Sporting News: "Buzzkill" Global Warming Message Had No Place at Rio Olympics

Global Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Global atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations from Oct. 1 through Nov. 11, as recorded by NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2. Carbon dioxide concentrations are highest above northern Australia, southern Africa and eastern Brazil. Preliminary analysis of the African data shows the high levels there are largely driven by the burning of savannas and forests. Elevated carbon dioxide can also be seen above industrialized Northern Hemisphere regions in China, Europe and North America. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech
Global Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
Global atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations from Oct. 1 through Nov. 11, as recorded by NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2. Carbon dioxide concentrations are highest above northern Australia, southern Africa and eastern Brazil. Preliminary analysis of the African data shows the high levels there are largely driven by the burning of savannas and forests. Elevated carbon dioxide can also be seen above industrialized Northern Hemisphere regions in China, Europe and North America.
Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Sporting News has published a scathing critique of Brazil’s attempt to prop up its rather shaky green credentials by wedging a “buzzkill” climate message into their Olympic opening ceremony.

Global warming message had no place at Rio Olympics’ opening ceremony

The organizers of the Opening Ceremony of Rio Olympics 2016 should give themselves a medal for hypocrisy.

Their preachy warnings about global warming brought a feel-good evening to a screeching halt Friday night. It was an unforced error that unfortunately marred NBC’s otherwise solid coverage from Brazil.

Things were going pretty well. NBC’s excellent opening video had glibly chalked up to the problem of polluted waters, zika and street crime to the struggles of “modernization.”

We had parkour athletes put on a dazzling show — despite Rio having a much-lower production budget than the London or Beijing Summer Games

We had Brazilian super model Gisele Bundchen strutting across iconic Maracanã Stadium to the bossa nova classic, “The Girl from Ipanema.” That set off a huge party. After the catwalk of her life, NBC cameras seemed to cut back to views of Bundchen, who is married to Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, dancing in the crowd every 30 seconds.

Prime-time host Bob Costas added his usual deft touch, saluting Rio de Janeiro’s “spirit for revelry.”

Then it happened just like that. Boom. The joyous ceremony took a hard turn with a bleak message about global warming and climate change.

Talk about a buzzkill. The dancing stopped.

Read more: http://www.sportingnews.com/athletics/news/rio-olympics-opening-ceremony-2016-global-warming-broadcast-nbc/1l4ud2ixi7adt1q538j5dcqza5

Brazil, until recently hailed as a rising tiger economy, has in the last few years collapsed into a morass of multi-billion dollar political scandals, impeachment, corruption, third world levels of street crime and a total failure to control sickening levels of water pollution and the Zika crisis. Our water sport athletes are literally competing in a sea of human filth.

Why aren’t green groups vigorously protesting Brazil’s environmental hypocrisy? I suspect they are getting so desperate for signs of political support, they’re willing to accept anything, overlook anything, in return for a few kind words.

Brazil is not the first government to try to use climate hypocrisy to distract attention from their sickening pollution levels, rampant corruption and political incompetence. They won’t be the last.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
112 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Pat Frank
August 7, 2016 5:55 pm

I suspect [green groups] are getting so desperate for signs of political support, they’re willing to accept anything, overlook anything, in return for a few kind words.
Reminds me of Mother Teresa’s calculation of ends over means in choosing to accept money from Charles Keating and Baby Doc Duvalier.
https://youtu.be/65JxnUW7Wk4

Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy
Reply to  Pat Frank
August 7, 2016 10:16 pm

Good point — in fact I raised this when BBC live interviewed Mother Teressa asking “on one side you are telling you wanted uplift downtrodden but on the other hand you are accepting drug money for the same”. She replied back saying “on the money it is not written it is drug money” — highly hypocracy. However, she got Noble Prize like IPCC & Al Gore. Also, one prominent left oriented film actor — which enacted several dramas in that left oriented issues — was asked by a TV Channel moderator “what do you think of the filthy films of today”. He replied back saying “The public should stop seeing such films. But, now both are no more.”
Dr.S. Jeevananda Reddy

Greg
Reply to  Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy
August 8, 2016 12:08 am

Thanks for that link. An interesting film.

MarkW
Reply to  Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy
August 8, 2016 9:52 am

Do poor people care who’s buying the meal that is saving their life?
Is being dead somehow enobling?

Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy
Reply to  Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy
August 8, 2016 5:26 pm

MarkW — Killing millions of people and saving hundreds!!! Is it worth or should we not reject that bloodstink money?
Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy

Francisco
August 7, 2016 5:57 pm

Have you noticed how much hypocrisy is rampant with all this climate change meme?
They don’t even bother adding the anthropogenic term to it (yeah, I know, too big of a word)

philincalifornia
Reply to  Francisco
August 7, 2016 6:08 pm

Some don’t even bother to add the “change” bit. They’re tackling climate now ……
I think some of them actually believe it too.

george e. smith
Reply to  philincalifornia
August 7, 2016 7:28 pm

Well phooey on their OCO-2 carbon map.
Everybody knows that satellite measurements are unreliable, and the real global carbon map is actually a very uninteresting monochrome uniform color, as is expected of a component well mixed in the atmosphere.
They must take us for uneducated fools.
g

Kiwikid
Reply to  philincalifornia
August 7, 2016 8:36 pm

George
I will take your comments regarding the CO2 in the atmosphere being monchrome and well mixed as sarcasm. It would be appropriate that you take the time to review the images and the surface station data. The simplistic summary that has been presented so far on the carbon cycle, and what the Keeling curves represent is far from accurate.
The carbon cycle is the least discussed of any topics, and yet it is possibly the most critical, and given the data available from the NASA images, open season should be declared on the IPCC theory as that is all it is, a theory without substance.

richard verney
Reply to  philincalifornia
August 8, 2016 2:21 am

I know from his previous comments that George was being sarcastic.
But if one looks at the NASA plot, the scale very dark blue to very dark red cover a range of about 15 ppm so the difference is under 4% of the actual ppm. Perhaps more significantly the range represented by mid red to green is probably about 8ppm so given a CO” concentration of around 400 pmn that is a difference of only about 2%.
Is CO2 a well mixed gas, well that depends upon what one means by well mixed and whether a difference of 5 to 8 ppm is significant. I consider that for present purposes at altitude CO2 can be considered well mixed.
However, CO2 at low altitude (say less than a couple of thousand feet particularly less than 1,000 feet) is anything but well mixed. In this altitude range concentrations of CO2 can differ by upwards of 100%, eg.locally they can be around 370 ppm to over 800 ppm. This is why the Beck re-analysis was rejected by the IPCC. Low altitude sampling of CO2 can show huge variations in the concentration of CO2 since CO2 at low altitude is anything but well mixed.
This raises an obvious issue. Where does the preponderance of DWLWIR come from? High altitude where CO2 is well mixed or low altitude where CO2 is anything but well mixed.
If DWLWIR comes from low altitude then we ought to be able to detect the warming signal by testing temperatures of adjacent areas where the level of CO2 differs by about 100%. I have never seen anyone try and produce observational data on temps verses CO2 concentration on local areas over a range of differening CO2 concentrations.

Reply to  philincalifornia
August 8, 2016 9:50 am

All, CO2 is well mixed in 95% of the atmosphere. That is at all heights over the oceans and higher than a few hundred meters over land. “Well mixed” doesn’t mean that levels are exactly the same at every moment, no matter how much and fast sources and sinks are working…
About 20% of all CO2 in the atmosphere is transferred back and forth between the atmosphere and oceans/vegetation. The net effect over months is not more than 2% of full scale each way. I call that well mixed…
About the effect: the largest variability indeed is in the first few hunderd meters over land, where most of the historical measurements were taken. The -theoretical- effect of the radiation capturing by CO2 is minimal. Even if the CO2 level was a continuous 1,000 ppmv for the first 1,000 meters, the effect wouldn’t be more than 0.1°C extra warming at the surface (based on Modtran calculations)…

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  philincalifornia
August 9, 2016 1:05 am

– ‘if the CO2 level was a continuous 1,000 ppmv for the first 1,000 meters, the effect wouldn’t be more than 0.1°C extra warming at the surface.’ – OK
– CO2 is not that well mixed in the atmosphere – on the grids calendar of measuring and calculations + over time that’s averaged out – OK.
_____________________________________
The real problems of Brazil are sanitation, health care, economy, crime.
In that situation mastering about ‘climate’ is tough.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  philincalifornia
August 9, 2016 1:23 am

Since 40 years ‘climate change’ is the polititicians emergency exit.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  philincalifornia
August 9, 2016 1:26 am

for a better read –
Since 40 years ‘climate change’ is the politicians emergency exit.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  philincalifornia
August 9, 2016 1:43 am

Seems to be a never ending good times party going on behind that ‘climate change’ emergency exit door.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  philincalifornia
August 9, 2016 1:50 am
Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  philincalifornia
August 9, 2016 2:19 am

Obviously when not marked ‘climate change emergency exit’ it needs a second guess to get out a’here.

Reply to  Francisco
August 8, 2016 4:34 pm

Hypocrisy and reliance on a non-existent level of ignorance. Brazilians are very familiar with Zika virus, and know that it caused no developmental problems until Zika vaccinations with Tdap vaccine began in Brazil, and larvicidal insecticide spraying to kill mosquitoes started. The exaggerated numbers of reported microcephaly cases correspond to a much lower instance clustered around areas sprayed with larvicide. The Big Pharma propaganda must have been designed by someone familiar with US censored corporate media.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  cassidy421
August 9, 2016 2:43 am

The Big Pharma propaganda must have been designed by someone familiar with US censored corporate media.
–>
The Big antiPharma propaganda must have been designed by someone inside US censored corporate media.

August 7, 2016 5:59 pm

“Brazil is not the first government to try to use climate hypocrisy to distract attention from their sickening pollution levels, rampant corruption and political incompetence. They won’t be the last.”
Nor will they be the last that the MSM aids in their hypocrisy.

Greg
Reply to  JohnWho
August 8, 2016 12:14 am

If they want a “sustainable” Olympics, they should stop building all the massive infrastructure and let everyone watch it remotely.
What is the “carbon footprint” of this mess? Hundreds of thousands visitors flying in from all over the world. All CO2 emissions from the concrete used in construction. They are probably responsible for more CO2 than all the IPCC fiestas since 1990.
ABSOLUTE HYPOCRISY.

Rainer Bensch
Reply to  Greg
August 8, 2016 1:32 am

The carbon footprint doesn’t matter. More CO₂ is good.

4 Eyes
Reply to  Greg
August 8, 2016 3:31 am

+1000

Reply to  Greg
August 8, 2016 6:41 am


Rainer Bensch
August 8, 2016 at 1:32 am
The carbon footprint doesn’t matter.

Ah, to the CAGW folks it certainly does as long as it is someone else’s carbon footprint.

David Middleton
August 7, 2016 6:01 pm

My thought exactly. Once they started the propaganda, I switched channels. No place for this when they have so many other problems to solve.

Kiwikid
August 7, 2016 6:11 pm

Eric
The image that you have used is now outdated.
You can find a replacement here
http://www.blozonehole.com/images/2_2014_2.10_2.11.PNG
For the complete set of 30 images go to the following link
http://www.blozonehole.com/blozone-hole-theory/blozone-hole-theory/carbon-cycle-using-nasa-oco-2-satellite-images
Also the commentary on the image is quite misleading, when looking at an individual image care must be taken to understand what part of the annual cycle including north to south transport is being captured.

Eli Rabett
Reply to  Kiwikid
August 7, 2016 6:56 pm

As was pointed out when the first images were shown, they emphasized agricultural burning in the Amazon and Africa but folks here did not believe it. The complete video showing a year’s worth of data paints a very different picture

PA
Reply to  Eli Rabett
August 9, 2016 5:31 am

The OCO-2 is a A-train satellite at a 98.2 ° inclination. There is no reason for JPL to crank videos that only show CO2 levels over less than 50 degrees of latitude. They should display 73.6 or more degrees of coverage.
I’m not sure how propaganda value is increased by masking the presentation but it must have increased the propaganda value in some way or they would have shown the full coverage.

george e. smith
Reply to  Kiwikid
August 7, 2016 7:51 pm

Sorry it is not outdated.
In fact your map is for a different time period.
Your map is for a 31 day time period, but the original is for 41 days. And the earlier shown original map pushes further into the fall (northern) season when global CO2 is changing.
Why is it that some researchers just can’t get their heads around the idea of keeping ALL of the parameters of an experiment UNCHANGED if you want to compare what are supposed to be two identical observations. Changing the observation period by shortening it by 25% at a critical time, is just lunacy.
G

Reply to  george e. smith
August 7, 2016 7:56 pm

Thank you, George.

Kiwikid
Reply to  george e. smith
August 7, 2016 8:22 pm

George
It has been replaced by an image within a time series rather than being the only one that was released at the time. Below is the image that follows the one that I posted above, which extends the time series.
Try looking at the the complete set of thirty, they tell a significant story. They are all provided by NASA.
Some researchers use the latest information at hand, and as you can now see they make a mockery of the IPCC carbon cycle. I look forward to your interpretation.
A single image is meaningless in an annual cycle.
http://www.blozonehole.com/images/3_2014_3.11_18.11.PNG

richard verney
Reply to  george e. smith
August 8, 2016 2:41 am

And this is one reason why the time series land based thermometer record is uninforming.
Quite simply one cannot compare temperatures ‘measured’ in 1880 with those measured in 1930 or those in 1960 or those in 2016 since the same station data is not being used.
if one wants to compare the temperature ‘measured’ today with that of 1880 one needs to identify those stations used in 1880 and to use only those stations that have a continuous record throughout the period 1880 to 2015, and then one needs to add some sensible error bands to take account of differing systems, equipment, methodology, quality control etc etc.

george e. smith
Reply to  george e. smith
August 9, 2016 4:51 pm

NASA also produced the original plot.
Let them explain the difference.
But that doesn’t change the fact that they are not the same plots.
Totally different time periods and different scales.
What is the point of comparing a domestic cow, with a buffalo. They are two different animals.
Try comparing two examples of the exact same thing.
G

Reply to  Kiwikid
August 7, 2016 7:54 pm

Thank you, Kiwikid. Nice! 🙂

Greg
Reply to  A.D. Everard
August 8, 2016 1:04 am

Yes, interesting image from that series.
http://www.blozonehole.com/images/14_2015_13.5_28_5.PNG
Note the strong levels all around the Antarctic. No trees, no industry down there. Must be outgassing of upwelling cold deep waters.

Greg
Reply to  A.D. Everard
August 8, 2016 1:09 am

I would add that I don’t give much credence to Blohole’s misinterpretations of what these images show.

Reply to  Kiwikid
August 8, 2016 1:40 am

Kiwikid
Rising CO2 is a frightening thing, your map looks rather benign, that ain’t going to scare anyone, here is the bloodcurdling CO2 map, those who live in the dark area they are roasted. /sarccomment image

sean2829
August 7, 2016 6:12 pm

The preaching also seems to be a ratings killer. Viewership was way down for the opening ceremony and did not do well for the second night. Considering the sports they are covering and the types of commercials airing, I suspect they expecting a lot more women to be watching than men.
In our area, the preachiness and price of The Weather Channel under NBC Universal ownership got it knocked off our cable provider lineup and replaced with an Accuweather channel.
The people at NBC must know they are pushing a dog of an issue. Who’s pushing them to keep trying?

Doug Bunge
Reply to  sean2829
August 8, 2016 5:55 am

Good. That’s the point that I got up off the couch and stopped watching.

August 7, 2016 6:43 pm

It made me happy that I didn’t watch it live. On Tivo, I pressed exactly one button to skip the whole propaganda mess AND the next set of commercials to get back to the entertainment.

n.n
August 7, 2016 6:44 pm

The proselytization of the left’s faith, religion, and traditions are a pervasive, even ubiquitous occurrence in liberal societies. Despite market changes, this Church remains well funded by the 1% (e.g. monopolies), special and peculiar, and bureaucratic interests. Separation of Church and State is a fantasy told by a replacement orthodoxy.

Gamecock
Reply to  n.n
August 8, 2016 3:50 am

Correct. NBC was just making a declaration of orthodoxy.

August 7, 2016 6:51 pm

Didn’t see much of the opening ceremony here in the Baja, Mexico. One good thing here is that DISH network has 11 (eleven) channels covering most of the events. There are very few commercials. I think the bicycle races had no commercials – just constant coverage. AND there are no “up close and personals” which tend to show sick family members back home that they are competing for??? They are just showing the competitions, and the awards ceremonies. Full coverage, but they don’t concentrate on the US athletes, but all of them including the USA, and their fans, etc. Haven’t seen anything about “Climate Change” yet!!!
One channel must have had 24 hour coverage of weightlifting…They did show the performance of the 19 year old female shooter who won the only USA gold metal so far. Then they showed the metal ceremony with the national anthem and all the after photo shoots in the arena. I am enjoying it. Almost commercial free…

commieBob
August 7, 2016 7:03 pm

It was an unforced error …

one of many.
Brazil found a bunch of oil. It was on top of the world. That led it to make many errors. Then the price of oil plummeted. link
Brazil got a case of Dutch Disease so bad that some folks are calling it Brazilian Disease.

Graham
August 7, 2016 7:08 pm

“OK. Climate Change is a huge and important issue. But was this the right time and place?”
Sporting News having a bet each way much? If it “is a huge and important issue” then any “time and place” is the “right time”. Truth is it is “is a huge and important issue” but for all the wrong and despicable reasons.

August 7, 2016 7:11 pm

In my youth I trained for Olympic swimming and met many who made the cut.
The message of that late 1950s era was “Amateur” status. If you were ever found to have received sponsorship, you were disqualified forever.
Then the tentacles of advertising started to grow and grow. The rules were relaxed 1950-2016 as it became possible to be sponsored, but amateur. Then later, professional sports people were let in.
Inter the United Nations, an unelected body paid for by the taxpayers of the wealthier countries – people like me- without us having ever been asked if we wanted to support the UN and its part in the Olympics.
We have seen how big advertising and big social engineers from the UN combined at the Rio Olympics to grasp a very sweet spot for global propaganda.
In a lifetime, we have gone from strict amateur to professional admission, from no advertising to extremely prominent advertising – all without the people having been asked if it is OK to spend their money this way.
The International Olympic Committee has lost its way, worse than ever before. In the past, we did not look too hard when Olympics official suddenly seemed to be wealthier than before, we saw some nepotism and shrugged it off as people behaving badly. But this Rio effort is in the big league of moral corruption.
Personally, I found TV coverage of the bowing and scraping to UN head Ban Ki-moon to be sickening as he sat unsmiling in the best box in the house at Rio, flanked by acolytes. What the Hell is the UN there for?
My prediction – it will get worse. As the UN Agenda 21 becomes more obvious, we will have the UN deciding which countries can or cannot compete in the Olympics, then we will have individual athletes banned or allowed, depending on their expressed loyalty to the UN. We can already suspect the hand of the UN with trivial sports now drowning out the ones that used to require dedication by aspiring athletes of up to a decade of hard training before reaching selection. Compare this to the golfer at Rio who did not even know the format of his game a few days before playing. How many are now there for the money (from their advertising sponsors) as opposed to the joy of competing?
Sure, we are talking of symbolism as well as athleticism. There are still many skilled, untainted individual athletes, but just watch the increase in manipulation of the Games and all they used to stand for in their purer, earlier form.
The IOC has to go, we need to think about returning all future Olympics to Greece and making them again open only to amateurs as tightly defined; and getting rid of the contaminating UN mucking around in sport.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
August 7, 2016 8:30 pm

Thanks to Germany and 1936. The Olympics has been a big con since then…

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Patrick MJD
August 7, 2016 10:45 pm

Patrick that just doesn’t add up, not only has there been cheating since Athens, money has ruined the Olympics. Not only that Brazil used the Olympics and World Cup to bring in new repressive laws

richard verney
Reply to  Patrick MJD
August 8, 2016 2:49 am

There was a programme about a week ago on the games of 1936 and how this had impacted on the modern Olympics. The evidence put forward was strong.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Patrick MJD
August 8, 2016 3:43 am

Well it does. The 1936 Olympics were the start of the “we can do it bigger and better than you” approach. And its been the same ever since. Hitler was very big on “showmanship”.

Roy
Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
August 8, 2016 12:44 am

What the Hell is the UN there for?
Although I have some sympathy for your viewpoint the Olympic Committee could reply that the original Olympics in Ancient Greece also had a political dimension. Wars between the Greek city states were not uncommon but they did try to maintain friendly, or at least peaceful, relations for their games.

emsnews
Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
August 8, 2016 4:39 am

Our rulers tried very very hard to eliminate Russia from this Olympics.

MarkW
Reply to  emsnews
August 8, 2016 12:28 pm

As they should have, because of the rampant cheating that went all the way to the top of their olympic committee, any medals they may win will need to have an asterisk beside them this year.

MarkW
Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
August 8, 2016 9:58 am

The problem with the “amateur” status was that the US was about the only country left that took that seriously.
Countries like those behind the iron curtain made many of their top athletes officers in their armed forces and permitted them to spend 100% of their time training, or had them join government sponsored “sports clubs” that fully supported the athletes.
It was abandon the myth, or get out entirely.

Gamecock
Reply to  MarkW
August 8, 2016 3:28 pm

I knew an Olympic marathoner. He was an amateur. On full salary from Nike.

Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
August 9, 2016 4:00 pm

Geoff, I first noticed this particular “contamination” of the Olympics (by the UN, courtesy of Ban Ki-moon) two years ago, while watching the Opening Ceremonies of the Sochi winter games.
From my investigations at that time, it appears that this “partnership” – which Ki-moon has declared to be … wait for it … a “dynamic global duo” – had been in the works since at least 2012 when he and then IOC head honcho, Jacques Rogge (and/or their underlings) cooked it up.
As I had concluded in my post:

When considering the foundations, legacies and values of the UN (and its offspring, particularly the IPCC) and those of the IOC, do we have a case of “Mendacity loves company”? Or simply a case of ‘You keep silent about our scandals and hypocrisy, and we’ll keep silent about yours’? Or perhaps both?!

Reply to  Hilary Ostrov (aka hro001)
August 9, 2016 7:49 pm

Thanks for the heads up Hilary.

Seth
August 7, 2016 7:19 pm

Reducing greenhouse emissions is like the prisoner’s dilemma: Global cooperation is needed, and unless the cooperation is valued, we’ll all be a lot worse off.
The Olympic spirit can wash aside national parochialness, so is a great forum to raise climate change concerns. There’s a grim reality, its mention in a forum of global community spirit is uplifting, not a “buzzkill”.

Alex
Reply to  Seth
August 7, 2016 7:57 pm

Perhaps it could be a forum for ‘ no need for concern’ ? In fact, no need to mention a non-event.

William R
Reply to  Seth
August 7, 2016 8:12 pm

It’s only a prisoner’s dilemma if the outcomes were certain, and negative. However, alarmists fail to understand that the entire debate is about not just whether AGW is significant, but also whether it is even a net negative. Temps rose in the 80/90s, and have been stagnant since the late 90’s, and where is the catastrophe that was predicted over and over? Where are the dead bodies? The economic calamity? What benefit are we getting for the cost of government “addressing” this issue? How many real problems could we have fixed with that money? At this point any reasonable person can assume the medicine is worse than the disease.

Seth
Reply to  William R
August 9, 2016 12:46 am

It’s only a prisoner’s dilemma if the outcomes were certain, and negative.

It looks like you’ve made a thinko there. They only have to be negative and more costly for everyone than if everyone acts.

However, alarmists fail to understand that the entire debate is about not just whether AGW is significant, but also whether it is even a net negative.

I don’t think that people fail to understand that, so much as do understand that the argument that it’s not a net negative is implausible.

Temps rose in the 80/90s, and have been stagnant since the late 90’s,

You haven’t looked at the temperatures in the last couple of years then?
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif
They’re much higher now than the 2000s, as the 2000s were than prior to ’98.

Where are the dead bodies?

Primarily in <a href = "”>sub saharan africa and south east asia.

The economic calamity?

Well it’s showing up in flood insurance and in flood damage to uninsured properties at the moment in the west.
But its been hitting farmers in Bangladesh and herdsmen in the Sahel harder for a while now. Lack of water is affecting some farms in inland California and inland New South Wales.

What benefit are we getting for the cost of government “addressing” this issue?

Amelioration of the acceleration of such issues.

How many real problems could we have fixed with that money?

It depends how much you want to spend on carbon emission reduction. The regional greenhouse gas initiative states have seen their economies grow at faster than the national average, so it getting the low hanging fruit there, the cost has apparently been less than nothing. But there will be increased costs if you want to transition faster or more completely away from fossil fuels.

At this point any reasonable person can assume the medicine is worse than the disease.

No, a reasonable person would look at cost-benefit analysis, such as the Stern Review. Then they would see that the disease is five times the cost of the medicine. And that’s using very conservative assumptions.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Seth
August 7, 2016 8:34 pm

Don’t know much about history do you Seth.

MarkW
Reply to  Patrick MJD
August 8, 2016 12:31 pm

Why should he treat history different from every other subject?

Seth
Reply to  Patrick MJD
August 9, 2016 12:54 am

Don’t know much about history do you Seth.

You refer to all countries getting together to reduce CFC emissions following the montreal protocol? And the nuclear non-proliferation treaties that have reduced the danger of MAD since the 80s?
Yes, history shows that in the absence of interested parties engaging PR groups and politicians to act against our total good, humans are capable of intelligent action, even if there are short term disbenefits to particular industries.

gnomish
Reply to  Seth
August 7, 2016 9:11 pm

the climatological concerns should be documented extensively on perforated rolls so they are readily available at the appropriate time and place.
and a new slogan should be promoted:
“demonstrate sincerity for a change!”

Reply to  Seth
August 8, 2016 6:45 am

Made my laugh.
“Seth
August 7, 2016 at 7:19 pm
Reducing greenhouse emissions is like the prisoner’s dilemma: Global cooperation is needed, “

We can’t get Global cooperation on things that are needed, let alone on something of marginal concern.

MarkW
Reply to  Seth
August 8, 2016 12:30 pm

Since CO2 emissions benefit everyone, the prisoners dilema doesn’t apply.
The olympics wash aside national parochialness????? What planet are you posting from?

Seth
Reply to  MarkW
August 9, 2016 12:51 am

Since CO2 emissions benefit everyone, the prisoners dilema doesn’t apply.

It’s kind of funny when people are on a board primarily about climate change, but pretend for some reason to be ignorant of either the greenhouse effect or its consequences.

The olympics wash aside national parochialness?????

I included a link that many would find uplifting.

What planet are you posting from?

Yes … Out of curiousity is it the greenhouse effect that doesn’t happen on your planet, or is it that warming has no impacts?

Richard M
August 7, 2016 7:26 pm

They convinced me not to watch. Hope others follow suit. Could be expensive.

Crowbar of Daintree
August 7, 2016 7:30 pm

It wasn’t an “unforced error”. The Games are broke.
It was a paid-for advertorial, with payment probably flowing via the Clinton Foundation (minus their “handling fee”).

KRM
Reply to  Crowbar of Daintree
August 7, 2016 7:46 pm

I think you’re on the right track Daintree. My first thought was that it was totally out of place and didn’t fit with the rest of the program. Reminded me of a TV advertorial I saw while on holiday in the Pacific Islands last year, which was also clearly paid propaganda to try and dupe the audience.

Berniea
August 7, 2016 7:34 pm

I think Brazil is owned by the UN. In our broadcast of the opening ceremony the first dignitary in the stands they showed was Ban Ki Moon and that was a bad omen. I think the UN financed all the environmental propaganda in the opening ceremony and there was a lot of it. It permeated the whole event. Even the cauldron looked like a greenie’s idea of solar and wind power. It all made me feel sick to see the extent to which the UN has used the occasion to push their propaganda. The TV commentators added their nauseating support as well.

Sleepalot
Reply to  Berniea
August 8, 2016 2:36 am

The UN has no money of its own: that’s _your_ money, and _my_ money.

rogerthesurf
August 7, 2016 7:35 pm

“Global Warming Message Had No Place at Rio Olympics”,
I wonder how many athletes and supporters sailed, ran, walked, swam or rode their horse in order to be present at the games:)
Cheers
Roger
http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

ossqss
August 7, 2016 7:40 pm

Just look at the ratings.

Another Ian
August 7, 2016 7:43 pm
markl
August 7, 2016 7:53 pm

Shows you how effective the AGW marketing is. You can bet they were in on it and it wasn’t a decision promoted by Brazil.

August 7, 2016 8:00 pm

I guess they just don’t get that they are losing popular support. No wait, I’m wrong, of course they do, they know it very well, which is why they are getting ever more shrill and panicky and trying to force the issue. What they don’t get is that pushing it is exactly the wrong thing to do.

John piccirilli
August 7, 2016 8:13 pm

I don t see how they are losing climate change is talked about as if it were a fact. This will get worse. Vote trump

dp
August 7, 2016 8:27 pm

To give this post any credibility and interest could someone post a video of Gisele Bundchen strutting, please.

prjindigo
August 7, 2016 8:41 pm

Because the Olympics is FAR too important for sexy people to be running around on a field barely clothed and often bent over facing away from a crowd.
We just WON’T STAND for that kind of thing.

MarkW
Reply to  prjindigo
August 8, 2016 12:33 pm

I can stand, I just have to bend over a bit.

August 7, 2016 9:05 pm

I noticed that one of the Egyptian female beach volleyball participants was wearing a “burka”, or what ever. Those two lost their match….

gnomish
Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
August 7, 2016 9:15 pm

[snip – off color comment -mod]

gnomish
Reply to  gnomish
August 8, 2016 12:47 am

no, no, no. it was clever and funny and harmed nobody.
you are scared.
and that makes you a worthless coward – not to mention humorless.
pussy.
you don’t like the color of my comments, bite me.

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
August 7, 2016 10:41 pm

Nonsense they wear Hijabs. Ignorance is no excuse. Hijab wont restrict your view in volleyball. Stop being a clown

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
August 7, 2016 10:42 pm

They lost because they were not as good as the other team.

Stu
August 7, 2016 9:52 pm

When the global warming bs came on, I shut it off. So did my parents, and my kids. I am disconnecting my satellite over this. I am so sick and tired of the PC bulls**t. Bye bye TV. Everybody I know is disconnecting from it. I am the last.

Reply to  Stu
August 7, 2016 10:43 pm

Good stuff. I gave up television a long time ago and have not looked back. I can’t stand it now, nor radio. You’ll notice that a lot of tension disappears when you’re not soaking up a daily dose of human misery.

Gamecock
Reply to  Stu
August 8, 2016 3:39 pm

Disconnect your land line, too. Saves me $35 a month, and 5 calls a day from people I don’t know and I don’t like. Can’t believe I didn’t do it years ago.

Susan P
August 7, 2016 10:03 pm

I hope I wasn’t the only one who burst out laughing when the narrator stated that “Greenland is melting”. Really? A land mass is melting? And then they showed “scary” animations of Florida, Northern Europe, and other coastal areas being completely covered in water over some indeterminate time frame. Apparently the entire state of Florida will soon be covered by rapidly rising ocean water from a “melting Greenland”. Of course the narrator failed to mention the expanding Antarctic ice sheets.

Simon
Reply to  Susan P
August 8, 2016 12:09 am

“Of course the narrator failed to mention the expanding Antarctic ice sheets.” Umm…. no it’s not.

Marcus
Reply to  Simon
August 8, 2016 4:50 am

…Ummmm, yes it is….

Patrick B
Reply to  Simon
August 8, 2016 9:27 am
Mark - Helsinki
August 7, 2016 10:35 pm

Two things worth pointing out.
1 Brazil just had a political coup before the Olympics
2 People at the Olympics holding “Temer” out signs were forced to remove them by Brazilian security forces.
Spirit of Athens eh.

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
August 7, 2016 10:36 pm

The current “interim” PM made millions from bribes from construction for the Olympics

Mark - Helsinki
August 7, 2016 10:46 pm

El Nino always gives Brazil a nice roasting, the 1877 El Nino pumped Brazil’s worst drought ever

ozspeaksup
August 8, 2016 2:22 am

the link to the sad n sorry climate clip is blank on the media page..
maybe on the no seeum list for us downunder?
anyone else from Aus able to view it at all?

August 8, 2016 6:59 am

I turned on the TV to watch the opening ceremony long after it started.
The first thing I saw was a computer graphic showing parts of the world flooding from sea level rise.
I turned off the TV less than one minute later.
That one minute may be my entire elapsed time viewing the olympics this year.

Jeff
August 8, 2016 7:02 am

I found it amusing that after all the global warming pearl-clutching they blew off 28 billion fireworks.

Steve in SC
August 8, 2016 7:41 am

In any beach volleyball game I will be pulling for the girls in the bikinis.

tadchem
Reply to  Steve in SC
August 8, 2016 10:16 am

“pulling”???

Reply to  Steve in SC
August 8, 2016 7:46 pm

That seems to be my favorite Olympic sport so far…

MarkW
August 8, 2016 9:50 am

Being in the tropics, global warming, if it were to occur at all, would show up the least.

Resourceguy
August 8, 2016 1:26 pm

I guess the NHS did not have the influence to march in the opening ceremony this time. That left a political messaging slot open.

BLACK PEARL
August 8, 2016 4:03 pm

Wonder how much they got donated to include the Climate Change arrangement ?

Gerald Machnee
August 8, 2016 5:33 pm

Sure glad I quit watching before the propaganda came on.
RE: Money. Does money have anything to do with the fact that Ben Johnson was the only one caught in Korea? Ben noted that all the top athletes were on something.

Jack
August 8, 2016 5:54 pm

If you watch the video closely I believe the dates of the polar ice caps melting ends in 2005 — for obvious reasons

Pop Piasa
August 8, 2016 8:00 pm

Here is the latest climate propaganda from the Olympics…
H/T commenter 007 on the tips page.
http://www.bloomberg.com//news/articles/2016-08-08/olympic-records-won-t-come-easy-in-rio-because-of-climate-change

Pop Piasa
August 8, 2016 8:16 pm

My bad if anybody already mentioned this, but Rio is in the SH which is cooling. Reminding the world that the NH has warmed using Greenland summer ice loss and applying it to the SH is using apple crops to warn of an orange shortage.

August 9, 2016 4:42 pm

Amen. You can put peanut butter in my chocolate. I don’t even mind ham in my beef chow mein. But keep your politics out of my sports.

%d bloggers like this: