Saturday Silliness – Naomi Klein comprehends the pause?

Josh writes:

One of the phrases alarmists like to use is to “just look out of the window” to see Global Warming aka ‘Climate Change’ happening right now. Presumably when they have looked out of the window these past 18 years they have seen the pause in temperatures – which should ‘change everything’ but I am guessing this might just be a pipe dream. Oh well, here’s hoping.

naomi_klein_pauseCartoons by Josh

Advertisements

106 thoughts on “Saturday Silliness – Naomi Klein comprehends the pause?

  1. The warming might pause, however briefly, but the socialist cause, the war against capitalism, marches on.

    • Capitalists, socialists, facists, and communists alike all need a supply of energy. So what are they thinking?

      • Capitalists believe you are right, Steve. However, socialists, fascists and communists don’t think capitalists, who have out-produced them all, deserve any energy.
        That’s why I choose not to live a socialist/fascist/communist existence.

      • Facists and communists need to control the peasants. (You and me) This is just one of the levers. They only need a supply of energy to run the trains and the capital cities. We can live in mud huts or preferably not at all. What part of Agenda 21 do you not understand?

  2. It is a thinly veiled war against Caucasian plutocrats and the Koch brothers, and capitalism, and poor nations developing. CO2 was just a club to beat them, but now that club is evaporating.

    • The people are getting wise to the ruse, is how I think of it.
      When we read and hear John Kerry and BHO calling Climate Change worse than war, famine, and other calamities of mankind, one has to stop and wonder (1) do they really think most Americans are that dumb?, and (2) what is their real agenda?

      • They do think most Americans are that dumb. I would think them wrong, but I must admit, my confidence has been shaken of late.

      • Joel: I bet Kerry, BHO and Co are more afraid of Ebola than AGW/CC. Put it this way: which one makes the sphincter contract when you’ve been in contact with it? Bottom line (pun intended), we will survive one, but not the other.

      • No, Kerry is dumb enough to believe it himself, and not smart enough to come up with anything as complicated as an “agenda”. I know that because he was my senator for too many years, and, if possible, less intelligent even than our late and oft-inebriated Teddy boy.

      • I am bothered by the comments stating that these people are dumb, stoopid, idiots, etc. None of these are true. They are smart, coniving and evil to the core.

  3. Naomi, I am coming to your rescue. Try this spin:
    Our climate must be allowed to change naturally. Fossil fuel use leads to unnatural devastating pauses in the ups and downs of weather. The disruption in these chaotic swings, which are finely tuned to the natural chaotic swings of flora and fauna as well as marine life, will lead to specie extinction and eventual human tragedy! We must end our dependence on fossil fuels in order to allow weather and climate to resume its natural course and break out of this pause! Act now! Call your congress person and demand a halt to oil production so that the pause can be broken!
    There ya go. Get those fingers tap tap tapping away.

    • The old Naturalistic Fallacy. I think it is a symptom of a world which has become so urbanized that people have lost their links to the land, and forgotten or unlearned the harsh lesson that Mother Nature is a bitch who is, according to the theory of natural selection, actively trying to kill us all.

    • Yeps.. Global Warming AKA “Climate Change ©®™” is now responsible for the pause. Please send money now because only that will fix it, maybe.

    • She is a High School Grad – College Drop Out married to Al Jazeera personality Avi Lewis who is the son of Stephen Lewis – a UN / Agenda 21 save the world hero and Michelle Landsberg who was a socialist reporter for the Toronto Tsar newspaper. His Grandfather was David Lewis who ran the Ontario New Democrat Party

  4. Or better yet, Naomi would be a great candidate for the “Set the Thermometer Test”.
    Go ahead Naomi, you’ve got total control of the Global Temperature…what do you set it at? 5deg cooler than it is now?…you just pissed off the canadians, the europeans, the australians, the russians, and how knows who else.
    What’s the magic number? G’head…you can do it 🙂
    Jim

    • She would still need to select and set the proper level for the rain meter and the snow meter and the drought meter and the hurricane meter and the tornado meter and the polar ice meter and the glacier meter and all of these meters, including the ocean and land temperature meters are controlled by the CO2 control knob – which is the one they want to tweek.
      Now, one more time, how is this supposed to work?

    • I would suggest daytime high temp of 88F, low temp of 74F, humidity of 50% and a sea temperature of 86F. While I am at it let’s set day time cloud cover at 35% against a bright blue sky. Rain would be set at 1/2 inch two times per week but only from 2-4 AM.

    • We can’t even get two people to agree on the proper temperature setting for an office building, good luck on setting one for the planet.

  5. I had a look out my window the other day. I have literally never seen that amount of snow nearly to sea level in NZ. In all my 35 years I don’t ever remember it being this cold in October.

    • You might of mised it last winter here in the States our moron Secretary of State John Kerry said that with global warming we should expect colder temperatures. So your snow and cold according to political idiots is the surest sign of warming. This is the insanity we’re dealing with.

    • Same thing here in N. America. Our fall is starting very cool after an unusually cool summer (the vast interior plains from the Arctic to the Gulf).

      • I love thunderstorms. Unfortunately, here in Victoria, Australia they’ve been on the decline since the 80’s (according to my recollections). We’re only just getting these lovely atmospheric features back.

    • Well, this will upset you then. Right now I am enjoying temperatures that are 84 F (24 C) and there are several hours of daylight left. This isn’t Florida or Texas or some other hot area of the US either. This is eastern North Carolina. Except for a 2 day cold shot, this October has been blessedly warm. I always enjoy the heat more than the cold because it is easy to cool off than warm up. Whenever anybody says anything about global warming I always respond “bring it on”. I then mention how people retire in hot Florida not some place cold. I also mention how it takes less energy to cool than heat, how more people die in cold than heat, and more cold means shorter growing seasons.
      Sorry, but after I hit post, I am going outside to enjoy the warm weather.

      • Sorry alexwade, 84F = 24C on seeing that seemed wrong. Actually it’s 28.9C. I might be an expat Yank here in Australia, but can at least “think” metric…

      • I knew the east coast was in trouble last winter when I saw the 0 degree F line cutting through North Carolina. Brrr.

    • I bet if you got enough people not remembering your not remembering October cold temperatures, you could get published in a climate science periodcal.
      I prefer to forget the cold, it is highly uncomfortable.

    • Living memory seems to be the only database that is required for climate alarmists to draw conclusions from.

  6. She’s not the only one seeing things. Here are some of the comments I get from True Believers:
    (in regards to a chart of low climate sensitivity numbers / research papers) – ‘fascist propaganda!’
    ‘I live in tornado country, I *know* tornados are getting worse!’
    ‘Have you see all the hurricanes lately?
    ‘Winds blowing from the mimalaya mountains caused the Sahara Desert!’
    Looooooots more where those came from. God Help Us.

  7. What bothers me is how unscientific a statement like that is. Science was created with a STRONG quantitative component for a reason – to avoid perceptual bias! Scientists calling for people to ignore data and rely on their perceptions instead is, imho, true scientific heresy.

  8. Oh it’s deliberate.
    This type of exaggeration and confusion IS the deliberate intention of their propaganda since the 1970’s …
    Person hears (over and over) “The world is getting hotter.” …
    Person “knows” that “The jungle is hotter than my house. Mosquitoes live in the jungle. Therefore everybody is going to die from malaria because of global warming.”
    Person hears (over and over) “The world will get much, much hotter and everything will die.”
    Person “knows” that “The Sahara Desert is hotter than my house. The Sahara Desert is very dry. The Sahara Desert is very hot. Therefore we are all going to die because of droughts and heat waves and starvation because of global warming.”
    Person hears (over and over) “The ice caps are all melting and we are all going to get flooded.”

    Person “knows” that “Snow and ice melts, and the rivers flood, and so sea level is going up and we are all going to drown because of global warming.”
    Every part of The Message is deliberately reinforcing the tiny parts of some of the things that are partially true, but NEVER telling the world the real story.

    • And because mainstream media depends on controversy, conflict, chaos and confusion (to create cash), there will NEVER be any widespread effort by them to explain how Person is manipulated.

      • Amzingly the BBC -of all manipulators- once broadcast the film “The Century Of The Self” which explains it brilliantly; go seek it, I think it’s somewhere on the internet, legally even.

    • G.K. Chesterton paraphrase:
      The thing from which we suffer just now more than from any other evil is not the assertion of falsehoods, but the endless and irrepressible repetition of half-truths.
      Yes; endless prattle, bits of half-truths, exaggeration, trivial groundless assertions; something like the dirt beneath your fingernails…
      And people wonder why I never watch the television, and have cancelled all my subscriptions.

  9. We do a bit more than look out the window, here in New Hampshire. We garden, keep livestock, have a small orchard, and sometimes make maple syrup. I also keep some track of the birds that visit our “farm”. Everything I’ve seen over the last two years suggests a return to colder temperatures and shorter growing seasons. (Apple blossoms killed by late frost, spring broccoli that did not bolt and is still producing some, tomatoes still green in October, a neighbor’s pumpkins killed by early frost in September; etc etc)
    If I were to draw a conclusion by what I see outside it is: “The pause” is over, and it’s getting colder!

    • You said a return to colder temperatures, return since when? A frost could be for one night, so is meaningless. You kept track of birds over what time frame over what number of years? How many birds are new, disappeared, left or comeback? The point is that subjective, ad-hoc obsevations are not proof of a pause, lack of pause, warming, cooling, etc. Thats the way politics works but not science.
      Anyways as I get older it seems every year gets colder, but I am not offering that as proof of global cooling.

      • Yup. Perhaps I was being a bit silly?
        To your point. Yes a conclusion made from window observations is not science when used to draw a global climate inference. I have enough data to show a cooling trend HERE, but that’s irrelevant, One cannot prove global cooling in advance of its occurrence with any amount of recent data from New Hampshire. The bird data if replicated across the region, might suggest a study using an observational database like ebird, It’s interesting, but more properly a starting point than a conclusion.
        I used a tactic of the political warmists to produce a counterpoint. Of course, unlike them, I’m not after tax money or control. Turnabout may be fair play and sometimes fun, but we agree it’s not science, even if its prediction is correct.
        Beyond the parody, my supposed “conclusion” above,is actually my working hypothesis, based on the science i read and observation. I hope to see it falsified..

  10. Just what climate change do Believers see? I have been around for some 66 years in many places, and I have yet to see anything out of the ordinary. Do we live in alternate realities?

    • Yes.
      Actually every individual lives in an alternate or subjective reality. Most of the time we tend to agree on objective reality, but for some un-Godly reason, climate only seems to only exist in alternate realities.

  11. Okay, now what about the glaciers, warmists always claim that melting glaciers will reduce the water available to those downstream, well if things get too cold that glacier will stop melting and there will be no more flow, but if things get hot and the glacier all melts away then no more water? Not necessarily, first, build a dam to catch the water, second, the snow falling to produce that glacier now falls as rain, presumably, well there you have a dam to catch the rain flowing down. It’s not as bad as we thought.

  12. Naomi Klein delivered a lecture at the Cheltenham Festival this afternoon and I listened to it with some annoyance. Never mind the attack on neo-liberalism; others can argue that case.
    The trick is she based her arguments on various indications of Climate Change, which were at least challengeable. I did not manage to get a question in at the lecture but confronted her at the book signing later, asking her whether her belief in the ecomomic change she wanted was undermined by the shaky foundations she had herself mentioned in the talk.
    I ran through the following:
    She mentioned the bad floods in England this winter resulting from record rain, as a sign of climate change. There was more rain in 1929/30, before any such climate change
    She linked extreme weather to climate change, when IPCC 5 said there was no such connection.
    She mentioned Hurricane Katrina, but there has not been a hurricane above force 3 landed in the US since then. She mentioned Hurricane Sandy, when it was not a hurricane when it landed in New York.
    She did not acknowledge the 14 scientific papers that say the most likely warming from doubling the CO2 concentration from 400ppm to 800ppm is 1.4C, while she quoted others who thought 4 or 6 degrees Centrigrade was likely – and had to be planned for.
    She did not mention the 18 years with no increase in global temperatures, which could indicate the models that she relied on for justifying her economic changes might be inadequate.
    Her response to my short tirade was to question the truth of what I had said – I reiterated the IPCC5 conclusion and the 18 years with no warming and she indicated she did not accept them.
    By this time I had outstayed my welcome. I took my signed book (with no personal reference, so still saleable) but did not buy it. The whole thing was filmed by a professional film crew, including a proper sound man with a boom mic, so a little of it may turn up in some biopic some time. I would like to know where and when if it is spotted.
    Dr Ken Pollock

    • You made a brave attempt at a rational discussion, but unfortunately it was equal to discussing Jesus not rising from the dead with the Pope. Naomi would not believe anything that undermines her ideology.

      • Tell us Alx what rational argument do you have for Jesus not rising from the dead? The mistake you’re making is you assume rational is the same thing as empirical. It’s not. You may correctly state there is no empirical evidence that Jesus rose from the dead (there isn’t that I know of if contemporaneous eye witness accounts are not accepted as empirical evidence – for whatever reason) but, within the realm and context of the supernatural, there is no rational reason why he couldn’t have.
        It’s an unfortunate comparison you made that only underlines your own confusion on what being rationalist really means.

  13. As for her arguments on climate change being a stick to beat capitalism with, neoliberalism hardly needs any assistance with that little enterprise, but it is disappointing that, having written a fairly strong critique of neoliberalism in the Shock Doctrine (reams of evidence but weak-ish theorising), she then jumps on the AGW bandwagon(s) so gullibly . . . Trusting scientists is one thing ( though bad enough in my view) but to fail to see that there are so many weaknesses in the arguments and so little substance to the evidence is a whole different matter . . .

  14. I looked out my window and see a rainy, cold but beautiful Fall day. Other people look out their window and see the end of the world. I guess some people live in a catastophic future all of the time, even looking out their window.

  15. Terrence Corcoran at the National Post did a good take-down of Naomi Klein’s latest book:
    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/10/03/terence-corcoran-naomi-kleins-revolutionary-dreamland/
    “Her objective is to rally millions of people in a war against climate change, to clear the world of fossil fuels and install some new social order as part of a battle of worldviews”
    Notwithstanding her (few) valid attacks on crony capitalists and various green-washing groups, it’s mostly standard socialist paradise nonsense.

    • Naomi Klein has one interest and one interest only. Having achieved notoriety, she peddles crap that will never germinate anything but money for a lifestyle few will achieve. She will keep peddling this crap until she has amassed sufficient resources to finish living out her life and then will slowly fade away. She knows what is real and what is not, but has no morals to come out and say what common sense would have someone else come out and say. It’s all about the money and nothing else. I personally don’t believe that she believes in her own nonsense. That’s her schtick!

      • Yep. I heard an interview and thought “If it’s so damned important to get your message out, why aren’t you giving your book out free in PDF format? After all, it’s all about saving the world, and not at all about the money… She sounded shrill when questioned. Details of a replacement for capitalism were vague and pollyannish. Par for her sort.

  16. Global Warming, no things are not warming.
    Climate Change, no things are not changing
    Climate Disruption, bingo. That will cover warming, cooling, pauses, more tornadoes, less tornadoes, a long string of average tornadoes (it should oscillate), etc

  17. Terrific concept Josh!
    When the Naomi thing looks at a window, all she is really looking at is the faint reflection of herself, so she can check her hair.
    Drag her out to the porch or front step and she’ll either pull out a mirror or look back at the house windows.
    Shallow belief, shallow life, shallow perception.

  18. If you listen very closely Naomi Klein sounds oh-so-much like Al Gore in drag. I know this blog is supposed to be above the notion of using personal attacks, but I figured since I’m insulting two people at once that it counts as a group, and is subsequently exempt.

    • “If you listen very closely Naomi Klein sounds oh-so-much like Al Gore in drag.”
      Since when is comparing someone to Al Gore an insult? After all, Al Gore is a successful businessperson.
      I know that comparing certain other Naomis to witches counts as an insult here, but even that is not logical, as it shows a certain anti-witchism; forgetting that witches have been the victim of relentless persecution.

      • inMAGICn, of course they exist. But you will never make out one because no one can force them to do magic. You don’t expect that they succeeded to persecude, let alone burn the real ones, do you 😕

  19. Lucky we’ve got one of the warmest years on record, so I can finish painting the outside of my windows. In OCTOBER!!

    • I spent a lot of my summer replacing my main water line to my house due to it bursting from frost due to one of the coldest winters since my house was built in 1967.

    • You are painting the outside of your windows? Isn’t October actually springtime or some such in Australia where you live?
      .
      Why would you paint your windows?

    • Whattsa matter? Too cold in August?
      Still waiting for that El Nino ‘Super-dee-looper-dee-poofer Special de luxe a-la-NASA & Schimdt?

  20. It is only a “pause” in relation to a given time frame. When do you start your window of measurement and where do you end it? If you start measuring from the MWP, isn’t this technically just part of a general cooling over the past millennium or so? Perhaps we’re just pausing before the next LIA, or even the next major ice advance. A lot of those attending this blog know we are due, if not past due, for major cooling.

  21. Anything Groucho Marx ever said about anything was more intelligent than anything Naomi Klein has said, will say or can say. That’s not ad hominem, that’s fact.

    • Jonathan Kay is still very ignorant on the state of climate science:

      the warming of our planet, which reputable climatologists generally agree is being driven by human industrial, climate-control and transport activity.

      He was on the CBC National news a few days ago participating in a Climate Panel discussion. The viewer learns that the reason for skepticism is only because we hate regulation. The 97% of all climate scientists meme was displayed. The halt in global warming since 1998 (their words) can demonstrably proven false.
      So Jonathan Kay participated in a show full of lies, and he seems fine with it.
      He also is the editor of the opinion section of the National Post.

  22. That is the beauty of weather. It is ALWAYS changing. Why just a couple of months ago it hit 90 degrees. Now? We are struggling to hit 60. OMG! The new glacial has started!

  23. My mathamatical formula says Naomi Klein=idiot, but this post is dumb. It provides no instance of NK having said anything about the so called pause. I’m on your side, but if you want to make sense, provide some quotes to support your (Josh’s) argument. With a nutter like Klein it shouldn’t be difficult, but do it anyway.
    You say ‘Naomi Klein comprehends the pause?’ I think this poster is a good man..But don’t be evil. Don’t make statements and then hide behind question marks;.

  24. We show stop allowing the kooks and rent seekers like Klein to set the terms of discussion.
    One small way to pushback is to start calling their obsession “so-called”. As in, “so-called climate change”. “So-called global warming”. The only change Naomi is afraid of in her intellectual vacuum of a book is a lack of growth in her bank account. Her book is dissembling over wrought drivel. Whatever her motives may be, her actions are no different than that of a deliberate and practiced manipulator.

  25. Yesterday we were fishing Lake Michigan and the Pleasant Prairie Power Plant had a small puffy white cloud, about the size of the plant site, hovering over it for two hours. It appeared to be caused by the cooling towers, the steam from the towers quickly evaporated and became invisible but when the vapor rose to altitude (maybe 2000 feet) it recondensed into a small puffy cloud that hovered in place.
    That cloud was absolutely dwarfed by the same type of clouds at the same altitude that hovered over Lake Michigan and were caused by natural evaporation.
    What I’m saying is try look at the big picture and not the small puffy man made cloud.

  26. . . . . Naomi O & Naomi K . . . .

    . . . . now there are two of them . . . . of them called Naomi who are bizarre unpersuadables having faith in the CAGW mythology.
    John

  27. Well, it’s obvious that Climate Changers are just more attuned to the planet than we Skeptic/Realists are. After all, they can feel global warming when they’re flying, and can see it just by looking out the window. Presumably, they can smell it and taste it as well. I envy them their capability.
    Excuse me now while I go hug a tree. Maybe I too can acquire them. Hey, I can dream, can’t I?

  28. So MzElectron sits at the bar, snuffling her beer in disarray. When Joe the bartender asks what’s wrong, she glances out the door and croaks, “Why can’t I be more positive?”

Comments are closed.