More Than 310 Thousand People with Skewed Priorities Flood New York

Guest Post by Bob Tisdale

The numbers are rolling in…and they’re impressive in a odd way. Based on numerous news reports, somewhere in the neighborhood of 310 to 400 thousand people participated in the People’s Climate March on Sunday, September 21, 2014 in New York City. The parade was, of course, a precursor for the U.N. Climate Summit 2014, which begins tomorrow.

Yet the results of the U.N.’s Global Survey for a Better World, also known as MyWorld2015, show “Action taken on Climate Change” at the very bottom…the abyss…of things that matter most to families around the globe. See the screencap below. If you haven’t had your say, you can take the survey here.

MyWorld2015 Poll Results Sept 22 2014

Looks like the 310 to 400 thousand people who marched in Manhattan yesterday have priorities that are out of touch with the rest of the occupants of this lovely planet.

Considering the object of the U.N. meeting, maybe the marchers should have been calling for “honest and responsive government“, which ranked much higher than climate.

Advertisements

380 thoughts on “More Than 310 Thousand People with Skewed Priorities Flood New York

    • 400,000?
      Cant anyone do arithmetic?
      16,000 is more like it
      The crowd was 15 blocks long on 6th Ave, about 4000 feet.
      6th Ave is 120 feet wide.
      120 x 4000 is 480,000 sq feet. In that ballpark.
      So if they had 400,000 people, then your Average Joe Environmental Activist fits into 1.2 square feet.
      But the Settled Crowd Counting Science says that 30 square feet (5×6) is typical for a march.
      So they had 16,000 people.
      To get 400,000, the crowd would have gone back 20 miles, to Connecticut.

      • That sounds about right. London Underground’s research indicates that 50 pounds per square foot is the concentration at which crowds could no longer move forward so about one 150 pound (average person) per 3 square feet. One person per 1.2 square feet would be the point at which it was hard to breath (a frightening sensation I experienced myself on the Embankment during Millenium celebrations) and certainly impossible to move under your own power.

      • Haven’t these people ever flown United Economy, in seat 27B?
        As I noted, if we believe the 311,000 attendees (not 310,000, not 312,000) claimed by the Climate Scientists, then the crowd density of people moving in a freely flowing march was about 1.5 square feet per person.
        That’s 5 times more crowded than a fully loaded United Airlines 737.

    • Those who get their news and opinion from the likes of John Stewart. “other idiots” in my comment refers to “the likes of John Stewart”.

    • Truth be told I’m not really Ok with ANY of them on either side if the isle being in charge of anything, I’ve rarely seen a more stellar bunch of maroons all gathered in one town, with the possible exception of NYC this past weekend.
      And in my opinion you need better news and science sources, or more precisely, you need to start relying on ACTUAL news and science sources.

    • I have to wonder about that crowd. The population of Manhattan is more than 1,600,000. I suspect that many of them decided to party on a nice Sunday afternoon. I probably would have.
      If the number of local residents was subtracted, no doubt the total would be far lower.

  1. Well, don’t that roast yer fish. You can bet that the whole lot of Climate Rhetoricians will be in force as the Climate Summit commences, and likely to get a rousing Circus-like response from O. Bummer et Al[Gore]. All the while ignoring their immense carbon footprint. In so being patted on the back and tut-tutted by the likes of Weepy Bill, they will now somnambulate back into their respective bucolique, and await trampling by the real issues that their messiahs so fervently downplay.

    • petey, they should have set it in India, so that the massive march could take place down roads full of people who live in both financial and energy poverty and who will Continue to live in poverty if the climate policies you and yours believe in, are enacted.

    • from radio reports Aussies also turned up in hundreds..except for melbourne..or so they say. havent seen pics.

    • Sure! For one thing, I believe the poorest of the poor nations, should be allowed to Develop their resources and build energy infrastructure that doesn’t rely on wind to blow 24/7 at just the right speeds, or the sun to shine 24/7!
      How’s that?

    • …but Otter’s is the correct approach, Peter.
      Or do you disagree?
      Would you support Portland Oregon’s denial of a coal port for exports to China, India, and any other developing country?

    • Peter did you not look at that poll? Reliable Energy at Home beat Action on Climate change by 400,000 votes. Considering that most people in the developed world have reliable energy at home, don’t you think it is the people in the poor countries who really want that? Don’t you think they would prefer reliable cheap energy over expensive and unreliable solar panels and windmill?

    • CO2 has done a wonderful job these past three years “enhancing” the agricultural output of the Central Valley in California. It has also done wonders for the output of Death Valley and the Sahara.

    • Beckley,
      Cherry-picking? Looks like it.
      I posted verifiable evidence of the global rise in ag productivity. Dispute that, if you think you can.
      Your cryptic, vague comments just clutter up the thread. If you have something to say, say it.

  2. Assuming about 600000 attended worldwide that would make about 0.01% of the total world population. Not what you would call a real consensus.

    • Yes. And even assuming it was 400000 its about 0.1% of the US population. About the same percentage as marched in Australia. Pathetic!.

    • Truth isn’t a hatchet job. Don’t like this websites view then post truthful counter-information rather than trolling.
      But from your comment it is clear that truth isn’t high on your list of priorities.

    • Village Idiot
      Truth, facts and reality are NOT a “hatchet job”.
      The truth is that the NY “People’s Climate March” demonstrated lack of support for the global warming scare.
      The facts are that the “March” attracted a surprisingly small number of participants. Assume the largest estimate of those who attended the NY “People’s Climate March” is correct then ~400,000 people attended. This compares with ~50,000 who completed the NY Marathon and ~2,000,000 who lined the marathon course last year.
      And the reality is that the lack of support and surprisingly small participation in the “March” was because most people don’t care about the false issue of the global warming scare, and they say they don’t care when polled about it.
      Richard

      • I think that the assertion was that even 100 000 is an overestimate by a long way. A stadium provides about 0.5×1.2 metres per person for the cattle class seating. A four lane road in the city is 12 m wide so 20 people per m is a generous estimate of the crowd density for those people marching (assuming that they would like a decent gap between each row for a long stride without taking off the shoe of the person in front). The Huff/post says that the circuit was 3.2 km. Lets say that it was continuously filled. That would give 64 000 people. After homogenization, we get 300 -400 thousand.

      • who cares how many were there. It is only a measure of ignorance. In 1969 I was a paid protester in the anti Vietnam Nam rallies, and so were most of my friends. Only 20 dollars and a meal but we were poor college students and it was exciting. I suspect that many such people attend marches with the same reasons I had. In 1970 I was drafted and went to SE Asia.

      • Yet the post referred to a call-out for people to hand out leaflets and get paid $50. Nothing in the post misdirected commenters to believe that the marchers themselves were paid. Reading comprehension is a skill you should use.
        I would imagine that handing out leaflets during a march requires a complicated permit along with a host of other rules. And I would imagine there are businesses to fill that nitch.

      • Re: Pamela Gray September 22, 2014 at 5:15 am:
        When I was younger and stupider, I protested near the UN against nuclear weapons (as if there are people in favor of them) . I didn’t go with a group, and I found myself standing near a group of anarchists. Even back then I was a limited government type, so I figured anarchists were the closest thing to limited government I would find there. I had nothing better to do, so I asked if I could hand out leaflets, I wasn’t paid, there were no permits required and there was no training, I handed them to whomever would take them, then when I got bored I throw them away. Nothing to it.

      • “vicgallus the figures below 310,000 only survive in comment threads like this one. ”
        It says it all about the mentality of a true believer. There are calculations for you to check. What was wrong with them? There are more above. Find a flaw with them. These proper estimates are around the tens of thousands and not 200. I say proper not because it comes from authority but how its calculated is there for you to see and for you to make a judgement,

      • Village Idiot says: “Rule #1 of ‘Sceptisism’: Sow doubt about the data.”
        I didn’t question the numbers in either case, Village Idiot. You’re wasting your time, and, more importantly, my time.
        Adios.

      • Village Idiot,
        What data?? All I see are opinions. Numbers have been ratcheted up throughout the past 24 hours, from a few tens of thousands, to a hundred thousand, to a worldwide total of 300,000 – 400,000, to a Manhattan-only total of 300,000 – 400,000. Believe what you want. But it’s not data.
        Alarmist Rule #1: Refuse to believe the real data, no matter how often it is confirmed.
        Example: there are plenty of village idiots who still argue that global warming is continuing. They even argue that global warming is accelerating.
        They are nuts, of course. But at least they follow Rule #1.

    • The way to annoy a so-called progressive is to tell the truth about what they say or do. The best way to stop a so-called progressive is to quote them accurately and in full. No wonder village idiot is so upset.

  3. The most interesting statistic on that http://data.myworld2015.org site is the number of 16-30 year olds.
    The total poll number is 5,015,344. The 16-30 group that responded was 3,159,132.
    • 3,178,671 voted for a good education
    • 1,050,574 voted for climate change action.
    At best, only 1/3 of the 16-30 crowd voted for climate change action.

    • What awfulness? I live 25 degrees south of the equator, about 100 years of global warming in the future, even at IPCC rates, for most Americans. “Awful” is not the word I would use to describe the weather in these parts.

    • Somehow, I seem to have read those words ten years ago…and wait, I get a deja vu right now: Ten years from today, I will hear them again.

    • Peter, the “awfulness of AGW will only become prominent in those people’s lives a decade or so hence” has been a “decade or so hence” for the past three decades at least. Could you be a little more specific on which decade this awfulness will occur, or is it always to be “some decade in the distant future”?

    • Which decade would that be? The ones following the predictions of Paul Erlich?
      They’re long since gone, but keep up the good work and keep those fear-predictions alive. .

    • @Peter………
      A decade or so hence these people will realize that AGW is a hoax, and a political agenda that was never proven and which has now been disproven by time.

    • Peter, come now. You accuse Bob of a hatchet job regarding the march yet you do the same. No one, not even climate scientists go as far as you just did saying that awful AGW will be here in a decade or so. You just cut to pieces their research and you are on THEIR side! I would imagine even Mikey did a faceslap to your comment.

    • If it hasn’t warmed at all in almost 20 years, why do you believe that it’s all going to heck in the next 10?

    • The “awfulness of AGW will come from the things the idiots have done to try and fight it.
      Massive poverty, loss of freedom, etc.

    • Ah ha ha ha ha! They’re subjected to climate brainwashing from Kindergarten on and at a bare minimum 67% of them reject it as critically important. That’s a big FAIL for you and your ilk.

    • “..the awfulness of AGW will only become prominent in those people’s lives a decade or so hence.”

      Phew. That’s a relief. Usually we are told it is going to be awful in about five years.
      I think they’ve been saying that for well over 1/4 of a century now.

    • @Karl
      Wouldn’t more current a graph include the CO2 level of today, so about 400 ppm, which would be off that chart?
      In today’s world a slight rise of the sea level would have considerable impact on the populated areas, compared to the past when such risk didn’t exist.

    • @fredberple: “If it isn’t rising in Vancouver, it can’t be rising anywhere else because the oceans are all interconnected.”
      Please note that sea level rise at any given location is also affected by tectonic movements, glacial rebound, and subsidence.

    • To some people the most awful thing is that the catastrophe that was promised is not occurring.
      Also, Many of the posts referring to paid volunteers were in jest. Mine were. On WUWT, if the subject of the thread is not scientific, the sarcasm and humor will likely rule.

    • 400,000/total population of the US (approximate) = .00133333 =.133333%. That is not a whole lot of Americans concerned about the issue of AGW, as far as I am concerned, even if we take for granted the number of people who actually showed up (which I doubt, given the MSM’s propensity to miscount at these types of rallies).

    • By the way, guys like you were predicting “the awfulness of AGW. . . a decade or so hence” about 25 years ago already. So stop playing at Chicken Little, it is unbecoming.

  4. One of the attractions of global-warming/climate-change is that it gives believers an excuse (a bad excuse) to dismiss the legitimate opinions and concerns of others who may disagree.

  5. I wonder how many of of the 300K finished their day by having a nice burger and a starbucks coffee, before loading up the family into the gas-guzzling people carrier and heading home to relax in their air conditioned apartment.
    And how many will have gone home and thought “I must change my lifestyle to save the climate”?
    Or was it just a nice day out watching a parade, – and a good opportunity to try out their brand new iphone6.

    • My personal belief is that more CO2 has more benefits than drawbacks for this globe – it provides exponentially diminishing more warmth for more arable land with more CO2 food for healthier crops. To increase this amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, I burn all the detritus from pruning my fruit trees without ever consulting local burn laws. Consequently I am not a hypocrite.

    • Mr. Grace,
      I believe that more CO2 is a net benefit to the world as well. Plants love it as food and grow better and feed more people. Peter, you worry about the arable land taken out of production by storm surges, but don’t seem to worry about the arable land taken out of food production to make fuel for cars. This makes food costlier for the poor where those of us more affluent just pay more and move on. I would put an argument in for making more CO2 to make it warmer and making more arable land that way, except that I don’t believe the CO2 makes that kind of difference. In fact, in the face of a permanent cooling trend, I could not make that argument to slow a cooling trend down because I simply do not believe the extra CO2 would slow it down at all. I DO like the fact that plants grow faster when there is more of it.
      One of the things hiding in this thread is that the implication of less food for the poor, is that there are many in the green movement who believe the earth is overpopulated, and would be better off with fewer people. Decrease the surplus population, as Scrooge would say before his visits with the various spirits.The problem with that is the BILLIONS you have to kill off getting there. The bad guys of the 20th century only managed roughly 100 million. You really do have ambitions. You worry about those on coasts being threatened by rising ocean levels, but they are not threatened with death. The ocean rises too slowly for that, even if warming continues at the rates prior to the leveling off seen during the past 18 years. Yet you don’t seem to worry about all the people facing starvation because they can no longer afford food because it is being used to make fuel instead. This is entirely consistent with a view that hopes the population of the world will decline and provides an allegedly green excuse for accomplishing it. Well played, Mr. Grace.

    • It did not affect pensioners or the poor
      ============
      If you are talking about BC you are very much mistaken. The program was a disaster, siphoning money out of the school systems into the hands of a few select private companies. Money that could have gone to replace ageing furnaces instead went for projects that would have been built regardless. Only after repeated investigations by newspapers and private individuals, and a scathing report by BC’s Audotor General was the governments forced to roll the tax over into general revenue.

  6. They just don’t realize that “Action on climate change” means they can’t own a car, or have reliable power to run their tvs and computers. Yes, that’s exactly what it means. No, there is no such thing as “clean and green” power, other than Nuclear (which is off the table to people who don’t understand physics or the real world).

    • You’re not agreeing with me, you’re demonstrating that something I typed as sarcastic seems appealing to you.
      I hope some day you take the time to learn some basic physics, and not the ridiculous politicized “new science” crap that you seem to love spouting off. There are no “renewables” that are in any way useful in our society. None.

  7. I don’t care that it’s in New York (where 95% of the people live perpetually with their heads up their a@@es), those numbers don’t get that fluffy without help from our Decepticon President.
    Barry is ramping up to do the public more violence, the worst way he can.

  8. The UN Survey is interesting, you can change parameters- income (by country), education, age etc. Climate change goes up the rankings the richer the country gets, and with higher education levels (although it only has “past secondary”). Concern for the environment (clean rivers etc) consistently ranks higher than global climate change, which is a relief in many ways. Age, surprisingly, had less effect on climate change ranking than one might have expected.

  9. I’m not sure about the idea of skewed priorities. Every persons priority is subjective and reflective of what they see as important in the world. It may be that some people in this survey voted for food as a priority, some voted for political freedom, others for freedom from persecution. None of these are wrong, they are just what is important to the individual. You are concerned at protesters demonstrating at what the perceive as a lack of action in climate change, that’s your choice Bob. However, by their very actions they are demonstrating political freedoms and rights which are also critical. They are likely to be well nourished, so are not to concerned over food. Their priorities suggest they are doing well and have the time and resources to be concerned about climate change. Disagree with them, but a much worse situation is when no-one cares enough about anything to protest any more. I do not agree with everything they say, but I applaud their commitment.

    • I condemn the collective stupidity that foams up when you mix Occupy Wall Street, left over Acorns, and OFA.

      • You do indeed have that freedom Maggie. However whether they have a commitment to harm others it at best a very subjective opinion, and at worse it is antagonistic. There are people here who believe that an almost complete absence of government is desirable in any modern society. Others may be really concerned over such a dog eat dog society, but there we are. Glenn Beck has lots of followers who would love to see only the strong survive and the weak go to the wall, but I doubt we will see anyone protest against his worrying ideas. Just because you disagree with someone does not make them a threat to humanity, no, not even Glenn beck.

      • There are people here who believe that an almost complete absence of government is desirable in any modern society.
        There’s a lie.
        Glenn Beck has lots of followers who would love to see only the strong survive and the weak go to the wall
        And there’s another.
        You’re just chock full of slanders.
        And yes, when ten, twenty, or ten thousand, gather to shut down power in my home, that is a commitment to harm me. Not opinion. Just a fact.

      • Gareth, it is generally considered bad form to lie about what others say and believe.
        The idea that only big govt keeps this from being a dog eat dog world is common fare amongst liberals. But even a casual reading of history shows this belief to be incorrect at best, a lie at worst.

      • Gareth, The driving principle of the Founding Fathers was Limited Government and personal liberty.
        Read the US history that lead us to revolt and you’ll understand the American Libertarian.

    • Gareth, if I were as convinced as you are that this is an important issue, maybe I would see this the same way from your viewpoint. But what these folks are doing is calling for action, political action, that requires a greater exercise of power than most anyone would be willing to give to the politicians in any other situation. That it is being portrayed in the most draconian terms requiring draconian action thus justifies us questioning whether their priorities are skewed or, worse yet, unduly influenced by hysterical propaganda that is contrary to (or otherwise distorts) known scientific facts. Nevertheless, their priorities are skewed, not because of the subjectivity of a person’s priorities, but because their ignorance of the known facts and their emphasis on the wrong things becomes so apparent when you hear any of them speak (e.g. Robert Kennedy’s deflection of the questions being asked of him by a media person about how he fails to practice what he preaches).

  10. Just took the survey.
    The moment you have clicked your sixth priority the survey jumps forward to Complete.
    So if you pick one and then decide it isn’t as important as a later priority then you had better not have got to 6 already This clearly biases the polling towards the earlier priorities on the list. You may not get to the bottom.
    And the first option is “Action on Climate Change” as it begins with “A”.
    Even with a fixed vote it still comes last.

    • Gee, what if they are ALL important? Do we really have to pick 6? And I strongly disagree with those on this thread who say that fighting climate change will create poverty. For whom? Why does that necessarily have to happen? Why can’t wealthy countries cut emissions, develop and transfer renewable energy technologies to developing countries, and help them leapfrog the fossil fuel economy? Many posters here are also staunch supporters of the free market, but to say action on climate change will necessarily cause poverty ignores the reality of free markets — people will buy and invest in what they value, not just what is “cheapest.”

      • “Why can’t wealthy countries cut emissions”
        Because they don’t need to. A fortune is being spent on a problem that doesn’t exist. Why not give just a fraction of the billions wasted on ‘climate change'(TM) to solving real problems like providing clean drinking water to those who desperately need it?
        As for renewable energy: come back to me when the technology actually works efficiently. Windmills don’t cut it right now.

      • and help them leapfrog the fossil fuel economy?
        ==============
        if the wealthy countries haven’t yet been able to do away with the fossil fuel economy, how can the poorest countries be expected to do so?
        The industrialized nations such as the US got where they are by burning fossil fuels. A whole lot of fossil fuels. Having got ours, we now want to deny this to the poorest countries.
        The reason we want to deny this to the poorest countries is self evident. We are afraid. Afraid the if the poorest countries do the exact same as we did, this will change OUR climate and harm us. So, we would prefer that the poor countries remain poor and not use fossil fuels.
        A tax on fossil fuels will do this. Make them so expensive that only the rich countries can afford them. 6 dollar a gallon gasoline is only an issue if you make $6/day. If you make $600/day it is not an issue, you will keep on driving.
        So in the end, only the poor will suffer. Greed and fear, that is what is driving us. Of course we don’t admit it. We rationalize and claim we are trying to save the planet. We are of course trying to save ourselves. To keep what we have and deny it to the rest of the planet.

      • The only way to reduce CO2 production is by making everyone poor. There are no renewable energy technologies that are capable of providing cheap and reliable power. Without that, widespread poverty is inevitable.

      • Again, all of these comments ignore basic principles of free markets — people are free to supply and use substitutes, innovate, and economies of scale develop for new(er) technologies.

      • Free markets are not allowed. Windmills, AKA bird choppers, are forced on us and raise both our electric bills and our taxes.

    • I have the opposite problem with the survey – I was required to check more boxes than I wanted to. Somewhat implicit – though not stated – is the background that these are things that the UN will, directly or by influencing member governments, take as priorities.
      All of these things are good things, at least on the surface. (Take reliable energy at home, for example. That’s great if it means more power plants, transmission lines, and gas wells. Not so much if it means everybody gets a solar panel instead of something more economical and reliable.) On the other hand, it is highly questionable whether it is useful or even desirable for the UN to engage in the pursuit of any of them. A UN program for better jobs is probably not going to be useful, and would probably be counterproductive.
      I chose four items – access to clean water and sanitation, political freedoms, an honest and responsive government, and freedom from discrimination and persecution – that I thought were within the realm of things the UN could (potentially) positively influence. Even those goals have the potential for bad outcomes with UN types involved. I had to pick two more items to complete the survey. Now those two random items show up in the results as if I cared about them, when I don’t (at least I don’t care for the UN to be involved with them).
      The take-away being that people likely are much less concerned about some of these things that the survey might suggest.

  11. Meanwhile back at the ranch here in Munich, the Oktoberfest sees about 7 million people marching through the streets to get beer.
    Kind of puts the People’s March in perspective.

    • I tend to agree that beer is much more important than climate change, and has been for several centuries. There won’t be any beer in the green utopia™ – smacks too much of enjoying oneself. Hair shirts all round!

    • And after reading some of the comments here, I could use a good brew about now.
      Is it me, or has the troll population increased somewhat dramatically of late?
      Increased trolling = Increase in desperation.
      Feeding trolls is like playing the carnival game “Whack A Mole”. As soon as you prove any given point wrong, they just move on to the next talking point. And as typical, they never respond to facts.

  12. Significantly fewer than the worldwide queues for the launch of the latest iPhone, and possibly fewer than the first week’s sales of said product in NY State. People do indeed have their priorities skewed by their immediate environment and perceived needs, rather than rational thought – in most cases.

  13. It’s notable that the next to last item is political freedoms. It would seem that people make no connection between political freedom and being able to attain all the other important things in life.

  14. Most of the people were just stuck in traffic. I had to drop off a friend who lives near the park on 58th st. My rate of speed going back down from 58th to 42nd was 2 mph, and I was driving!

  15. If solar scientists are right, and earth’s climate cools for the next few decades, these people will still be protesting. They won’t let facts get in the way of their beliefs.

    • Solar need not apply. The oceanic-atmospheric teleconnected system is quite capable of causing up and down trends under a relatively steady state sun. Even climate models (that we so love to hate) that account for these teleconnections while ignoring anthropogenic (not total) CO2 can be set up to run cold.

      • Pamela Gray
        September 22, 2014 at 5:26 am
        Solar need not apply. The oceanic-atmospheric teleconnected system is quite capable of causing up and down trends under a relatively steady state sun.

        Right — like ice-ages following orbital variations. No inherent solar-changes required.

  16. We had a climate march here in Santa Fe last Sat. and I attended. It was the same thing here…get rid of fossil fuel..etc…What I found most amazing..the newspaper did not cover it. There is no mention of the local lemmings. There is of New York lemmings tho.
    Last summer we had a green fair here which the paper endorsed. Once again there was no coverage. I would of thunk it would have made front page.

  17. I liked the huge turnout at Geraldton Western Australia in the rain. 23 idiots 3 children and a dog. Population of Geraldton 36,000. Tony Abbott the Australian Prime Minister will not be attending the U.N. Climate Summit 2014 he has better things to do.

    • That’s probably a truer estimate of the number of people genuinely concerned. Away from the hype and the big event only a couple of dozen people turn out to protest from a population of 36,000.
      About the number I used to get for the annual general meeting of our local community council. So what’s with “the greatest threat to mankind ever”? Yawn!

    • And better things to do that waste the taxpayers money on a rehashed 19th century theory that has been debunked by facts.

  18. “…paid to protest…”
    The point is that this is not just a spontaneous gathering of people. I suspect that someone with considerable “community organizing” skill is behind it all, getting all these “folks” to show up and get so hyped up about impending CO2-induced catastrophes, when getting hyped up about ISIS and other impending global security threats would make more sense.

  19. funny how these people do not march to demand a control on world population ,,, 6 Billion a decade ago just turned into 7 billion ,,, when are people that ‘care about the planet’ going to wake up to this disaster we are walking into as a species….

    • Campaigning to reduce the world’s populations, are you?
      You are either claiming that other people must not live, or you must include yourself in the group to be reduced. Prove the strength of your convictions.
      Are there tall buildings where you live?
      Lead the way.

    • Okay, I accept your challenge. Forget tall buildings. Leaves a carbon mess on the ground. Get yourself and any offspring snipped. Come on. Snip snip.

    • The planet could easily support double the current population. If the rest of the world were to increase it’s agricultural productivity to US levels, Tripling the population would be no trouble at all.
      On the other hand, even the UN believes the world’s population is going to top out before 2050 and start falling rapidly.

      • The pop of the world could jump into Lake Superior with 14sq m (140 sq feet) each to tread water in; 80 billion could be cozy with 10sq feet. Now that would be a protest! Population is not a problem, although it would be nice if the haters decided to remove themselves from the gene pool.

    • Mainly because it isn’t.
      And will be less so if we stop trying to keep the undeveloped countries undeveloped.
      The UN itself claims that the earth’s population will peak at around 9 billion by mid-century and start to decline thereafter. Even at present we could give every human being currently alive ¼-acre of land in Australia and still have Tasmania left over not to mention the rest of the world. Of course it would help if we stopped using prime agrcultural land to grow diesel and stopped cutting down forests to feed power stations.

    • Jonny Old Boy
      September 22, 2014 at 3:52 am
      “funny how these people do not march to demand a control on world population”
      They demand socialism, which is the most effective population control the world has witnessed.

      • DirkH
        You assert that socialism is “the most effective population control the world has witnessed”. Yes, and it is good to be able to agree with you for a change.
        The reason socialism is so good at population control is that socialism grows wealth and improves affluence. And affluence reduces population.
        There are several reasons why affluence reduces population. Of most importance is that poor people need large families as ‘insurance’ to care for them at times of illness and old age. Affluent people can pay for that ‘insurance’ so do not need the costs of large families.
        The result is that the indigenous populations of rich countries decline. But rich countries need to sustain population growth for economic growth so they need to import – and are importing – people from poor countries. Increased affluence in poor countries can be expected to reduce their population growth with resulting lack of people for import by rich countries.
        Hence, the real foreseeable problem is population decrease; n.b. not population increase.
        All projections and predictions indicate that human population will peak around the middle of this century and decline after that. So, we are confronted by the probability of ‘peak population’ resulting from growth of affluence around the world. Indeed, we have already passed ‘peak children’ and the number of people aged under 16 years has been declining since the start of this century.
        Richard

      • “The reason socialism is so good at population control is that socialism grows wealth and improves affluence. And affluence reduces population.”
        I know about the affluence that a good Gulag builds, Richard.

      • DirkH
        Yes, and socialists were rounded up and put in gulags by communists.
        Fortunately soviet communism is gone.
        Unfortunately a return of communism is threatened by events such as the ‘March’ which is the subject of this thread.
        Very unfortunately there are ‘useful idiots’ whom communists confuse people about the immense differences between communism and socialism. And fascists also use ‘useful idiots’ to stealthily promote their politics by the same method.
        Richard

      • richardscourtney
        September 22, 2014 at 2:55 pm
        “Very unfortunately there are ‘useful idiots’ whom communists confuse people about the immense differences between communism and socialism. ”
        Well, according to a certain Karl Marx, socialism turns into communism when the socialist state dissolves by itself as it is no more needed; when the New Human has been successfully created. This was never achieved in the Soviet Union, therefore it was a socialist state.
        There is no such thing as a communist state; communism is stateless.
        Yeah I know I will hear some variation of the No True Scotsman fallacy now…

      • DirkH
        You yet again demonstrate your ‘useful idiot’ status.
        What Karl Marx claimed has been demonstrated to be wrong by subsequent history.
        Socialists do NOT morph into communists as Marx claimed. You are free to be a good little Marxist if you want to be, but that does not entitle you to pretend that we socialists have to abide by the mistaken Marxist ideas you cite and promote.
        Richard

      • @richardscourtney
        “Socialism grows wealth and improves affluence. . . ”
        Yeah, sort of like in France at this point, eh? Or Cuba? Or North Korea? Even Sweden, which encouraged its private sector to grow through reduced regulation and taxes in the 90s and 2000s? Europe is still in the ditch, fella, and it isn’t coming out likely any time soon until they abandon socialist methods, because as their working populations decrease their welfare states are going to come apart at the seams. But true believers like yourself refuse to believe anything they should easily see. I would characterize you as a useless idiot.

  20. TRG September 22, 2014 at 2:55 am
    It’s notable that the next to last item is political freedoms. It would seem that people make no connection between political freedom and being able to attain all the other important things in life.

    B I N G O !
    It’s also notable that shelter and clothing are missing from the list.

    • Yes, in today’s economy, a lot of people have to choose between shelter and clothing, settling mostly on shelter. However, once the economy gets going again, clothiers should make a killing as people replace ragtag items.

  21. climate change is the most important situation facing humanity this century. If we don’t fix it now this century will be last habital one.

    • That would be ‘habitable’, I assume.
      Can you provided some evidence for this extraordinary assertion? I’ve seen none so far.

    • You can’t fix climate change. The climate will change the way it always has. The good news is that you probably don’t have to worry about warming. The bad news is that you may have to worry about significant cooling. That’s much worse. We know from the historical record what happens when the climate cools: famine, war and pestilence. The best protection against it seems to be prosperity. Cheap energy is one of the keys to prosperity, in fact it may be a necessary condition.
      Anyway, the historical record is also clear that, no matter how bad the climate gets, humanity survives.

    • 1 degree of warming is going to render the planet uninhabitable?
      Even the IPCC has abandoned any pretenses of trying to claim the climate is going to warm much more than 2 degrees.

    • Really Richard? (Your name is Richard right? You just misspelled it didn’t you?)
      Did you come to this conclusion all by yourself or did you hear it at the march where you handed out flyers for $50.-?

    • Richatd Punko
      September 22, 2014 at 4:06 am
      “climate change is the most important situation facing humanity this century. If we don’t fix it now this century will be last habital one.”
      If the world were actually warming, which it isn’t since 1998, Canada and Siberia would become habitable and arable; introducing an age of abundance the world has never seen in the last 10,000 years.
      Why do you people hate Canadians and Russians?

    • UN IPCC Official Ottmar Edenhofer said:
      But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy…This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy any more.
      richatd,read the above statement and realise climate change is the least of our worries.

    • “Climate change…most important situation…this century” – oh really? guess you haven’t met ISIS or Ebola.
      Too bad.

  22. 22 Sept: Telegraph: Emily Gosden: Prince Charles: climate change is the greatest challenge facing humanity
    “Even in a world full of daunting perils and crises, it is hard to imagine anything that poses a greater challenge and opportunity for humanity,” he will say.
    His comments come in an address to political and business leaders in New York ahead of major international climate change talks, convened by UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon…
    In a pre-recorded video address, the Prince shakes his head as he says: “We are running out of time – how many times have I found myself saying this over recent years?” …
    In his video, Prince Charles says the world cannot “delay, regroup, prevaricate or wait for more and better information” and warns that tackling global warming will require “an unprecedented transformation of our communities, societies and lifestyles”.
    He calls for renewable energy – such as wind farms and solar panels – to be “vastly scaled up”…
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-charles/11110457/Prince-Charles-climate-change-is-the-greatest-challenge-facing-humanity.html

    • aaannnd?
      King Canute, you know the guy that ranks higher than mere princes, ordered the tide to go out.
      Just like Prince silly you mentioned, the tide didn’t listen, nor does the climate listen to Price Charles.
      King Canute is down in history as using the tide to teach his followers a lesson that being royal does not make one infallible or omnipotent. Oh and dear old King Canute ruled a greater area than just Great Britain.

    • “Procrastinate” my liege…. “procrastinate.”
      … although certain ones do prevaricate, equivocate and exaggerate as well…

  23. If I was a Warmist PR operative and I had an aerial shot of 400,000 people on a demo, I would have it ALL OVER the media.

  24. That’s all they could manage? They were busing them in from all over the east coast (saw a bus leave from a {shock} Walmart parking lot in Richmond.
    I guess lots of people had a spare day and could use the $50. In this economy,. we all can use the money.

  25. I posted the following on the thread about paid marchers. I doubt that many were paid, but there were reportedly many organizations coordinated things, arranged for buses, etc.
    An old friend who I heard from recently by email, a died-in-the-wool liberal, has this signature:

    My activism at this point is centered on divestment of institutions from fossil fuels, and on stopping the pipelines (Keystone XL and the Northeast Pipeline), because solving the climate crisis is literally the sine qua non. I’m working with 350.org.
— And notice: so far, over 95,000 people have signed Credo’s pledge of civil disobedience alone (there are other pledges) in connection with the pipeline.. Finally, finally, this movement is taking off. Better late than never!
I urge all to attend the NYC climate march on Sept. 21. . . [list of organizations like the Sierra Club, providing buses, follows]

    Note the phrase, “My activism at this point. . .” This is someone who defines herself by the putative causes she attached herself to. I doubt if she has the slightest clue that the science behind organizations like 350.org is completely fraudulent. Doesn’t matter: “The movement is taking off.” It’s where the action is. She’s basically a camp follower.
    /Mr Lynn

  26. All this spitting back and forth doesn’t change the FACT that lots of misguided people showed up for the march, parade or whatever one wishes to call it. Score a hard-earned point for the climate change propaganda machine. Then move on to resume the tedious work of spreading the scientific truth of man-made global warming. One cannot credibly defend scientific facts on the one hand while denying the significance of a demonstrably large crowd having just gathered in New York on the other.

    • Claude Harvey,
      I fear you are correct. No matter the reality of the numbers, paid or not, it will be “useful” for propaganda to herd the “idiots” in the right direction.
      Way too easy for them. The education system has failed us. Go ahead and call me a conspiracist , but I also believe that is AS PLANNED to make the masses more easy to fool. As we are seeing demonstrated today.

    • Agreed. It is a fatal flaw to underestimate an adversary.
      As I’ve written elsewhere here, 350.org and its cohorts have demonstrated their ability to organize and mobilize “over 1500” disparate groups for their so-called “ecosocialist” activities.
      Tiny sampling of groups said to be participating in the People’s Climate March:
      Codepink
      CodePinkTN
      Congregation Kol Ami, Elkins Park, PA
      Collectively Free
      College Democrats of Massachusetts
      College Green Magazine
      Columban Center for Advocacy and Outreach
      Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health
      COMFORT ZONE documentary
      Coming Clean
      Comite Dialogo Ambiental, Inc.
      Committee Against Plutonium Economics
      Committee of Interns and Residents-SEIU
      Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism
      Common Dreams
      Communications Workers of America
      Communications Workers of America, District 1
      Communications Workers of America, Local 1180
      Communist Party USA
      According to Benjamin Friedman, only about 40,000 Jewish Muscovite Bolsheviks were required to seize control of Russia.

    • It just shows that Scottish journalist Charles Mackay’s “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds” is just as applicable to today as it was in 1841 when published.

  27. Now they’re claiming 400,000 MARCH IN NY. It’s on HuffPo. Jeezuss. That 2.75X the population of Syracuse. New Year’s Eve gets that kind of crowd. This didn’t.

    • Good video, worth a look, if for no other reason than to see the guy right at the start with the gas mask and white gloves; as the camera pans back, we get a brief peek at his hat, which reads:

      NUKE THE CLIMATE!

      Truly, you can’t make up this stuff. Vonnegut would be impressed.

  28. It looks to me like they’ve pretty much jumped on the socialist anti-capitalist bandwagon and showed their true colors. Global Warming to Climate Change. They don’t care what the facts are. This movement is quite large.
    But the irony is that even though socialism in various forms eventually runs out of other people’s money as economies slowly (or quickly) descend via entropy to the dismal bottom, one true socialist country is doing quite well without the horrors of high taxes and unemployment.
    That country is Norway. It’s small which helps but it is dependent on oil revenue to keep its economy going.
    So Climate Change fanatics who wish to destroy capitalism are on their way to destroying socialism instead.
    Hah!

  29. I imagine the gross majority think CO2 is a pollutant and the world has been continually heating the past 20 years. When all people are inundated with are misrepresentations of the truth from their governments and media, its no wonder they feel this way. Sadly, individual research is the only way to have a well informed opinion, and I doubt there is much of that at all in those streets.

    • Good point–too bad there wasn’t a reporter (or contrarian) there to poll participants with a questionaire on their beliefs.

  30. A good friend of mine maintains that the right to protest is the most important right we have in the free world. I tend to agree, but I also maintain that the right to mock protestors is just as important.

    • I would say that mocking protestors is also a form of protest.
      What saddens me is the number of people who proclaim how important it is to protest, who would then turn around and ban any protests that they disagreed with.

  31. A note to those mentioning their proximity to the equator. I live 21° South of it, and I am still waiting to be able to don shorts comfortably again. I moved here because it was too cold further South this last decade, and I expect it to get cooler.

  32. Those who succeed in pushing through mandated reductions in business ventures will get what they ask for. No one will have jobs thus no one will be using transportation of any kind. Fossil fuels will stay in the ground. Everybody will be ever so happy to sit around in squalid dense apartment buildings, communist-style. But tell me, watermelon-rich folks (such as Al Gore), who will be working your fields, washing your dishes, and wiping your butt in this imagined Shangri La?

  33. How does anyone know that 310-400,000 number’s accurate? What measure was used? The measurement system of public relations? Or the measurement system of impressivanatics? How about the measurement system of…?
    Way back in the late 1970s the then Pope traveled to Chicago as part of a world tour. All the news services reported that a million people showed up. No one bothered to ask how a transportation system for a city of four million people could handle an additional one million people without freezing up solid. In reality an aerial count showed 75,000 people in Chicago’s Grant Park at the Pope’s visit there.
    Remember all the Million Man Marches? They’re all gone aren’t they? They disappeared when that impressive number began to sound silly and self-defeating.
    I’d take this 310-400,000 figure with a real grain of salt. Let’s see how it was derived first.

    • Are you serious? 35 spotters, eh? What, each of them counted approximately 10,000 people each, and there were no double, triple, or quadruple counts? And, of course, there was no personal enthusiasm adding to their counts?
      Nonsense. What about an aerial gridded headcount? Can’t have that, can we? How about the additional buses pulling into NY’s massive bus station. How many additional schedules and lines were added to the Sunday public transportation schedules? What about garbage collection counts? – oh wait, they don’t collect garbage on Sunday.
      Show me real numbers. Not a preconceived model.

    • Last night, (9-21-2014) around 9PM EST, I clicked into a Wall Street Journal article regarding the climate march and I checked out some of the march photos they presented.
      At that time, the independent estimate for marchers was ‘tens of thousands’ while the march organizers were claiming 310,000 – 400,000 plus marchers worldwide.
      11AM this morning and the article is changed. Gone is the independent estimate and now the organizers estimate is 400,000 plus marchers in New York City.
      New York has access to experts who are quite capable of accurately assessing crowd sizes. They must, crowds require adequate preparations and precautions for safety, transportation, restrooms, food and police; otherwise disaster portends.
      Where are the independent estimates with photographic evidence?
      What objective person(s) in the world automatically accept estimates from organizers whose success depends upon those numbers? Objective! Remember to keep that word objective in perspective. Especially when we already know just how objective a number of those organizers are, (e.g. McKibbs bits).
      While looking through the photos and reading the signage carried, I was a little surprised just why all those groups thought they were marching.

      “Steve P September 22, 2014 at 7:24 am
      Agreed. It is a fatal flaw to underestimate an adversary.
      As I’ve written elsewhere here, 350.org and its cohorts have demonstrated their ability to organize and mobilize “over 1500″ disparate groups for their so-called “ecosocialist” activities…”

      Steve P weighed in with a very short list of those groups attending the march. Quite a number of those groups carried signs that didn’t mention climate change; which I thought was interesting.
      Supposedly 500 busses were used to drive protestors in from out of the city. Why? Those folks could’ve marched wherever they were from, saved carbon fuels, kept roads clear and ate their own food.
      Based on other ‘350.org organized’ bus events I expect that protestors rode free and at least got free food and drink at the block party.
      Described differently, the protestors brought in enjoyed a free trip to the Big Apple with food and drink even if every one of them were not paid to show up.
      Bogus all around from specific marcher motives to marcher compensation(s) whether food, drink, free ride, monetary to the mathematically very anomalous marcher count.

      • ‘Supposedly 500 busses were used to drive protestors in from out of the city.’
        Only 500? If each of those buses hold 100 passengers each (I don’t think they do) that leaves us with a total of 5,000 out of towners. And, in my admittedly limited experience, most out of town protesters arrive by bus. Which is why the Pennsylvania Turnpike, and Washington, and the congested East Coast is set up for this. So, unless those other 395,000 protesters all harken from the direct New York area me thinks this, um protest, ain’t quite the biggee it’s claimed.
        But, then again, those 500 buses could be special magic buses. Maybe they’re teletransportation buses. Expandable buses? Regenerating buses? Breed like rabbit buses? Who knows?

      • “Only 500? If each of those buses hold 100 passengers each (I don’t think they do) that leaves us with a total of 5,000 out of towners.”
        Make that 50,000 (500 * 100). (But such buses probably hold only 60 people, so make it 30,000.)

  34. Going back to the march in Santa Fe….I was talking to a young marcher..teenager…I mentioned underwater volcanoes and that is what causing calfing on the small part of Antarctica not co2. He was surprised we have underwater volcanoes.He never heard of them…so much on our school science

    • Underwater volcanoes are certainly presented in standard geography text books. That your teenager didn’t read that chapter is not a reflection on teachers as much as it is a reflection on teenagers. By the way, under-the-ocean mountains are called seamounts. Many such seamounts are also volcanoes. My 5th grade writing club studied them.

      • I heard some people learn geography by declaring war. If undersea volcanoes had oil…..

      • With today’s emphasis upon “studies” that support everything from global warming to whether kids should have their tonsils removed, the largest void in high school science is regarding the basic skills needed to evaluate research validity. And I do believe some very basic skills could be taught at that level that would be very valuable and be no more difficult than pre-calc. I try to introduce such issues where time permits and where appropriate.

      • Underwater Volcanoes discriminate against South Sea Islanders.
        Therefore, Underwater Volcanoes are RACIST and must never be discussed.

  35. The proposed catastrophe of an insignificant rise in average temperature from 34 to 34.5 C inside of 2 or 3 generations is the issue here. The horror of 1 entire degree will be……..lost on humans. They can’t detect that difference and it is still inside natural variation and well inside the error bars of climate models.
    The march was nothing more than a march of intellectually stunted, mob-ruled idiots.

  36. The climate kooks are making one last push towards relevance. Every one of their treaties, movies, laws, and predictions have failed. Yet all they do is ramp up the fear.
    That sort of behavior meets the definition of crazy.
    They are yesterday’s fear mongers whining about their inevitable passage into irrelevance.

    • This is precisely why we don’t have to worry about a totalitarian world gov. It starts off nice and fuzzy, full of Kumbaya moments, but eventually they get impatient and pushy, and soon its all hanging out for even the most gullible to see. The apparatchiks have faded away before this to fight another day and left the crumbling edifice to the useful idiots who are the last to be disillusioned. Interestingly, we have to be thankful to China, Russia and India who have held the fort for the rest of us to catch up. The soshulist model has been falsified repeatedly (hence Russia and China’s role as saviors) but these Luddites haven’t the imagination to try something different.

      • Gary, the problem is that while the population does wake up and roll back the gains of the one world govt types, they only give back about 90% of what they have gained.
        Each new assault starts from higher ground than the previous assault.

  37. On another topic, looks like the artic minimum ice extent may have been passed. Another year of “ice free” artic fail.

    • No. Climate March! World burning up! Polar ice caps REALLY melting!! I can’t hear you [fingers in ears]! /sarc

  38. You are all out of your depth, the real issue goes back to the Galileo affair when the central argument was not really whether the Earth was the center of the solar system or Universe but rather whether the system which predicts astronomical events such as when the Equinox occurs,when solar and lunar eclipses happen and things like that would mesh with the observations and conclusions used to determine the Earth turns and moves through space.
    The later empiricists exploited the term ‘predictive’ as it applies to astronomy within a clockwork solar system framework and then extended it to all motions large and small until we arrive in this train wreck of an era where everything is dumped into predictions/speculations and nothing reserved for interpretation and stable narratives which link astronomy to terrestrial sciences.
    Turns out that one side in this ‘climate change’ mess is every bit as problematic as the other for the wider view looks at the emergence of predictive modeling and the disappearance of interpretative science where none of this nonsense would have happened.

    • Ya~ tell those shallow(?) punctuation users what’s what!
      So, are you saying that both sides of the CAGW ‘mess’ are both wrong, because predictive modeling has usurped interpretative science in some way? It may be you whom are out of your depth, because interpretive science is even easier to politically spin than predictive modeling applied to science. The real problem, is that bad interpretations lead to failed predictions.

  39. If you do a bit of drilling down on data.myworld2015.org, you will find that around 20% of respondents claim Mexico as their home country. I have nothing against Mexico, but these results are far from definitive. It’s just another example of the thoughtless approach the UN takes in all of its efforts. I will say that it is interesting that they would go public with this, since it is bad news for the warmist agenda. When will they start “adjusting” these results?

    • I was going to post the same thing. Mexico is incredibly over-represented in this survey. I’m curious how that happened. Also, 13.3% from Sri Lanka, 4.3% from Yemen, 3.5% from Nigeria, yet only 1.1% from USA. Heck, Ghana (1.2%) had a better showing than we did.

  40. Meanwhile here in the UK there was a march through London headed by Emma Thompson and Vivienne Westwood – so you know automatically that they have no idea what they are marching for. Loads of banners saying ‘100% clean energy’ – whatever that means…

  41. Between 310,000 to 400,000? AM New York today is saying “tens of thousands”.
    I was interested in going to have a look myself and getting an idea of the size, but with the multiple PATH failures I wasn’t interested in getting stranded…

  42. I’m shocked to see that political freedom ranks so low on the scale. I would have that at the top of what I want government to insure.

  43. C’mon, let’s be honest here:
    it is the “peoples” march, and the “people” are being constantly told in the media that “climate change is here and it is not good”, the science is settled, the debate is over, we must act now”,. Heck, even the President of the United States has said so, along with an ex-Vice President and, most importantly, Bill Nye the science guy, so it must be true.
    These “people” are clueless of the truth: that only a portion of what is portrayed as “the science” is settled, that there is serious debate (even among supporters of the CAGW concept) going on, a globally warming atmosphere has not been happening in 15 – 18 years, nothing unprecedented has happened with the climate in recent history, etc.
    Forgive them for they know not what they do, although they do look like they are having a good time doing it.

  44. These people are all smarter than the rest of us — just ask them. So it’s no surprise they have other priorities.
    #1 Priority is tell the rest of us how to live.

  45. Data, Data, as with everything else in Climate Activisim, data is the first item to get mangled. We’ll never know how many people attended the March, it is too politically charged a data point for any level of integrity.
    Not that it matters, after OWS which was a far more lengthy and wide ranging protest, Wall Street wealth has been on a huge upswing and the ranks in poverty have stayed the same if not increased.

  46. I went to the “Vote” site and was struck by the fact that there was little there that I would, as a US citizen, consider the business of government to accomplish. I certainly could not find 6 such issues in which the government should play any major roll. And none for the UN.

  47. Had a Twitter chat with several of the attendees. They have a severe lack of civility. Name calling and such seems to be the mode of operation with that group.
    There was a blackboard with the level of CO2 on it put not the temperature. I pointed that without the temperature the board was bogus. Also was a shot of the crowd with fossil spelled wrong and a sign held upside down which I commented on.

  48. If there was an honest and responsive government then climate alarmism would be out of business. So no it is not high on lefty’s list. Haven’t you heard? Climate change is like the most urgent thing in like the history of like ever. Did you know like more animals are extincted in one hour than like the sun is as far from the earth?

  49. Mustering all the usual suspects from throughout the world for one protest in New York. Some of them were climate alarmists. Some of them were anti-capitalist. Some were Liberal Hipster Doofuses. All of them full of hype. And still less than that Glenn Beck rally in Washington a few years back.

  50. The scientists gathering in new York are saying that emissions will continue to increase, adding that the world in about 30 years will warm by about 1.1 C from now. In 2009, world leaders called that level dangerous and pledged not to reach it.
    Just go back a few years.
    Pentagon-climate-scenario/ June 2014: Washington Times: Rowan Scarborough: Pentagon wrestles with bogus climate warnings as funds shifted to green agenda
    Ten years ago, the Pentagon paid for a climate study that put forth many scary scenarios.
    Consultants told the military that, by now, California would be flooded by inland seas, The Hague would be unlivable, polar ice would be mostly gone in summer, and global temperatures would rise at an accelerated rate as high as 0.5 degrees a year.
    None of that has happened…
    The report also became gospel to climate change doomsayers, who predicted pervasive and more intense hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and droughts…Doug Randall, who co-authored the Pentagon report, said, “Even I’m surprised at how often it’s referred to…
    Asked about his scenarios for the 2003-2010 period, Mr. Randall said in an interview: “The report was really looking at worst-case. And when you are looking at worst-case 10 years out, you are not trying to predict precisely what’s going to happen but instead trying to get people to understand what could happen to motivate strategic decision-making and wake people up. But whether the actual specifics came true, of course not. That never was the main intent.”…
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jun/1/pentagon-wrestles-with-false-climate-predictions-a/?page=all
    This Pentagon climate report speaks to the heart of false climate science alarmism that is rampant to day .These alarmist climate science reports are meant to exaggerate and scare people. They do not highlight that these are worst case projections in the opening paragraph. These qualifications never make the headlines or press releases .The rational world does not plan for the future based on worst case scenarios. We might as well all quit living if this was the case . No nation can afford to spend money to mitigate worst case scenarios, nor should they. The problem is that some politicians take these worst case situations and make public policies and actions as if they were true. They then fabricate entirely new falsehoods like carbon dioxide is a pollutant on top of these worst case scenarios and you now have a firm government action thrust on the general public that is all pure fabrication of a worst case scenario that will never come about. Yet it comes from the highest administrative offices in the land
    Now that it has been clearly shown during the recent 17 year pause in the rise of global temperature , that CO2 levels do not significantly raise global temperatures, what is happening with respect to global warming ? The global ocean surface temperatures have stopped rising and are in fact declining especially in the Northern Hemisphere and in particular, for the North Atlantic Ocean. The Winters are cooling globally and especially in the Northern Hemisphere. These factors have all combined to cause a major 17 year pause in global warming .This pattern is likely to continue for the next 2-3 decades as the cooler ocean cycles typically last 30-35 years and they have just started. North America is having one its coldest winters since about 30 years ago ( 34th coldest in UNITED STATES since 1895). Global climate seems to be returning to the cooler temperatures like we had 1880-1910 and 1945-1979. There has been no nation wide global warming in United States for 16 years or since 1998.

  51. I took the poll. At the end of the listed concerns you get to add one of your own. I wrote, “Freedom from overreaching statist bureaucracy”
    I have a feeling the UN will not like that.

  52. There were 15 NFL games this weekend. Average attendance for the first two weekends of this season was 73,000. So about 1.1 million Americans attended football games while the march was held. Many million more watched their favourite teams on TV. Add another 73,000 tonight (Jets/Bears). Just saying! Regards from Canada- go Bears.

  53. “Everyone is happy. The legal eagles are glad the courts aren’t log jammed with misdemeanours, the cops don’t have to do tons of paperwork and the kids have had their very own martyrdom experience saving the planet, which thank goodness won’t appear permanently on their unblemished record. Everyone has a jolly time, even the cops, who occasionally like to dress up like Robocop and always appreciate a bit of overtime.”
    http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2013/06/14/know-your-enemy-the-foot-soldiers/
    Don’t be too hard on the. It’s a good day out for everyone.
    Pointman

    • Some twitter accounts that caught my attention:
      @ GlobalRevLive “Global Revolution TV”
      Center for Bio Div ‏@ CenterForBioDiv · 14m
      Civil disobedience training happening now as these people get ready to
      Mike Hudema ‏@ MikeHudema · 15m
      Now that’s a banner! RT “@ Peoples_Climate: Capitalism = climate chaos!
      gangolan ‏@ gangolan · 16m
      Direct Action training happening at # FloodWallSt. # PeoplesClimate pic
      Hrag ‏@ hragv · 5m
      Carbon Bubble is getting out of control # FloodWallStreet # newyorkcity pic (
      (big 16 foot inflated balloon pushball. )
      The march is starting now.
      They didn’t drive in 500 busses of activists for any Sunday picnic.

    • Bill McKibben ‏@ billmckibben · 1h
      Nice to see big crowd on hand for # FloodWallStreet it’s a beautiful morning on the Battery
      Jemma Rose Brown ‏@ jemmarosebrown · 1m
      wear blue and inundate the banks at noon.
      Sarah Levine ‏@ salixroots · 2m
      Decolonize the water, decolonize the land. We’re changing up the system, we’re changing up the plan.
      [Retweeted many times]
      Tar Sands News ‏@EI_TarSands · 1m
      Only question how brutal will NYC police @ NYPDnews be against peaceful climate protestors # FloodWallStreet Watch live http://ow.ly/BM2Bo
      Old Forest Wisdom ‏@oldforests · 1m
      Only question how brutal will NYC police @NYPDnews be against peaceful climate protestors # FloodWallStreet Watch live http://ow.ly/BM2Bo
      “Feel the Force”
      “I’ve got a bad feeling about this.”

  54. The AGW movement has always been more about the politics than the science so lets face it, the march was a success for the organizers who were determined to rally the troops. In politics you always want to differentiate yourself from those opposing you. Obama and his team are ‘for the planet’ and they hope that the voting public is left with the impression that the other side must therefore be ‘against the planet’.

  55. A “tiny temper tantrum” from the drama queens of “climate catastrophe”. It was just a casting call for a new reality show: “Crisis De-jour”.

  56. Ambulance chasers without an ambulance. Ha ha. No Frankenstein in the castle. Ha ha. Gore did show for a few minutes; that was as Franken close to a stein as he will get. Ha ha. 😀

  57. Yet the results of the U.N.’s Global Survey for a Better World, also known as MyWorld2015, show “Action taken on Climate Change” at the very bottom […]

    And it’s been at the very bottom almost from the getgo! I first stumbled across this survey in June last year when approx. 622,000 votes had been cast.
    So when I revisited in early May of this year, I was not all surprised to find it still> at the bottom (431,377) of a 2,013,830 heap.
    What I do find, well, somewhat surprising, though, is that between May 5 and Sept. 22 they seem to have more than doubled the heap to (your capture of) 5,015,324 … and “Action taken on Climate Change” seems to have taken a giant leap to (your capture) 1,058,568.
    Percentage increases in such a short period of time are somewhat curious, to say the least. But if they’re seeking a higher rating for “Action taken on Climate Change”, it doesn’t seem to be helping … well, not so far!

  58. If one looks at the organizations that were on the list backing this ‘march’ you mostly find three basic groups:
    1) Communists and hard-left socialists
    2) Somewhat fringe-ish churches
    3) Unions (potentially indistinguishable from the hard-left socialists above)
    This is perhaps the clearest proof yet of the nature of ‘climate change’ as a substitute faith.

  59. JEM, that doesn’t mean they cannot organize and intimidate.
    Yesterday was just the dress rehearsal.
    I wonder if today might undo what they did Sunday.
    Occupy Wall Street ‏@OccupyWallStNYC · 5m
    # BreakingNews capitalism = climate chaos # FloodWallStreet # climatejustice
    Eli Feghali ‏@ efeghali · 10m
    Some more pictures from the # FloodWallStreet CD training. Flow like water! pic.twitter.com/zcEEZyoYmQ
    Retweeted by Occupy Wall Street
    Anonymous ‏@ Crypt0nymous · 7m
    Pro-Tips: Record everything. Stay together. Protect each other. The cops can’t arrest everyone. They will use force. # FloodWallStreet
    Dennis Trainor, Jr. ‏@ dennistrainorjr · 1m
    Massive sit in now # floodwallstreet
    Harris from the Post ‏@ rousseau_ist · 4m
    # FloodWallStreet did a quick U-Turn back to the Bull
    Devyn Powell ‏@ DevynFromOregon · 2m
    An important thing happening now. RT @ eligerzon # FloodWallStreet
    [chant] The people are rising! No more compromising! (Amen)
    Christopher Robbins ‏@ ChristRobbins · 4m
    About 100 sit on Broadway, heard another contingent is headed towards Wall Street # FloodWallStreet

  60. There’s an election coming up in November, and the Democrats are rightfully worried about the President’s negative ratings. So this could be viewed as an attempt to create a false, alarming sense of urgency about the climate, to distract voters from the legitimate urgent global security issues (ISIS, Putin, Iraq, Libya, etc).
    Remember “Occupy Wall Street” and the “1%”? That was a similar distraction to create class envy and hatred, just before the 2012 elections.
    We’ll see another, bigger wave of this kind of crowd-activism just before the 2016 election.
    This stuff is far more predictable than any NOAA climate model, and much more effective in creating its desired goals.

  61. I don’t care if 300 million people were there…or 3 billion think CO2=pollution.
    Science isn’t settled based on how many people come to a rally or respond to a poll based on what they think they know.
    Sunshine +H2O + CO2 + some minerals in the soil = O2 + Food(sugars)
    Increase the CO2 and you get more O2 and more food. World food production has been soaring with the help of increasing CO2, despite what the people at this rally(and however many others think).
    http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/CropProd/CropProd-09-11-2014.txt
    “Released September 11, 2014, by the National Agricultural Statistics Service
    (NASS), Agricultural Statistics Board, United States Department of
    Agriculture (USDA).
    Corn Production Up 3 Percent from August Forecast
    Soybean Production Up 3 Percent
    Cotton Production Down 6 Percent
    Corn production is forecast at 14.4 billion bushels, up 3 percent from both
    the August forecast and from 2013. Based on conditions as of September 1,
    yields are expected to average 171.7 bushels per acre, up 4.3 bushels from
    the August forecast and 12.9 bushels above the 2013 average. If realized,
    this will be the highest yield and production on record for the United
    States. Area harvested for grain is forecast at 83.8 million acres, unchanged
    from the August forecast but down 4 percent from 2013.
    Soybean production is forecast at a record 3.91 billion bushels, up 3 percent
    from August and up 19 percent from last year. Based on September 1
    conditions, yields are expected to average a record high 46.6 bushels per
    acre, up 1.2 bushels from last month and up 3.3 bushels from last year.”
    Other than a a slight increase in heavy downpours/flooding and rain the last 3 decades(part of which was likely caused by the slight/modest greenhouse gas warming from an increase in CO2, the others effects, have either been undetermined(not a factor) or beneficial.
    So we have choices:
    1. Spend trillions to cut CO2 emissions with it resulting in less heavy rain events, while reducing increases in world food production or
    2. Continue to let CO2 increase and add to the 20% increase that it has already contributed to plant growth, vegetative health and crop yields.
    http://www.co2science.org/education/reports/co2benefits/MonetaryBenefitsofRisingCO2onGlobalFoodProduction.pdf
    Tough choice……………….that is, if the above choices have been instead been framed like this:
    1. Spend XXX amount to cut carbon pollution, with it slowing/stopping the catastrophic warming, extreme weather and widespread and harmful, human caused climate change or
    2. Continue to let CO2 increase and allow carbon pollution to accelerate the catastrophic warming, extreme weather and widespread and harmful, human caused climate change.
    My 32 years as an operational meteorologist analyzing global weather patterns and using them to predict crop conditions/production and energy use, make this a no brainer.
    On the other hand, it seems clear to me, that almost everybody at this rally, have already made their no brainer choices……………and they are the opposite of what what makes sense to me.
    What should I do?
    Should I go with 310,000 people that are convinced enough to travel to NY to support their position, or should I go with my 32 years of observations, that includes looking at weather data/climate that dates back to when humans began to record it accurately?
    I don’t care if 3,000,000,000 people become brainwashed/hypnotized and tell me that 2+2=5. The correct solution is 4.
    CO2 is a beneficial gas. The correct policy is to let it continue to increase and continue to benefit almost all creatures on this planet.

  62. We need a ‘debate’ with the warmists and/or their political party leaders to stop their manifold of madness and its impact on our economies. The number of people who will march and protest, stand on their head, or hold their breath will not change the facts and the ‘problem’ situation.
    There are more than 10 fundamental observation and analysis results that support the assertion that there is no extreme AGA problem to solve. For example: 1) there is no observed tropical tropospheric hot spot, 2) the tropical region of the planet has not warmed as predicted (two thirds of the CO2 warming should have occurred in the tropics which makes sense as the amount of warming due to CO2 is proportional to the amount of long wave radiation emitted to space prior to the CO2 increase, the tropical region warming, if it had occurred, would have been caused by increased long wave downward emissions from the higher regions of the tropical troposphere (see picture for details), instead 2/3 of the warming occurred in high latitude regions (rather than the tropics which indicates a significant portion of the warming has due to something else beside CO2), and 3) there is now more than two sigma record sea ice in the Antarctic and sea ice has started to increase in the Arctic which supports the assertion that the high latitude regions (which have cyclically warmed and cooled when there was solar magnetic cycle changes in the past) which indicates the planet have started to cool.
    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.ca/search?q=models+predict+%22hot+spot%22
    Green energy is a scam that does not work. There is no painless engineering viable ‘green’ energy solution to reduction total world CO2 emissions by 70% (note agriculture is responsible for 18% of AGW).
    The only ‘solution’ if we ‘must’ significantly reduce world CO2 emissions (actual reduction in world emission of CO2 by say 70%) is a massive conversion to nuclear power for all countries of the world (paid for by the developed countries) and draconian restrictions on everyday life such as banning recreational air travel and limits on individual consumption such as banning vacation homes, limits on individual house size, forced moves into high density multi-dweller housing and so on which is not going to happen unless there really is a catastrophic problem to solve.
    The developed countries have wasting trillions of dollars on green energy and the world CO2 emissions are increasing not decreasing . Protesting and marches will not change the fact that economic development and jobs are directly connected to low and reliable energy prices. China and India are not going to stop the development of their economies.
    P.S. Note for some unexplained reason more and more (now up to 88%) of the anthropogenic CO2 emissions is being absorbed by the biosphere which indicates Salby’s assertions may be correct which is astonishing.
    http://news.yahoo.com/china-us-india-push-world-carbon-emissions-084610366–politics.html

  63. More Twitter excerpts from Flood Wall Street
    Jeff Rousset ‏@ JRousset · 37s
    The iconic Wall Street bull appears to be drowning in a sea of people power. # FloodWallStreet pic.twitter.com/dORFbEgCSc
    Joe Jackson ‏@ joejackson · 2m
    Crowd enjoying themselves @ # FloodWallStreet sit-in; brass band keeps up buzzy accompaniment as bemused office workers peer out from windows
    Joe Jackson ‏@joejackson · 4m
    Best guess at #FloodWallStreet turnout so far: several hundred max
    Jamie Henn ‏@ Agent350 · 2m
    The police popped our carbon bubble. We’re really going for more a slow deflation… # FloodWallStreet pic.twitter.com/tysvQgGl3m
    And the critics:
    Mike ‏@mrjc1 · 3m
    It’s pretty rich when moral relativists try to tell people that anything is wrong or should change. Ever. #tcot # FloodWallStreet
    Zanesville Democrat ‏@ ZANVDEM · 1m
    # FloodWallStreet Classic controlled oposition mission. Wall Street wants 2 trade carbon credits. They will make trillions. LOL What a joke!
    james ‏@jamesx61 · 3m
    Webcam view of the bull, from a few stories up. # floodwallstreet @ macfathom @ stopmotionsolo @ owscasper http://www.earthcam.com/usa/newyork/wallstreet/chargingbull/

  64. Follow the money (as you have been)
    The People’s Climate March was organised by 350.org
    350.org’s primary sponsor is the Rockefellers Brothers Fund
    And now RockeFellers Brothers Fund has announced it has divested itself of fossil fuels and invested in clean energy.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-29310475
    Heirs to the Rockefeller family, which made its vast fortune from oil, are to sell investments in fossil fuels and reinvest in clean energy, reports say.
    All it needs now is the necessary PR campaigns with events like the People’s Climate March to convince people they need to give up fossil fuels and buy their clean energy products instead…

    • Okay, wow. The first thought that popped into my mind is how many investment companies are going to receive orders to divest their clients from the Rockefeller fund? Be interesting to see what their market value is at the end of the month.

      • It’s a tax free foundation (you remember how the rich put their money in those when the income tax was invented, right?), not a hedge fund.

    • I notice that they divested their oil stocks prior to the rally.
      Wouldn’t want to risk having these rallies actually make a difference and having to worry about selling your stock into a declining market.

    • Yes, Wall Street has rolled out the Green Carpet. As the tweet above nailed it:

      Zanesville Democrat ‏@ ZANVDEM · 1m
      # FloodWallStreet Classic controlled oposition mission. Wall Street wants 2 trade carbon credits. They will make trillions. LOL What a joke!

      The joke is on us.
      USA Today has a well prepared piece in this morning paper, ostensibly on the march yesterday, but with references to White House meetings last week.

      “We’re taking this summit serious, both to show that the United States is committed to leading the fight against climate change and to call on the other leaders to step up to the plate,” says John Podesta, Obama’s counselor.
      He says Obama will outline U.S. Efforts but will not make a new emissions-cutting pledge until early next year.

      John Podesta: ‘Unconventional Sources of Fossil Fuels Cannot Be Our Energy Future’ Dec. 10, 2013.
      350 dot orgVerified account (Dec. 10, 2013)
      ‏ John Podesta’s Center for American Progress has stood strong against Keystone XL. Will Pres. Obama listen with Podesta in White House?
      Thick as thieves.

  65. I’m seeing a lot of effort to whistle past the graveyard here. People going out of their way to show that this turnout means nothing. When you combine it with another attitude I’ve noticed here, that the fight has been won, I think everyone is making a big mistake.
    The real problem with the whole scam is that it has been deep enough and lasted long enough that it has indoctrinated an entire generation. Many of the people in the march were likely only toddlers when Climate Alarm became the go to for activists pushing a cause. They ‘know’ the truth. They have been indoctrinated and it is going to be no simple thing to shift their beliefs.
    Now, more than ever, this is politics.
    All the people here, who have worked so hard, have placed a sliver of doubt in many minds, but the battle is nowhere near won. Look at this turnout and take it as a warning. There are still far too many people who have bought into this hook like and sinker. Please, keep up the good fight.
    This is not the end, it is not even the beginning of the end, but it is perhaps the end of the beginning. Winston Churchill.

    • It is worse than that.
      Wall Street is in on the circus. Wall Street wants them blocking traffic. Wall Street wants fears of climate chaos. Wall Street will fund protests, will advertise in news papers and TV networks to spread the fear.
      Because Wall Street wants the profits from Carbon Trading. This is a scam to rob from what’s left of the middle class to give to the rich.

    • Nice tuba. As they say, it takes two to tango, but at least one has to know how to dance, preferably both. Of course, real men don’t dance at a climate rally, and nobody is specifically prepared to answer direct questions, but give them a second to gather their thoughts, and they’ll come up with something brilliant like: turn everything off.
      Anyway, Dave’s post of the actual video gives me a chance to expand on my comment above, about the nuke the climate hat, which I see now I took out of context.
      The entire body language statement seems to be: Fossil fuels nuke the environment, if you read the bib first, hat last. His “gas mask” also has a message, the signage is probably removable, and Halloween is coming up too.
      Finally, I began to think those are lady’s eyes peering out from the goggles.

    • Let them be them lead by example and be the first to do so.
      They can move into huts, and fill us in on how it goes after the first year.

    • BBC says the investment assets are 860 million.
      Wikipedia says the endowment in 2009 was 3.4 billion.
      Given QE it’s likely more today.
      So whatever they do with the rest of the money; BBC is only talking about ca. 25% (but doesn’t tell its readers as usual).
      Also, maybe they just want to cash in before the big collapse which is right around the corner. I would if I hadn’t already.

  66. Capitalism creates climate chaos.
    Socialism creates an eternal stable climate.
    This has been known to all inventors of socialism starting with Plato.
    Had a socialist revolution been successful in the Medieval, there would have been no Little Ice Age and no Maunder minimum.
    Once the socialist revolution succeeds, our current Grand Solar Minimum will immediately end.
    The planet will start to heal and the seas will recede.
    Have these total demwits not learned anything since 2008?

  67. I believe that a while back the satellite people declared that they would just assume at least a 3.0 mm/yr sea level rise. It is very similar to the “adjustments” always used in the “official” temperature record.

  68. Are there really that many commie, socialist, trotskyite, green, yellow, differently-coloured, UN-black-helicopter loving, world-goverment facilitating, anti-American/freedom/rich/libertarian/George Dubya Bush naifs in New York?
    We are doomed and you have every right to be fearful for your shares and your privileges.
    Don’t stop complaining and seeking out those conspiracies wherever you find them, though. Perhaps The Lord Viscount Christopher Monckton (if you ask nicely and deferently enough) can be brought out to lead the good fight(back).

  69. Ted Kennedy Jr. is calling once again for jail terms for climate skeptics (he uses the “D” word).
    If there is ever a notion that screams “I don’t have the science on my side”, this is it.

  70. 310,000 out of a New York City population of 8,400,000 is about 3.7%..
    That MyWorld 2015 survey had about 20% of the votes going to ‘Action taken on climate change’.
    So where were the other 16.3% of NYC’s climate concerned population? I make the march short by 1,370,000. 🙂
    Giants at Texans maybe?

  71. Jamie Henn ‏@ Agent350 · 10m [Note the ID…]
    I always thought “climate chaos” was a better term than “climate change.” # FloodWallStreet pic.twitter.com/F9ESotGHJf
    japhetweeks ‏@ japhetweeks · 14m
    “Are you getting arrested or not?” How people greet each each other at # FloodWallStreet
    Fossil Free ‏@ GoFossilFree · 1m
    Check out the crowd at # FloodWallStreet! pic.twitter.com/O96Af8GSyM [OK photo]
    Now that’s funny, whoever you are
    David Darnell ‏@ DlorenDarnell · 12m
    “Climate protection has become a growth engine,” I’ll say. Have you seen the size of @algore? His homes? His jets? # FloodWallStreet
    Bossy Darth Kitteh ‏@ eloracnasus · 4m
    # CommieCon
    It’s like comic con, just minus the showers, but still packed full of fantasy and sci fi!!
    FlyoverStateofMind ‏@ TheMightyComet · 8m
    Reading smart phone posts on Twitter from people condemning Capitalism at # FloodWallStreet is completely satisfying. # Hypocrites

  72. @Steve from Rockwood, if you look closely at the graph, you would see that there is not a 100% correlation. The time periods could have been divided differently with similar results (for example, 3.2 mm/yr rise since 1985). Also, there is variability and even “hiatuses”, yet sea level rise continued to accelerate over decadal time periods.

  73. Hudreds of thousands of unemployed Watermelons (green on the outside, red on the inside) indulged in a carnage of garbage on the streets and sidewalks of New York. Informed by the superstition of ignorance which inflates faster than superhelium, the inchoate mobs wandered around taking selfies and screaming about the evils of capitalism and blaming big oil, rather than their own guilty tech enabled soft lives of wasteful indolence. Today they want to stop the city just like the framebreakers broke the industrial machines in the first factories. Back then these people were flogged and broken on the wheel, now our society tolerates and encourages them to keep others from doing what they eed for their daily bread. And most of us need tat bread every day! These hysterics and paid activists should be given a lesson in civics, but it’s highly unlikely,given the leaderless state of the country. In actuality, their march will have no effect whatsoever on the climate debate. The public has voted, climate is the last thing they want to talk about or spend money on.
    Too bad fot the hysterics whose only legacy is the mountains of garbage on the streets which will have to be burned!:]

    • “Hudreds of thousands of unemployed Watermelons (green on the outside, red on the inside) indulged in a carnage of garbage on the streets and sidewalks of New York.”
      I would hazard a guess that quite a few of them are government lardasses.

  74. Bob Tisdale,
    Two points that I think should be added to the context of your lead post.
    First point is some historical perspective about the attendance at yesterday’s NYC climate march, with its ~310 thousand participates which was the number reported by news media, compared to some other well-known marches that were generally considered to be highly successful marches for their causes. Well, it looks like the Sept 21 climate march in NYC by numbers, in historical perspective, cannot be discounted as being comparatively also very successful. I say that based on this historical info on marches for other famous causes:

    PBS said ( http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/march-on-washington/ ) more than 200 thousand in famous successful civil rights march on Washington in 1963 and the NYT said ( http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/us/a-time-to-return-to-and-reflect-on-the-march-on-washington.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 ) there were tens of thousands in that same famous successful civil rights march on Washington in 1963. If you take the average of those two figures you get less than the attendance at yesterday’s NYC climate march.
    BBC said ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/15/newsid_2533000/2533131.stm ) that on Nov 15 1969 in Washington DC about 250 thousand demonstrators protested the Vietnam War with significant impact and general success in influencing the outcome on the issues. For that same Vietnam protest march in Washisngton on Nov 15 1969 the NYT said (http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/nov-15-1969-anti-vietnam-war-demonstration-held/ ) that as many as 500 thousand people attended. If you take the average of the two different attendance reports you get ~375 thousand which is on the same level of attendance at yesterday’s NYC climate march.

    Second point is the UN survey you posted doesn’t indicate the relative effectiveness or organizational efficiency of any of the causes just based on survey numbers. The survey does not measure intensiveness of any group of people within any of the listed subject matter. The survey gives no rational person any reason to be less concerned about the danger from radical climate activism due its comparatively lowest poll numbers.
    John

    • Welll….
      375,000 would be about 0.185 of the US Population in 1969
      From US Census — Historical
      July 1, 1969 202,676,946
      As for today.
      310,000 of a the current US population would be: .. 0.098 percent
      Estimated US Population for 2013-2014 — 317,297,938
      All these are national and international issues — and sparked attendance from outside the area of the March — so it’s probably valid to say that there was half the interest — and this in a time when social activism is strong. So it was probably easier to get people out in these times of strong publicity for popular “causes”.
      Something to think about

      • WillR on September 22, 2014 at 11:37 am
        – – – – – – –
        WillR,
        Yes, yours is an interesting perspective.
        I just wanted to add some critical perspective to Bob Tisdale’s post. Balance seemed needed.
        John

  75. Same here . I am the biggest cheerleader for “global” warming. There are no indications in my part of the world that there is anything significant happening. When I no longer have to winterise my palm trees for a decade I will be more convinced than I am now.

  76. I see a lot of similarity between the alarmists and big foot hunters. “See that broken branch? A big foot did that.” and “See those jellyfish? Climate change did that.”

  77. Alyson Ann Cina ‏@ AACina · 19m
    What Broadway just north of the charging bull looks like right now. # FloodWallStreet pic.twitter.com/UhGumGCoCT
    [ground level, but well framed up street. few hundred sitters]
    Chris‏ @ TheNYCBMX “@ NatGat2014: # floodwallstreet panorama right now
    pic.twitter.com/yDUsF4jJjt via GlobalRevLive @RebelMouse http://rbl.ms/1ymubVS
    [about a 180 deg panorama. worth a note]
    350 dot org ‏@350 · 3 m
    Wow, check out this great video from above the # FloodWallStreet crowd earlier today:
    //bit.ly/1C5IaOd [1:07 iphone vid from top of a tourist bus inching through the crowd.]
    on.mash.to/1r0BDSA [photo from 8-10 floors up of the street around the bull]
    Funny
    Nicolás Feierherd ‏@ flaicaster · 22m
    “@ SooperMexican: Cardboard sign but $600 iPhones # floodwallstreet pic.twitter.com/RcGiGkcyOE”
    Mirá la notebook @ porliniers.
    hashtags are forever ‏@ markwaterous · 2m
    To the brilliant, “We don’t want Canada’s oil” people at # FloodWallStreet omgosh you’re right! Buying from the middle east, so much better.

  78. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/22/more-than-310-thousand-people-with-skewed-priorities-flood-new-york/#comment-1743677
    The Reason video clip is pretty revealing. It makes it clear that 350.org has been successful at mobilizing the usual left-wing ‘activists’ (upper-middle-age academics, naive students, Unitarians, public-employee unionists, the Young Socialists, etc.) behind a basically inchoate slogan, “Climate Justice Now!”
    What the heck does that mean? Nothing; it’s just the usual anti-corporate, anti-capitalist sentiment, tacked on to the ‘climate’ agenda of 350.org (and the White House). These Watermelons are just ‘useful idiots’ (in Lenin’s words) for the anti-American Marxist Left. They don’t know anything about climatology, and they don’t care to know anything, because they just want to be camp followers of ‘the movement’ of ‘the people’ against the evil capitalists who, they are told, are running (and ruining) the world.
    They even claim they’re willing to do without all of the ‘stuff’ that the evil capitalists have foisted upon them. Don’t ask them about iPhones; ask them if they’d like to do without their washing machines.
    /Mr Lynn

  79. “310 thousand people” supporting the progression of science to a universal frame directed through [social/political] consensus. The discomfort with uncertainty is understandable but poorly conceived. These well-intentioned movements inevitably lead to misaligned development with consequences for individuals, societies, humanity, and the environment.
    Is their concern about human lives or something else? Make life, not abortion.

  80. Chris Lehane, the PR boy in the back of the White House in 1994 who concoted the Conspiracy Theory at age 24 with Mark Fabiani, to cover Clilnton’s WH peccadilloes, is billionaire Tom Steyer’s new PR master. (According to NPR this AM.) Lehane and partner Fabiani are based out of San Francisco. I wonder if they organized the People’s March.

  81. It is both amusing and sadly tragic at the same time to see how socialists and communists have infiltrated the environmental and climate activist movements and created a mythical link between anti-fossil fuels and anti-nuclear eco-utopianism and climate action on one hand and socialist/communist ideology on the other. One might even say that the movements have been melded together to one degree or another.
    Is there evidence from history that such a link exists or is justified? In the old Soviet Union and its East European satellites? In Cuba today? North Korea? Where is the proof of such a link or association?
    This is amusing in the sense that the radical left has to resort to doing something like this to maintain the movement in the face of the Soviet Union’s collapse. Yet it is also tragic in that there are so many people in the country (although hopefully a minority) who have bought into the idea that such an association can and does exist. Interviews and evidence displayed by individuals in the climate march yesterday in NYC would seem to indicate this.
    If it is to be believed that socialism and communism are somehow more eco-friendly than the free market has demonstrated it is capable of being, then I believe the radical green left is going to have a difficult time convincing the majority in this country that it is true given that polls in the past (IIRC) have shown continuing majority support for fossil fuel usage and development.
    To the extent that environmentalism, climate activism and socialist and communist ideologies have all melded together, environmentalism and climate activism now be seen to have somewhat of a black eye in the minds of those who value the principles of freedom, democracy and human rights that are held near and dear. If Bill McKibben and others of his ilk want to talk about divestment, they would do better to divest the environmental movement of its radical political leftist element.

    • CD (@CD153)
      September 22, 2014 at 1:05 pm
      “It is both amusing and sadly tragic at the same time to see how socialists and communists have infiltrated the environmental and climate activist movements and created a mythical link between anti-fossil fuels and anti-nuclear eco-utopianism and climate action on one hand and socialist/communist ideology on the other. One might even say that the movements have been melded together to one degree or another.
      Is there evidence from history that such a link exists or is justified? In the old Soviet Union and its East European satellites? In Cuba today? North Korea? Where is the proof of such a link or association?”
      In the late 70ies/early 80ies the anti nuclear environmental movement in Germany staged massive demos. The small communist parties of the time had no opinion about the environment, and it took them a while to register something they had always tried to achieve but failed: A mass uprising of ordinary people.
      So they joined the movement and the new Green party and quickly rose to the top and purged the Green party from all non-hard left elements.
      The persons were Trittin, Joseph Fischer, and Kretschmann; they came from the small K-Gruppen – which were controlled by the KGB.
      Joseph Fischer became Foreign Minister under the socialist Schroeder in 1999.
      So yes, the KGB infiltrated and used the environmental movement. The K-Gruppen BTW called themselves Maoist – as Stalinist had fallen out of favor in the 70ies with the discovery of the Gulag.

    • “If it is to be believed that socialism and communism are somehow more eco-friendly than the free market has demonstrated it is capable of being,”
      I have visited the smouldering wreck that was the remains of the DDR in 1990 after its collapse. Socialism does not invest; it uses up the existing capital stock. From 1945 to the collapse they kept using the same dirty machines they inherited from the German Reich.
      The only eco-friendly aspect of the DDR was its incapability to develop anything; it was a civilisation in retreat – and where humans let infrastructure decay, Nature will grow, trees grow through roofs of houses, destroying them (yes I saw that in many places).
      Where industry still operated, it was wasteful and dirty.

      • Yes, East Germany and the Soviet Union were notorious for environmental pollution. It was the capitalist West that could afford to spend money cleaning up rivers, air, and toxic waste sites.
        It is indeed mysterious what the appeal of discredited Marxism is for the neo-enviros; as far as I can tell, it is all sloganeering, the tired old “People’s Revolution,” however vague and undefined. “It’s good to be against stuff, so lets go march and be against it, too!”
        /Mr Lynn

  82. fwiw, more than 800,000 Americans attended professional football games yesterday, and more than that attended college football games on Saturday. More than that watched the games on tv. Friday Night High School games I don’t know about, but I would guess that attendees also outnumbered the demonstration in NewYork. I wonder how many people go trick-or-treating on Halloween. 3 million people publicly protested the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
    311,000 is a respectable turnout, but it looks to me like a demonstration of diminishing political influence, not gaining influence.

    • Don’t forget to add in the rest of the world attendance at futbol games. Also consider that most of these people attend every weekend, not just a one time walk in New York. Now, an astute warmer would call for a stadium exhale tax on all those cheering fans worldwide who pump out massive amounts of CO2.

      • Tom, it would be interesting to stage a march of opposite philosophy, say “Disband the UN”, and see how many protestors would attend both. Just for the carnival.

    • Why stop there? Approximately 7 billion people worldwide breathed air yesterday. Any demonstration less that that is worth ignoring.

    • It will press on deeper into the Big Muddy.
      ===============
      The size of this march will embolden warmists into acts of civil disobedience—and will make the authorities more timid about prosecuting them.
      It will embolden Obama to turn thumbs down on the Keystone pipeline–and make it impossible for him to back down on on his EPA’s actions.
      It will make Dem politicians warier about opposing warmism.

    • It will also make the media shyer about opposing warmism, and more eager to pander to its warmist audience.
      It will strengthen many hangers-on in the feeling that they are on the winning side.

  83. http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/sep/19/this-changes-everything-capitalism-vs-climate-naomi-klein-review
    The new approach is seduction…
    “Klein argues that humans don’t cause climate collapse, and nor does carbon. The problem is a particular arrangement of these elements – in other words, capitalism, the whole point of which is to find resources and exploit them. It’s a habit of mind, if you like, a form of behaviour. As such, it can be changed. Except that most of the time we cannot see this, because we are “locked in, politically, physically and culturally” to the world that capital has made. “We lack the collective spaces in which to confront the raw terror of ecocide,” is how Klein encapsulates the problem. Lucky for everybody then that opening up such spaces is exactly what Klein does best.”
    Hilarious so if humans don’t cause it, if carbon doesn’t, capitalism does… but how? Visibly scientific reasoning is not a forte of The Guardian, or Naomi Klein for that matter. Of course, CBC, The Globe and Mail -that is Thomson Reuters- open their pages wide to interview and op-ed by the author…

    • “The problem is a particular arrangement of these elements – in other words, capitalism, the whole point of which is to find resources and exploit them. ”
      Klein is a liar or complete moron. Throughout its existence the Soviet Union found and exploited resources in Siberia. Profits were forbidden; and it was a centrally planned economy, so it obviously was not capitalist.

  84. May I suggest simply requesting that the organizers show us how many Porta-Potties were present along the march route. I’m not trying to be funny. The number of Porta-Potties contracted for (and I would hope NY put that in as a requirement for the march permit) would tell one everything they needed to know about the size, or expected size, of the event. And if you don’t see the contracts, well, photographs showing the line-up will tell the story.

  85. Dear all,
    I happened to be in midtown NYC yesterday to meet some old friends for lunch. The trains in and out were at normal half-empty capacity for a typical Sunday. I didn’t know this extravaganza was planned. I didn’t see any protesters anywhere around Penn Station the entire day. Perhaps they parachuted in.
    Be very suspect about these attendee claims. I’ve been to NYC for many years on New Years Eve for private parties, and I can assure you the transit routes are jammed on that night.

  86. 7.1 Billion Demonstrate In Favor Of Global Warming
    NEWS IN BRIEF • Sep 22, 2014
    NEW YORK—In an overwhelming show of support for dangerously escalating temperatures, 7.1 billion people from nearly every nation on earth staged massive demonstrations yesterday in favor of global warming. “Whether they were sitting in their living rooms, watching football at a bar, or just driving somewhere, a sizable portion of the world let its support for climate change be heard loud and clear,” said environmental policy expert Janet Purvis, adding that the protest that began in the morning never lost steam at any point throughout the day. “This should serve as a wake-up call to officials around the world that the factors contributing to global warming are real, important, and must be protected at any cost.” At press time, the 7.1 billion protesters were reportedly making plans to stage similar rallies every day for the foreseeable future.
    http://www.theonion.com/articles/71-billion-demonstrate-in-favor-of-global-warming,36984/

  87. This post is good opportunity to remind folks that WE too can DIVEST – divest ourselves of a mainstream media who no longer has anyone’s interests at heart except their own left wing bias – divest ourselves from Hollywood, which is comprised of numerous hypocrites and self serving blowhards – divest ourselves from the manic, CAGW-loving weather media such as the Weather Channel and “Weather Underground” – and divest ourselves from businesses who would rather ride the wave of public acceptance through forging ties with socialists, communists and left wing extremists than providing us with goods and services.
    We CAN politically defeat these people if we would rise up and divest ourselves from their influence. And it is working – look at CNN for example which is going nowhere fast, and the Weather Channel, which has been dropped by a major cable provider.

    • If sensational aerial photos were available of the reported several hundred thousand person gathering, one would think they’d be all over the media. But in all, the media seem to be taking a pass on the People’s Climate March, possibly in recognition of the fun we’re having here with the photos and signs of the individuals representing the hodgepodge of organizations that trudged thru NYC yesterday.
      So far, the best photo I’ve seen was posted by Stephen Rasey
      September 21, 2014 at 12:34 pm,
      http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/21/paid-volunteers-for-the-nyc-climate-march/
      Which photo shows a mob of people walking c15-20 abreast along a broad avenue & trailing of into the distance, if not petering out. I have no experience or skill in estimating crowd size but my WAG here would be about 20 or 30,000 visible.
      This drone video shows a bigger throng:
      http://qz.com/269303/watch-this-drone-capture-the-enormity-of-the-peoples-climate-march/
      Pretty good crowd up to 100,000 visible in the drone video, again WAG.
      but I’m coming up empty on any pictures of Mr. Ban linking arms with anyone, let alone the designated Hollywood celebrity shill, I mean UN designated Messenger of Peace Leonardo DiCaprio, who not only gets to be a movie star, but also a messenger of peace. Some guys have all the luck.
      Meanwhile, over in the UK, is the Telegraph getting Grauniad disease?
      Emma Thompson: ‘Climate changed deniers are bonkers’

      It’s a form of insanity, and it’s a form of collective suicide…it’s like a Martian attack on Earth only we are the Martians…
      –Emma Thompson

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/11112714/Emma-Thompson-Climate-changed-deniers-are-bonkers.html

  88. I don’t see any of them wearing a gas mask to sequester their own CO2 emissions on that long march.
    Just how serious are they?
    Or maybe a mask cost more than 50 bucks?

  89. Best comment I saw was over on BBC:
    30. Saruman the White
    3 HOURS AGO
    While at the same time, on the left coast, ~400,000 people from all over the world gathered to celebrate sadomasochism at San Francisco’s Folsom Street Fair – an event that almost no media outside of San Francisco dares to cover. Kind of puts things in to perspective.

  90. Environmentalists Defend Pedophilia Advocate
    http://freebeacon.com/issues/environmentalists-defend-pedophilia-advocate/
    Environmentalists quickly rushed to Scroggins’ defense.
    “How can this be legal???” exclaimed Gasland director and anti-fracking activist Josh Fox. Anti-fracking group 350.org called the decision “surreal.”
    “My new heroine is called Vera Scroggins,” one environmental activist declared. “Go Vera!” cheeredanother.
    In addition to her work combatting fracking, an innovative oil and gas technique that experts say is an economic game-changer for the United States and could help ensure energy independence, Scroggins is also an advocate of incest and pedophilia.
    Scroggins expressed her desire for parents to engage their children sexually at a young age in aseries of messages in 2001 posted to an online message board called Peacelist.
    “Are there cultures that mothers or fathers pleasure their children and teenagers sexually or genitally and also possibly initiate them into sexual expression at some point?” she asked.
    “I have had intuitive thoughts that such would be a healthy way for parents to interact with their children and introduce their children to sensual/sexual pleasure and bonding and loving practices.”
    “Who better to do it, than the parents first?” she wrote.

  91. http://news.yahoo.com/massive-york-march-aims-focus-worlds-eyes-climate-111853341.html says both:
    Organizers estimated that some 310,000 people, including United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, actor Leonardo DiCaprio and elected officials from the United States and abroad

    A New York Police Department spokeswoman said there had been no arrests reported as of 3 p.m. ET (1900 GMT) and declined to comment on the size of the crowd.
    Organizers said another 270,000 people had participated in related events outside New York.
    So, how about 310,000 – 270,000 = 40,000 in New York? Well, assuming “abroad” in NYC means “not in NYC”.

  92. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/nyregion/02crowd.html?_r=0 is mostly focuses on the NYC crowd for New Years Eve 2008. Snippets:
    How many people rang in the new year at Times Square on Monday night? The simple answer is: One heck of a lot. The complicated answer is: Perhaps only the Police Department knows for sure, and it won’t tell you.
    “We have stopped providing official counts” of large public gatherings “because no one was ever satisfied with them,” said Paul J. Browne, the department’s deputy commissioner for public information. “Whatever the count was, it was usually never enough for whatever group was involved.”

    Jeffrey A. Straus, the president of Countdown Entertainment, the company that organizes the ball drop in coordination with the Times Square Alliance, estimated that Monday night’s crowd totaled at least one million people.
    “I’ve been doing this now for 13 years,” he said. “I’m in the TV truck with our cameras.

    Mr. Browne said that he did not know how long ago the department stopped releasing its crowd estimates for all sorts of events, from parades to protests, but that it was probably about a decade ago.
    Paul Wertheimer, the president of Crowd Management Strategies, a Los Angeles-based consulting firm, said that many police agencies across the country became reluctant to reveal crowd-size estimates after the Million Man March in Washington in 1995, which was organized by the Nation of Islam. The National Park Service estimated that the march drew 400,000 people. A furor ensued when the organizers insisted the number was far larger. A year later, the park service said it would no longer make crowd estimates.


    Pity, I didn’t realize the NYPD stopped making that information public. I was wondering why I hadn’t seen a reference to it.

  93. It appears that 350.ORG is pretty much a computer generated revenue stream for the people that run it.
    I signed on to one of their on-line petitions (although I changed the language in the letter to reflect reality and requested that government recognize that coal is an efficient energy source that is fairly easy to transport … coal trains are a good thing, etc.).
    I then signed the my name as COAL = JOBS. So “COAL = JOBS” went scrolling across their website with the names of the other useful idiots … it did for a long while … no one caught it or seemed to care.
    A year later I (“COAL = JOBS”) still regularly received solicitations “directly” from what appears to be the organizational leaders (Bill Mckibben, Maeve, etc.), for cash and organization help for the cause.
    Greedy scam … Useful idiots … Decisions based on emotion … Stubborn inability to admit to mistakes …. Similar to our current white house.

    • “Useful Idiots” is a good term to use for this crowd:
      Term invented in Soviet Russia to describe people who blindly supported the likes of Lenin and Stalin while they committed atrocity after atrocity.

  94. 400,000 New Yorkers (high end estimate) attended the Global Warming Protest.
    19,100,000 New Yorkers did not attend the Global Warming protest.
    That means more than 97% of New Yorkers agree there is a consensus, the debate is over!


  95. Drone video footage of People’s Climate March
    FStv via DemocracyNow!
    Unfortunately, it’s not really possible to see either beginning or end of the parade formations in this pop-up and turn 180° video. For that, a drone would have to fly over the entire length of the parade.
    Crowd size estimates encouraged; Step Right up & Make Your Guess!

    • The copter took off at W 63rd and Central Park West.
      Google Earth coordinates: 40°46’13.40″N 73°58’47.71″W
      The building are a dead ringer .
      W 63rd south to Columbus Circle (last view from copter) is 306 m.
      I think the assembly goes as far back as W 86th St. (first direction of copter)
      That is a cross-park avenue.
      From the picture I posted yesterday, it was a couple blocks north of the Museum.
      W 86th is 1868 m from W 63rd.
      So total length, Central Park South / W 59th St to W 86 St would be 1868 + 306 = 2175 m.
      I measure the parade width at 15 m.
      call it 32000 m^2.
      I think crowd density is between 1.5 and 2.5 people / m^2. Some places it is as high as 3.5, but other places it is 1 or less.
      Assume 2 people / sq meter: 65,000 people in sight. Could be up to 80,000, or as low as 50,000.
      Add to that, maybe there is 550 meters from Columbus Cir to 6th Ave. 8000 m^2. Another 16,000-20,000 people.
      Get 2.5 people per m^2 and you have 100,000 people.
      Lagniappe: consider people in queue on the side streets ( though there wasn’t a queue on 63rd from the copter) or under the trees.
      Lagniappe: maybe they assembled on 6th Ave, too.
      Lagniappe: others show up after the parade gets underway.
      But it is hard to get anywhere near 300,000.

      • I make it an order of magnitude less. Stop the video at 0:47. There’s about 60 people on the pavement next to those two buildings. The crowd on the road are about ten deep, and also closer lengthwise. Call it 1,000 on that stretch of road. Multiply that up by the number of lengths of road. 20,000 ?

    • There is another constraint. The number of people that can pass an intersection in a unit time.
      On the Sunday thread, there was a parade route web cam at 6th Ave and 58th St, so one short block from Central Park. I made the following observations:

      At 2:00 pm, it is an impressive crowd. Probably 2-5-10 people per second, avg. 300/min. would be 18,000/hr at that rate. Saw one float.
      3:02 – 3:05 pm Probably still 2-4-10 people/sec. Initially I thought 1-2-4, but at 3:04 a big clump came by.

      But that was 2-3 pm. The march left at 11:30. How dense and rapid could it have been?
      Take a 15 m street. Line up 20 soldiers across. space them about a meter apart. march them at a 110 cadence. I bet you could get three ranks in 2 seconds. That’s 30 people per second in a drilled march.
      In a citizen parade, half that at best, probably a third. Call it 10-15 people per second paste any point in the early part of the parade. Tops. 3600 seconds per hour. 36,000-54,000 people per hour. Call it 2.5 hours from 11:30 to 2:00 when I started looking. 90,000-135,000 people maximum. After that, it is down to my observed 18,000 / hr.


  96. RFK Jr issues a call for Klimatnacht – and so it begins. Der Klimatunmench are loose in the world and are making it clear to all who will see that science has never been an important driver in their cause. Hansen’s Death Trains take on a new meaning. How long before the RFK Jr goons in congress follow through and declare skeptics to be war criminals? I can’t believe he is the son of the man I supported and voted for in 1968.

  97. this march is just more proof that the movie ‘idiocracy’ was not a comedy, but a documentary of the probable future.

  98. If you look at the back of the sign of the guy leading the march it all makes sense.
    Follow me for
    FREE BEER
    &
    FREE PIZZA

    • It wasn’t a direct count, it was a systematic sampling.
      Nevertheless, their totals generally agree with my WAG, and estimates above by Messrs. Peterson and Rasey, that the People’s Climate March had about 100,000 participants.

      • Or not:

        Organizers had estimated turnout of some 310,000 people ranging from environmentalists and political personalities to celebs and commoner, including UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, former US Vice President Al Gore, actor Leonardo DiCaprio, elected US officials and several others who joined the People’s Climate March abroad.

        –Wall Street OTC
        I thought I’d seen 100, 000 as the estimated turnout, but this article claims a higher figure, which agrees with the apparently obviously inflated post-parade claims of the organizers, which itself was subsequently boosted to 400,000.
        Jimmy Rogers did the systematic sampling. He explains:

        But it is not hard to show that the 310,000 is impossible. I hope no one will challenge our statement that the march took 4 hours and a hair to get past our checkpoint. If that number had marched past us, they would have had to do so at a rate of 1300 a minute, non-stop for four hours.
        That’s almost twice as fast as the fastest contingents we saw. 6th Avenue can comfortably accommodate 25 adults standing abreast, in a squeeze maybe 35. (We checked before the march came through). That would mean 30 rows a minute.
        The only people who can do that are troops, drill teams and maybe joggers in a race, not senior citizens, folks pushing strollers, marching bands …

        (my formatting edits)
        Last but not least, that linked-arm picture
        http://www.wallstreetotc.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/climate-march.jpg
        Wall Street OTC

      • That looks like Jane Goodall with a monkey and a cow. Don’t think I would care for monkey meat. I love her work regarding monkeys and other primates. But don’t touch my beef.

  99. Plainly the emphasis in education should not be on events of “billions and billions” of years ago, and “millions and millions” of years ago, but on technology, the properties of matter, the behavior of energy, and on subjects such as agronomy and husbandry. What were these spoiled, miseducated children not told?
    This:

    Message to marchers: There is nothing wrong with heating water to generate steam. That simple activity is not killing the planet or destroying the atmosphere. You are not “saving the planet.”
    Teach children about power generation, sewer lines, plumbing, and cattle. Teach them about agronomy. Do it yourself. No one else will. That is science.
    Right now I would like to thank the more than 300,000 wonderful people in sewage treatment over the years who have done such amazing work for our society and homes. They never get appreciated, but if any of you are reading this, our family thanks you and values your hard work and applied engineering skills far more than 97% of the professors who are inverting our children’s minds like this, and these unthankful, gullible, and spoiled people.

    • 25 years ago I ran a (very small) wastewater treatment plant. (I work with new rather than used water now.)
      But, thank you for your thanks.

  100. In homage to the #gamergate journalism reform movement, within the $80 billion a year gaming industry, fighting Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) I hereby coin the associated term:
    Climate Justice Warriors (CJWs), or #ClimateJusticeWarriors for Twitter.

Comments are closed.