CNN: All The Carbon Pollution Reductions During Lockdown Didn’t Make A Difference Or Something

CNN is kinda giving up the game with their spin, basically saying that reducing carbon dioxide doesn’t matter

The pandemic didn’t solve climate change. This week’s disasters are proof

If you thought Covid-19 restrictions, like enforced lockdowns and social distancing, would put a lasting dent in our collective carbon footprint and save the world from warming, you were mistaken.

Earlier this year, in the midst of a horrific news cycle and a rapidly mounting death toll, that notion was a welcome silver lining to the pandemic.

As people around the world stayed at home to stop the spread of the coronavirus, greenhouse gas emissions from the energy and transport industries plummeted, dropping to record lows.

But it may have given some a false sense that the worst effects of climate change were being mitigated.

They’re not.

So, of course, they blame all the fires (which were set mostly by humans, accidentally and on purpose), tropical storms (which have always happened), and glacier breakup (it’s called an interglacial period for a reason) on you driving a fossil fueled vehicle and eating a hamburger.

All of these extreme weather events can be linked to global warming, caused by rising levels of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, mainly from humans burning fossil fuels.

If there was a huge drop in CO2 output during lockdown, shouldn’t there be some change noticed if, as they say, CO2 is the control knob?

The climate change that we’re experiencing today — evidenced by extreme weather events like the West Coast wildfires — is the net result of our cumulative emissions since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.

So, even if annual carbon emissions go down in any given year, as they have during the pandemic, as long as we are adding greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the planet will continue to warm.

See? There’s always some Excuse. If the weather people at CNN (this is in the straight weather section) really care, they’d demand CNN stop using fossil fuels to gather and disseminate the news

Under the 2015 Paris climate accord, countries committed to reduce their carbon output and halt global warming below 2 degrees Celsius — and if possible, below 1.5 degrees Celsius — to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. Trump announced in 2017 he would pull the US out of the accord, a move that that will lead to a complete withdrawal just after this year’s presidential election.

But, this is written as an opinion piece, because you know they want Biden to win, and this is advocating that. Because this whole movement is a doomsday political cult.

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

7 Responses to “CNN: All The Carbon Pollution Reductions During Lockdown Didn’t Make A Difference Or Something”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    TEACH typed: If there was a huge drop in CO2 output during lockdown, shouldn’t there be some change noticed Well, no.

    TEACH is refractory to learning. We’ve explained this several times already, but he’s too cowardly to address it.

    The Earth is warming rapidly from the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. The emissions over 6 months of the Trump Plague, though reduced, have little impact on the concentration. Only naifs or disinformers such as TEACH (is he stupid or dishonest) would believe that a few months of lower emissions would solve global warming. He’s insulting his hapless readers.

    • formwiz says:

      I love Jeffery talking about people who disagree with him as naifs (wonder who gave him that word, not to mention refractory).

      Then answer is, of course, that no matter what the situation, it is always making things worse.

      • drowningpuppies says:

        Rimjob word of the day:
        refractory .

        Bwaha! Lolgf

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Porter Good’s belly warmer, Mr. Dutcher, doesn’t know what naif or refractory means?

        You’d expect the seasonal help of HR Block to know some things.

        We help but notice that Mr. Dutcher never discusses anything. Even the pitiable dp occasionally stumbles upon an issue.

        • formwiz says:

          No, I don’t believe you know what it means.

          And I raise an issue now and again. you’re usually too afraid to go near it.

    • Jl says:

      Nope-the rate of warming isn’t statistically different from earlier last century. “Solve global warming..”. What’s there to solve?

  2. ST says:

    Class and Respect – President Trump on Death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg

    ps. Could you please add CC to your blogroll?

Pirate's Cove