By Katie Tubb
It seems like with global warming embedded in our politics (for now), anything we don’t fully understand can now be ‘legitimately’ blamed on the weather. Forget the trusty old excuse about the dog eating your homework: A sampling of news stories tells us instead that global warming might really be the cause of all our problems. Allegedly, thanks to global warming:
Your breakfast got even less exciting. Your morning coffee is going to be more expensive. Also, the cost of cereal could climb by as much as 30 percent because of global warming according to an Oxfam report(their recommendation to General Mills and Kellogg’s: “intensify” effort to cut greenhouse gases, which ironically would also likely increase the cost of cereal and beverages). Thankfully, populations of feral cats and dogs are liable to increase, and these could suffice as possible “bridge food” for climate change refugees.
History and culture have been redefined. Leonardo DiCaprio’s Jack Dawson didn’t make it off the Titanic in 1912 thanks to global warming. Two years later the world engaged in WWI, followed by the Great Depression, and WWII, all of which apparently slowed the pace of global warming. In current cultural events, the arts world has been subjected to climate change…the musical. And a horror movie. Some congregations have been subjected to a new topic for bad sermons. And employees are less productive at work.
America’s adversaries have been aided. Climate change has boosted Russian rice, corn and sunflower seed crops and promises to unlock some of the natural resources trapped in Siberian permafrost. And rather than failed diplomacy, climate change was the catalyst for Boko Haram. Meanwhile, North Korea has emerged as an example of combating climate change.
Nature got a little bit wilder. Salamanders are shrinking in size, but the return of bus-sized snakes is more likely. Meanwhile the coquis frog in Puerto Rico croaks a little higher, butterflies in Ohio are showing up a bit earlier, and there is an abundance of rock snot in West Virginia streams and not enough tissues to deal with it. It also has been discovered that global warming killed a 16-year-old polar bear (even though the average lifespan of a polar bear is 15-18 years).
Vacation plans are being ruined. Airline passengers might want to use those seatbelts on their next flight because of greater turbulence. Thanks to global warming, life in Asia is generally miserable and England will be too wet, and too dry…and too cold…and too hot. That hike you may have been planning to the peak of Mt. Everest will be harder, in case it wasn’t hard enough already, and out of good eco-conscience you probably shouldn’t run another marathon because of all the unnecessary CO2 emissions. And the migration of the Baird’s sparrow away from North Dakota to Canada is threatening to cut into the hordes of tourists coming to bird watch.
What has been called the dangerous, more expensive, more uncertain future of climate change may in fact just be climate, which always changes. Nevertheless, the Obama administration wants to implement costly global warming regulations that not only will have almost zero impact on global average temperatures, but also will drastically change for the worse how Americans access and use energy, an important building block of the American economy and quality of living
Now that’s a real problem—one Congress actually can do something about.
Source: Heritage.org
=================================
Because I said, “I might be wrong.”
Could summertime be caused by global warming?
The more I read about HAARP the more I’m concerned. It can be used to create a class of chemicals, Partially Ionized Atmospheric Nitrous Oxides, that could wreak havoc on civilization. In fact, it’s been rumored that HAARP and PIANO could be used in concert with Oxygen Based Organic Esters (OBOE) that would cause a truly ill wind for us all.
“Thankfully, populations of feral cats and dogs are liable to increase, and these could suffice as possible “bridge food” for climate change refugees.”
============
Trust me, you don’t want to go there.
u.k.(us) says:
June 22, 2014 at 2:10 pm
“Thankfully, populations of feral cats and dogs are liable to increase, and these could suffice as possible “bridge food” for climate change refugees.”
============
Trust me, you don’t want to go there.
Dog meat was good enough for our President.
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
June 22, 2014 at 10:47 am
Oh dang. All this time I thought America has never won it in cold years. I must’ve looked it up on Wikipedia.
JohnH says:
June 22, 2014 at 2:07 pm
Ha ha ha, chortle, guffaw! Good one! I needed that…80)
Mac the Knife says:
June 22, 2014 at 11:26 am
______________________
Hook, line and sinker…
Global Warming cause Lois Lerner’s hard drive to fail, causing the lost of her e-mails
papiertigre says:
June 22, 2014 at 2:26 pm
“Dog meat was good enough for our President.”
============
I tried to warn the author, then you chimed in.
You won’t win that fight, a quick death will seem to be a blessing.
I’m sure General Mills and Kellogs would hate to have to say “We’re putting our prices up because of Global Warming.”
I deal with rock snot by putting felt on the bottom of my waders. It usually works well enough to maintain grip and balance.
Something the media might find useful when considering reality.
I’m pretty sure that Global Warming causes bad grammar. The increase in bad grammar during the twentieth century correlates closely with the increase in temperatures. However, I haven’t seen a “pause” in the rise of bad grammar. This suggests, first, that it is not bad grammar that causes Global Warming, and, second, that it takes there is a time lag of several years between Global Warming and its effect on grammar.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIcAjXjKsyQ&w=420&h=315%5D
And here we are again with this argument and here is the answer.
I got a new one. Someone will blame the missing IRS emails on global warming.
Dudeashaneo,
Very funny! But sadly, true.
CAGW could definitely affect your retirement funds, unless u tell your fund managers u want no prt in this scam!
22 June: Financial Times: Madison Marriage: Pension funds urged to publish climate risks
The hope in political and academic circles is that increasing the transparency around pension funds’ exposure to carbon-intensive industries such as coal and oil will make them more aware of the risks and encourage them to invest elsewhere.
Peter Norman, Sweden’s minister for financial markets, says he wants global pension funds to “publish their carbon footprint”, although he adds that he does not want there to be restrictions on where pension funds can invest…
George Serafeim, assistant professor of business administration at Harvard Business School, agrees that it is “very important and very feasible” for pension funds to measure their carbon exposure…
From September, more than 1,000 UK-based companies listed on the main exchanges will have to report their carbon emissions in their annual reports, says Mr Simpson.
The European Union has also recently drawn up its accounting directive, which will require more than 6,000 companies to report regularly on environmental, social and governance factors from 2016.
In 2011, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the US regulator, issued guidance encouraging companies to publish their climate risk in their 10-k filings (documents that detail a company’s performance on an annual basis).
***Although few US companies have begun doing this, roughly 70 per cent of companies in the S&P 500 voluntarily provide similar data to CDP, which shares the information with 767 institutional investors representing more than $92 TRILLION in assets…
***An asset manager who counts many pension funds among his clients, says: “Pension funds generally don’t worry about [carbon exposure] at all – it is just not something they associate with being an investment risk.
“There is a lot of talk about how pension funds should be more sustainable, but if you look at their portfolios, asset selection is not done with carbon risk in mind.”
He adds that forcing big investors to publish their exposure through regulatory initiatives could cause friction within the pension fund community.
“The unintended consequence of forcing that is that maybe everyone chases the next clean-tech bubble,” he says. “Right now, pension funds’ ears are ringing from all of the regulatory demands on them. There is a strong pushback and a sense that maybe regulators have gone too far.” …
One of the worries for pension funds is that the pressure to reduce their exposure to carbon-intensive stocks in sectors such as oil and transport will hamper their investment performance…
***Companies such as General Electric, Alstom and Siemens, which sell equipment for power plants, wind turbines and solar panels, could also benefit as investors switch out of carbon-intensive stocks…
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/1c5e0b58-f795-11e3-90fa-00144feabdc0.html#axzz35QKx7XZ6
Won’t name names, but the guy who validates carbon projects and environmental schemes for the world bank at its Sydney office and for auditors like TUV says with a straight face that 180,000 people a year are directly killed in war each year due to climate change.
This is the man who wields the fatal vote on whether real businesses get real credit for real environmental work. They rarely get through the net without being coerced into hiring a brace of rentseekers. On the other hand those part of the international bureaucrat parasite class get waved through every time even if their documentation is lacking. Waved through an audit process. With document problems.
It’s the economic equivalent of an open borders policy.
“Thankfully, populations of feral cats and dogs are liable to increase, and these could suffice as possible “bridge food” for climate change refugees.”
============
Trust me, you don’t want to go there.
dang uk you got me I thought the same thing POTUS grew (threw?) up on that.
Mark says:
June 22, 2014 at 5:29 pm
I deal with rock snot by putting felt on the bottom of my waders. It usually works well enough to maintain grip and balance.
Something the media might find useful when considering reality.
Now with ‘felt’ and ‘media’ I feel a sexual harassment suit coming up. 😉
The main thing I have noticed about climate change is that it causes progressive politicians and the media to lie to the public and feel good about doing so. (I wonder if that made anybody’s list.)
I never realized being that close to danger.
Love the Polar bear line. Basically, if you die, it is because of Climate Change period. LOL
I think North Korea may be the environmentalist-progressive poster state.
The population is starved of resources and energy. Because of malnutrition, the people are smaller in stature. Smaller people use less resource, thus reducing carbon pollution even further. The population is tightly controlled and the average person is little more than a peasant. Anybody who dissents is reeducated–for life–along with their families. News is controlled by the state. The only religion allowed is the official state religion of worshipping dear leader, with every organ of the state itself serving as the priesthood. People are taught not to want more. Consumerism, corporatism and capitalism are non-existent.
Only the elites enjoy comfortable lives.
“Nevertheless, the Obama administration wants to implement costly global warming regulations that not only will have almost zero impact on global average temperatures, but also will drastically change for the worse how Americans access and use energy, an important building block of the American economy and quality of living
Now that’s a real problem—one Congress actually can do something about.”
Sorry, Congress can’t do anything about what the EPA does as long as Obama is in the White House and Reid controls the Senate. We see this as an obvious fact when the House passed the “Audit the Fed” bill back in 2012 and it has yet to see the light of day in the Senate. And should that actually find the floor and pass, it won’t gather the President’s signature and you can bet there isn’t enough Congressional support to override his veto.
Same thing with any bill to rein in EPA, or any of the other destructive overreaches of the administration through department regulations. The House could pass the bill, but it won’t get past Reid and the Senate, much less be able to pass over the president’s veto. And since all candidates that will run for these offices are “pre-vetted” by the party regulars, you can’t even vote in a new Congress that hasn’t already agreed to “follow the party line while pretending to be a maverick.”
Onlyway your could would be with paper ballots and a true opposition party – a third choice, and not one vetted by TPTB.