Weepy Bill McKibben is fed up, because he says nobody is listening to the climate sirens any more. He says in an MSNBC editorial published on Tuesday April 1st, that we need a climate labor strike. I think it isn’t an April fools joke, but it’s hard to tell with Bill since most of his writings are borderline crazy even on regular weekdays.
He writes:
So at this point it’s absurd to keep asking the scientific community to churn out more reports. In fact, it might almost be more useful if they went on strike: until you pay attention to what we’ve already told you, we won’t be telling you more. Work with what you’ve got. We’re a quarter-century ahead – when you deal with the trouble we’ve already described then we’ll tell you what’s coming next.
Oh, what a GREAT idea!
- Imagine weeks without Michael Mann bloviating about his hockey stick, or his lawsuit, or how the #Kochmachine is funding opinion contrary to his, worldwide.
- Imagine weeks without Stephan Lewandowsky claiming climate skeptics deny the Moon Landing without actually ever having asked any of them.
- Imagine weeks without Gavin Schmidt thumbing his nose at people on Twitter that he thinks aren’t worthy of having an opinion.
- Imagine weeks without Kevin Trenberth having to search for his missing heat and offering excuses for why it has disappeared.
- Imagine weeks without Jonathan Overpeck lecturing us on Twitter about how we have to “tackle climate change threats”.
- Imagine weeks without Andrew Dessler saying “Skeptics should keep their mouths shut. Here’s why: Dick Lindzen talking about environmentalism”
- Imagine weeks without anyone referencing the new IPCC report as gospel.
- Imagine weeks without weepy Bill claiming that #divestment is going to stop fossil fuels from being used, when all it does is shift it somewhere else.
You get the idea. The world would be a kinder, gentler place if climate scientists and their fanboys went on strike. Personally, I’m all for it. I could use the rest.
While we are on the subject of weepy Bill’s MSNBC article, I note there is a poll at the bottom of it asking this:
Do you see climate change as a threat to your life or well-being?
And here is the poll result as of about 10:30PM PDT Tuesday evening.
No: 2,718 votes Yes: 947 votes I am not sure: 91 votes
With those kind of numbers, I don’t think WUWT readers need to weigh in.
When you can’t even get the ultra-left MSNBC crowd to agree with your premise of climate change being a threat, maybe a strike isn’t the answer; maybe it’s just time to just give up.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Time for john cooks computer voting to be called into action?
To be honest, if there were no climate science at all the world would be an infinitely better place.
The poll stands at yes=1005, no=3252, so the yes vote has just under 24%
It’s good to see the sceptics have a strong lead, but I still feel sad that around a quarter of the people have been so badly misled. But what can you do if even the President of the United States is so delusional that he thinks global warming is actually accelerating?
Chris
Hell yes, strike now. Last chance before the grant money machine grinds to a halt, putting them on permanent vacation.
jones says:
” …would you please please happen to have one of those lovely little lists of what predictions were extruded by this crowd 25 years ago? (for 25 years time if you get me?).”
Already done :
Updated list of things “caused by global warming”:
http://linkis.com/wp.me/uQESG
note: This has been going on for so long now that some of the links are dead.
So climastrologers are now at the three year old tantrum stage. That’s what happens when you spoil the child with endless indulgence. Donna Laframboise is so right when she describes the IPCC as a delinquent teen that has been spoilt rotten and never heard the word ‘No’.
Once GetUp! in Australia get wind of this, the Yes vote will jump by about 100.
It is interesting how quickly this latest IPCC report got buried in the news schedules. Some of the MSM never reported it at all, and most of those that did were careful to disable their Readers Comments/Feedback sections.
Nevertheless, the climate hysterics are still trying to close down the debate and deny “deniers” a voice on the worn-out argument that they are unqualified to comment on the “settled science” of climate change. This doesn’t stop them allowing views to air that agree with them even when the contributor is unqualified.
Here is a prime example from today’s Independent:
Government accuses BBC of creating ‘false balance’ on climate change with unqualified sceptics
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/government-accuses-bbc-of-creating-false-balance-on-climate-change-with-unqualified-sceptics-9231176.html
Notice the (completely unqualified) Bob Ward is allowed free comment.
“In fact, it might almost be more useful if they went on strike: until you pay attention to what we’ve already told you, we won’t be telling you more.”
———————————————————–
….and risk losing all the NWO bribe money flowing into the coffers of the CAGW team? Haha now that’s funny!!!
I Imagine it’s time to cast all those possibilities as new lyrics to the Beatle’s “Imagine”. Sadly, I lack the talent. Elmer? Do you have the time to take a crack at it?
“…until you pay attention to what we’ve already told you, we won’t be telling you more”
So until we bow to your dictates on energy policy, based on corrupt science, lies and criminal activity, you’re going to stop producing corrupt science?
NO PROBLEM GUYS. We’re right behind you.
BTW do we need to contribute to a strike fund or do you count on still getting 24 billion dollars per year in funding while producing nothing of value, as you have been doing for the last 25 years?
75% “No” @ur momisugly 7am EDT
A few weeks ago, there was an article about Gore speaking in ?Nebraska, maybe? I scrolled through nearly all the 700+ comments, and found only one that -didn’t- trash him and his views. I am heartened. The sooner this hyperemotional weather blows over, the better.
The comments on the MSNBC page meet both meanings of ‘hysterical’
Go on strike while the world is ending? We have two kinds of strike, refusing to work for a while in order to get more wage, and hunger strike. The latter is done by people who are desperate. So McKibben simply can stop eating today if this is what he wants.
Interestingly the 25% that believe that climate change is a threat to them is similar to the Pew Poll numbers of those “extremely worried” about climate change. Sounds like Bill McKibben is filled with recursive fury.
Go and vote.
Go and vote.
McKibben – the wannabee victim, is now playing little billy stompy feet!
In this case, since I am not his parent (that would be grounds for suicide), I say let him do his stompy feet! And if anyone notices, they can tell us about it.
” maybe it’s just time to just give up.”
As long as the tap of public moneys is still running flat out, thats never going to happen.
The colour code and the tick are designed to mislead the casual viewer into thinking that most vote are in the affirmative, which they are not. Dishonnesty abounds on the side of the warmists.
The members this new movement will come to be known as the “climate trappists”.
Whatever you do, don’t interrupt Bill McKibben.
None of this lot do any work that the rest of us would miss, so a conventional industrial strike isn’t going to work. Has to be a hunger strike. McKibben doesn’t look like he’d last long. Might actually do one mann some good.
By the way, what happened to the Phillipino hunger striker at the Warsaw conference? Has he croaked yet?
Here’s another MSNBC poll to try:
http://pollpot.people.msnbc.com/_news/2014/04/02/23348855-do-you-understand-a-tick-mark-to-represent-disagreement-with-a-proposed-question#51390
McKribben still doesn’t get it. These “reports” have nothing to do with anything other than generating income for those issuing the report.
Always remember these immortal words: “Further research is needed”
at 77% now:-)