by the end of this century, thanks to climate change. Winter wanted to see how they would do.

Seriously, they are stating that there’s a good chance of a 15+F increase in temperatures within 84 years, despite there only being a 1.4F increase since 1850.

The rest of the article is equally as doomy.

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

2 Responses to “Climate Change Means The Death Of Our World And Start Of Another Or Something”

  1. Michael says:

    I really wish he also added higher PPM levels of CO2 along with the temperature to make sure it is more realistic.

    What he may find to his disappointment is that the CO2 would act as a food source to the plants as they would experience greater growth mass and a coolant as it will trap the heat into the molecule and escape above the moisture created by the water vapor and heat.

    I wish these people would stop just looking at one variable and making long term climate predictions.

    You know meteorologists use at a minimum of 3 variables to predict the weather and they still can’t get it right, yet this yahoo thinks one variable can predict anything realistic, whether short term or long term.

    It’s getting old….

    Meanwhile in Iowa, despite the massive rainfall this year, we are expected to have record breaking crop yields on corn and soybean. As I predicted, the higher the CO2 PPM results in greater crop yields.

    And in case anyone doesn’t already know, studies show that crop yields continue to increase up to 1200 PPM of CO2 in the atmosphere. After 1200 PPM there seems to be no further benefit of increase. We are currently at 400 PPM.

  2. Jeffery says:


    You’re right you need more than one variable. For example, plants don’t only rely on CO2 levels but also depend on nitrogen fixation, O2, temperature and water. All these variables are changing from global warming. It’s unlikely that the benefits of increased CO2 seen in the laboratory or hothouse will translate to the new hotwetcolddry world.

Pirate's Cove