The Hurricanes Are Sending Trump A Message On ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

It’s all about the man-made toxic gases, you guys. Probably from you, as we head over to the Miami Herald, where opinion Warmist Andre Oppenheimer apparently has nothing better to worry about

President Trump, hurricanes Harvey and Irma are sending you a message

As a Miami Beach resident who is writing this surrounded by sand bags in preparation for Hurricane Irma, only a week after Hurricane Harvey ravaged Texas, I have an urgent question for President Donald Trump and his fellow climate change deniers: how many natural disasters will it take for you to listen to the world’s most prestigious scientists?

All of them, because they are natural disasters, hence the word “natural.” Things that have been happening long since Mankind’s records

Climate deniers like Trump, citing fake news reports and pseudo-scientific studies, say the world has always had warmer and colder periods, and the current wave of global warming is just one more. According to their logic — and that of polluting industries that are behind it — mankind has nothing to do with this. It’s just nature, they claim.

How much in the way of fossil fuels and electricity were used to produce the paper and distribute it so that people can read this claptrap?

But 97 percent of climate scientists agree that global warming is being caused by man-made toxic gases, according to a 2013 scientific paper that examined 11,944 climate abstracts. That paper drives climate skeptics mad, but virtually all studies show that there is a near total consensus around man-made climate change among scientists, and that climate deniers are in most cases pseudo-scientists or conservative radio charlatans.

People who are quoting the utterly discredited and debunked pseudo science Cook et all 97% paper shouldn’t be casting any stones, especially when they yammer about a trace gas necessary for life on earth. But, then, Warmists live in their own little fantasy world, much like those practicing Scientology.

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

6 Responses to “The Hurricanes Are Sending Trump A Message On ‘Climate Change’ Or Something”

  1. drowningbabies says:

    Hurricane Irma? Pffft!
    Try facing Hurricane Gussy…


  2. JGlanton says:

    Cook et al, LOL.
    Cook is a cartoonist, and he got that hate-spewing activist scientist Lewandosky to sign off on his silly study so it has ‘science’. What his study showed is that less than 1% of scientists whose papers they surveyed thought that most of climate change was caused by man. But okay, swear by this cartoonist’s paper while calling those who have harder information followers of ‘pseudo-science’.

    What a freakin’ idiot!

  3. Dana says:

    Are these hurricanes Donald Trump’s fault, or is it still too early in his term, making them George Bush’s fault?

  4. gitarcarver says:

    As someone who is sitting in the middle of this, it is ridiculous to think that Irma has anything to do with man-made climate change.

    But there is something to ponder….

    Two days ago the path of Irma was literally right over my home as at Cat 4 storm. Irma was projected to come ashore slightly south of Miami and head up the east coast, never losing strength as it would get more energy from the Atlantic.

    Two days later, the storm is projected to go under the state of Florida, and come ashore on the west side of the state and then pass by me with tropical force or low Cat 1 winds.

    The projection changed that much.

    While I know and respect the idea that weather and climate are not the same thing, at the same time I am struck by the fact that with all the computer models and data, no one got the path of Irma right. (IIrma was initially not supposed to come near Florida at all.) Once again, in two days the path has change so much that while the east coast of the state was panicking, now the west coast is going nuts.

    Yet with precise, measurable data for a limited area the projected paths were wrong. Drastically wrong. One could argue that is because of the volume of variables in calculations and models.

    But long term climate projections have far more variables, far more data points over a much broader area.

    The idea that we cannot predict events because of the enormity of the data and variables, but can predict climate change that has infinitely more data and more variables just doesn’t make sense.

Pirate's Cove