Pirate's Cove

Do members of the doomsday Cult of Climastrology really think this is a good argument, one that will get people to say “well, sure, let’s destroy economies around the world, lock me up at home, and leave me on the government dole”?

We Are in an Unprecedented Climate Experiment

The coronavirus pandemic has frozen the whole world in place as we try to keep ourselves and each other safe. We’re in the middle of an unintentional global experiment that has shut down entire nations and industries. That has put a spotlight on how our personal choices and global systems affect climate change and what we need to do to flatten the curve of emissions.

The coronavirus lockdowns have triggered what is expected to be the largest annual drop in carbon emissions on record: an 8 percent decline globally, amounting to 2.6 billion metric tons of carbon by the end of 2020, according to the International Energy Agency. As we stay at home—especially in developed countries like the United States, which has the highest carbon emission rate per capita—consumer demand for fossil fuels has plummeted. Renewables have eaten oil and gas’s lunch when it comes to rates of energy use. Oil futures went negative in March, after supply began to outweigh demand and available storage. Air travel fell by 96 percent between early March and mid-April (though air traffic fell by only 50 percent, because airlines continued to fly mostly empty planes). Air travel is likely to remain unpopular for the foreseeable future. In other words, quarantine has shrunk our carbon footprint significantly.

But drastic cuts that came from upending our daily lives are still not enough to curb climate change. Even with this year’s unprecedented emissions cutbacks, atmospheric carbon level and global temperatures are likely going to increase again this year. Today’s global warming is the result of past choices: greenhouse gasses stick around and heat up the planet over decades, and the atmosphere can’t create an immediate feedback loop that incorporates our recent cuts. This April was still the warmest on record. According to the United Nations, in order to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial temperatures (the target of the Paris climate accord, which the United States withdrew from last year), human beings would have to cut emission by 7.6 percent every year for the next decade.

And cult members wonder why skeptics aren’t willing to give an inch even on things we would actually agree on. Because they will want more and more, constantly moving the goal posts.

That means we need structural change on an international scale. It’s now clear that meaningful emissions reductions won’t come from personal actions alone or even unilateral change from conscientious countries. But we can use this moment to consider a new path. There is no status quo anymore: the pandemic has forced us, on individual and collective levels, to rethink work, commutes, industry, recreation, supply chains, and urban planning. As we rebuild, we have a chance to do better. Individual actions can still be a big part of creating market and political pressures to reduce emissions. But we also need policy that makes individual action easy and enforces reductions in carbon use in major industries.

In other words, the end of capitalism, pure government control of the economy and your life. They want to limit your ability to travel. Where you can go, what modes of transportation you can use. How much energy you are allowed to use at home. Which you’ll essentially be stuck in. Is this really a winning argument, saying that the current Bat Soup virus lockdown, which includes some serious authoritarian restrictions, is just a start?

Read: We’re In An Unprecedented Hotcoldwetdry Experiment Or Something »

I blame card carrying members of the doomsday Cult of Climastrology for refusing to give up their own use of fossil fuels and making their own lives carbon neutral, living like it’s 1499

Experts Warn Climate Change Is Already Killing Way More People Than We Record

People around the world are already dying from the climate crisis, and yet all too often, official death records do not reflect the impact of these large-scale environmental catastrophes.

According to a team of Australian health experts, heat is the most dominant risk posed by climate change in the country. If the world’s emissions remain the same, by 2080 Australian cities could see at least four times the number of deaths from increasing temperatures alone.

“Climate change is a killer, but we don’t acknowledge it on death certificates,” says physician Arnagretta Hunter from the Australian National University.

That’s a potentially serious oversight. In a newly-published correspondence, Hunter and four other public health experts estimate Australia’s mortality records have substantially underreported heat-related deaths – at least 50-fold.

Apparently, people didn’t die from the weather prior to CO2 crossing the 350ppm threshold. Or is since 1978? Or 1999? Or all the way back to the beginning of the Industrial Revolution? Warmists typically just pick and choose their time frame. Anyhow, people die from weather events. Soon, the Warmists will start blaming cold weather related deaths on ‘climate change’.

“If you have an asthma attack and die during heavy smoke exposure from bushfires, the death certificate should include that information,” she adds.

Without those data, we’ll never truly know the scale of what we are dealing with. But while it’s possible to diagnose someone with a heart attack or cancer, it’s much harder to draw links between climate events and human mortality.

The authors of the correspondence compare it to a lightning strike, which might cause a branch to fall on a person and kill them. The thing is, the resulting death certificate might not make any reference to the lightning at all, only the branch.

Wildfires have always happened, and, since a majority of them tend to be set by humans rather than spontaneous combustion from a minor 1.5F increase in global temperatures, yeah, this is just fear-mongering from a doomsday cult.

“Climate change is a concern to many people. But if the effect of extreme temperatures is not recorded, its full impact can never be understood,” the authors argue.

What’s so extreme about 1.5F? Go ahead and set your AC up 2 degrees. While it might not be as comfortable for sleeping as you are used to, do you feel doomed?

“Death certification needs to be modernised, indirect causes should be reported, with all death certification prompting for external factors contributing to death, and these death data must be coupled with large-scale environmental datasets so that impact assessments can be done.”

Well, if we’re going to do that, why not record “dead due to Liberal policies”? “Dead because lived in a Leftist city”? That makes a whole lot more sense than “dead because weather happened that has always happened by now we’re going to blame it on witchcraft”.

Read: ‘Climate Change’ Is Killing Way More People Than Recorded Or Something »