The craziest reactions to Trump pulling out of the #ParisAgreement

Heads are exploding today, get popcorn. Here are some of the best emotionaly based reactions from the climate alarmist squad.

Here’s billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer saying it’s a “traitorous act of war”. Yeah, right.

“Scientific” American thinks the future is dead trees, everywhere:

Neil Degrasse-Tyson thinks Trump is just too stupid.

So does Carbon Brief Editor Leo Hickman, though he’s got a bit of an ego problem to think Trump should read his stuff:

He also helpfully provided Weepy Bill McKibben’s nutty op-ed:

Bill McKibben provided a flag and a funeral:

The other Leo must have been crying on his mega-yacht:

The execrably ugly Michael Moore:

You think that’s bad? Mr. Sulu goes full-retard:

Buh bye! Going to pay back all that money you got from the government anytime soon?

Apparently, this is a Golden opportunity to play the race-card, according to the ACLU:

The mayor of Pittsburgh was apparently not happy that Trump said: “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.”

Robert Preston channels Trump Via cartoonist “Matt”:

Al Gore, still boring:

Hollywood actress Patricia Arquette suggested a class-action lawsuit against Trump’s decision to stop participating in what is an entirely voluntary and non-binding agreement.

Useless actor Mark Ruffalo: waaaahhh! At least Kathy Griffin shut-up.

Obama, Zzzzz:

One of Pope Francis’s right-hand men “Crux” said it would be “a slap in the face” to the Vatican if Trump did not continue with the agreement. Maybe the Pope could turn the other cheek?

Al-Ed reacts:

This eco-green grassroots organizer said Trump’s announcement will prevent everyone from living on planet earth. We are dead already. Who knew?

Joltin Joe Room tries the scare tactic of showing Florida flooded:

Maybe the most ridiculous one is this map from the Sierra Club. They probably need to work on their color scheme.

The Huffington Post is predictably huffy and puffy:

This one is just psychotic, IMHO:

https://twitter.com/mims/status/870367084609515521

Josh sums it up pretty well after I chided Leo Hickman for thinking Trump should read his work::

UPDATE:

A new addition, Andrew Freedman from Mashable who once penned a ridiculous piece on sea-level, complete with a flooded runway, forgetting that airplanes can move faster than water:

https://twitter.com/afreedma/status/870425624967606272

I’m not the least bit ashamed of my reply:

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

480 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
commieBob
June 1, 2017 5:06 pm

If I and my advisors had never learned what Science is or how & why it works …

You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means link
Science is about making and testing hypotheses. It is a speculative activity. When it progresses to near certainty, it becomes engineering or medicine.

There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. … claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias …link

Neil Degrasse-Tyson you are not nearly as smart as you think you are. Anyway, to mangle a metaphor, cheerleaders are not football players. You and Mr. Nye are not scientists and your qualifications are less than those of a good number of the denizens of WUWT.

Reply to  commieBob
June 1, 2017 7:32 pm

Indeed

Eugene WR Gallun
Reply to  commieBob
June 1, 2017 7:36 pm

commieBob — well said — Eugene WR Gallun

Ack
June 1, 2017 5:10 pm

All i want to know is, how sending trillions of $$$ overseas is going to stop global warming?

June 1, 2017 5:13 pm

Just what is it these demented people struggle so hard with in the concept of two tenths of a degree in a century? Even if the doom-mongers are right. How stupid can anyone literally be? How can there be so many people simply dying to commit economic suicide in order to achieve literally nothing at all? Every generation comes to a point in their middle years when they say ‘the World has gone mad’. But now the World has gone mad.

Butch
June 1, 2017 5:15 pm

WARNING…WARNING…
HEALTH ALERT….Do not wander into liberal websites at this moment…..You would be at risk of laughing to death at the stupidity of comments there at this time… You will be notified in the future when it is safe !

Eugene WR Gallun
Reply to  Butch
June 1, 2017 7:39 pm

Butch — laughing my assets off — Eugene WR Gallun

Chimp
June 1, 2017 5:15 pm
The Third EYE
June 1, 2017 5:15 pm

There is this thing called the SUN it will determine how hot and cool Gaia gets.

J. C.
Reply to  The Third EYE
June 1, 2017 6:09 pm

I know, right. I’ve been using that line for years and adding the question ” Do you think a couple extra molecules of co2 has more influence on climate?” The usual response was to defer to the “cosenses of 97% of scientists say”. People have no ability to use critical thinking and don’t like being challenged.

KevinK
June 1, 2017 5:18 pm

Oh man, I need some help, I ran out of popcorn, dang, I didn’t model my popcorn consumption well enough.
Not sure how that happened, I did 2137 model runs and made an ensemble of the results, they said my popcorn would last until 2100 if I simply turned off the AC all summer long….
Anybody want to help a skeptic out, I would gladly repay someone next Tuesday for an overnight shipment of popcorn today….. (all credit due to Popeye)
Cheers, KevinK, suddenly hard of hearing due to the sounds of heads “xploding”. (no disrespect towards folks that have struggled with real hearing impairments intended)

Merovign
June 1, 2017 5:19 pm

You know, “histrionic” is a very lucky word. I mean, it was going out of style and people weren’t using it any more, it was headed for the obscure end of the dictionary, and then BAM! Example after example after example.
Pulled back from the brink, that one was.

Warren Blair
June 1, 2017 5:20 pm

Fundamentalist leftist AGW has the upper hand in education, bureaucracy and increasingly in commerce.
New BHP boss (world’s largest miner) is a globalist AWG con artist.
USA winning battles is good but other Western nations need to be more organized in their fight against AGW fraud.

Ken
Reply to  Warren Blair
June 2, 2017 7:37 pm

The “other Western nations” (Germany, UK, and Australia) are leading the way into renewable energy Armageddon. They are all starting to experience the distress caused by the ridiculous increases in energy prices. They will break it off soon, I am thinking. California and South Australia are both “states” that are going to drink ALL of the renewable energy Kool Aid, or so it appears at the present time. They will serve as a warning to any other country or state that thinks that is the way to go.
Don’t get me wrong, wind and solar both have their place. But that place can best be found when governments stop subsidizing them.

Janice Moore
June 1, 2017 5:22 pm

They are SCREAMING so loudly because….
they lost their audience a looooong time ago.
Listen — to — us!! LISTEN — TO — US!!!!!
http://www.thepurposeisprofit.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Bored-Audience.jpg
**********************
Re: that all-red map of the U.S. — that is probably a Sierra Club membership-only poll. Whatever bogus statistical construct they are graphing there, it’s a meaningless piece of information. There aren’t that many people in the entire United States who have enough of an idea WHAT the deal really is with Paris to care either way.
Average American cares about “CLIMATE CHANGE!!!!” this much:
http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/parker-bored.gif
Seriously.

Reply to  Janice Moore
June 1, 2017 7:40 pm

Janice, you’re a woman . . . what’s she looking at like that? We know it’s not a guy! 🙂

Chimp
Reply to  Pat Frank
June 1, 2017 7:47 pm

That’s the inimitable, then young, future “Indie Queen” Parker Posey in “Dazed and Confused” (1993).

Janice Moore
Reply to  Pat Frank
June 1, 2017 9:05 pm

You are correct, Pat! 🙂 She isn’t looking at anything. She is staring blankly out the window of the fast food restaurant there while on her break (she would NEVER go out in public dressed like THAT with her hair like THAT) thinking about how long it will take her to save up enough money to move out of her parents’ house. From the look on her face and given the job she has, that will take about 40 years. And that doesn’t make her jump for joy.
She COULD be looking at a guy. But, it would be her boyfriend that she has come to realize is so dumb and annoying that if she has to listen to him talk about his new shovel and play that same country music album one more time she is going to go CRAZY. So, she would be thinking about how to tell him it’s over. Oh, she is sure of THAT, but, timing is important. She really, really, wants to go to the senior prom. And there isn’t time to get another date. She could just not go, but, she already bought her new dress. She could take it back, but, she really likes it and her mom won’t let her keep it if she’s not going to the prom in it. And….
Aren’t you glad you asked me that? lololol
Take care, down there.
#(:))

Janice Moore
Reply to  Pat Frank
June 1, 2017 9:07 pm

Chimp: You don’t need to tell me that I got the plot of the movie wrong. I never saw that movie and I was just having fun making something up.

Reply to  Pat Frank
June 1, 2017 10:31 pm

Janice, you’re brilliant! 🙂 . . . still laughing, thanks! 😀

Janice Moore
Reply to  Pat Frank
June 2, 2017 6:45 am

Pat: You are TOO kind. Thank you. Very glad I could make you laugh.

Reply to  Janice Moore
June 2, 2017 2:25 am

One should always chew with their mouth shut. It is not only good manners it makes one look more intelligent.

Janice Moore
Reply to  wayne Job
June 2, 2017 10:27 am

You are correct, Mr. Job.
Here is what that young woman would say to that: As if.
Heh. 🙂

george e. smith
Reply to  Janice Moore
June 5, 2017 10:37 pm

She just figured out that all of the derivatives of Y = exp(-1/x^2) are zero at x = 0 so now she’s trying to figure out how the hell, it every gets to anywhere else !!

R. Shearer
June 1, 2017 5:25 pm

Climate Ca Ching is real, it’s happening right now, but thanks to Trump it’ll be less burdensome on U.S. taxpayers.

Dems B. Dcvrs
Reply to  R. Shearer
June 1, 2017 6:40 pm

If only A.G. Sessions would apply RICO to AGW Climatologists. As a Taxpayer who’s money was wasted on known Fraudulent Science started by one Man’s Hockey Stick Chart; I want to see AGW Climatologists lose their positions, their pensions, and spend some time staring at vertical bars.

ChrisDinBristol
Reply to  R. Shearer
June 2, 2017 2:31 am

. . . Climate Ca-Ching . . brilliant R.Shearer. . . Permission to steal and redistribute!

Dave O.
June 1, 2017 5:28 pm

Everyone is still free to come up with an alternative to fossil fuels if they so choose. Nobody is preventing that from happening.

R. Shearer
Reply to  Dave O.
June 1, 2017 5:37 pm

But Steyer, Musk, Gore, etc. can’t risk “their” billions.

RockyRoad
Reply to  R. Shearer
June 1, 2017 10:45 pm

Of course not–they’re greedy socialists sponging off taxpayer funds. If they were alpha males, they’d put their money where their mouths are.

Gary Pearse
June 1, 2017 5:32 pm

Natgeo: the planet will be covered by dead trees! They didn’t get the memo that over the last decade forest cover has expanded 14%! This new forest (and the rejuvenated old) are more drought resistant, and the massive sequestration of ‘carbon’ is an endothermic (cooling) activity. Moreover creation of biomass through C-sequestration is exponential overlayed on a n~approximately linear addition to atmosspheric. Apparently zoo plankton increase likely dwarfs land effects. Henry’s Law is shrinking back to a supporting role in the carbon cycle.
It would be nice if our more analytical friends like Willis, or Rud would take on such an analysis of the attenuation of CO2 growth in the atmosphere and even the” Le Chatelier” negative feed back of the endothermic rapid growth of plants and sea organisms. With the ‘Pause’ like hysteria of the drowning climate rats vis a vis greening, it must be bigger than even we thought!

Anthony Byrd
June 1, 2017 5:33 pm

Truly amazing, to me, is the rank vitriol displayed by these Algorians. These folks are dangerous. They throw one or two blanket statements at you, then when you don’t bite, out come the fangs, the spewed insults, and the mindless hate. So scary that there are so many of them.

JohnWho
Reply to  Anthony Byrd
June 1, 2017 6:23 pm

And, and, for the most part, these people you are talking about are the ones who constantly preach the importance of tolerance.
What’s with that?

June 1, 2017 5:34 pm

Complaining about Trump is just another form of Virtue Signalling.
Obama (and other Western Leaders) signing on to the Paris Accord was also Virtue Signalling.

Chimp
Reply to  stuartlynne
June 1, 2017 5:47 pm

Their signalling would cost working Americans trillions!

Moa
Reply to  Chimp
June 2, 2017 1:55 am

That shows you how much the Left ‘cares’ about you (not a whit – it’s all about themselves, vain and narcissistic douchebags).

Butch
June 1, 2017 5:36 pm

Pruitt on withdrawing from the Paris climate deal
http://video.foxnews.com/v/5456706919001/?#sp=show-clips

Butch
Reply to  Butch
June 1, 2017 5:41 pm

Far Left Liberals are now committing political suicide….After supporting Hillary, I never thought they could get, any lower …Silly me….MAGA !!

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Butch
June 1, 2017 6:31 pm

I’m heartened that Steyer, Rockefeller brothers, Soros and other Champagne Socialists and neomarxbrothers dropped billions on Hillary winning (sponsorship and investment in ‘sure things’ ), and then took another hit on green investments! These guys’ business strategies based on perpetual anti-American, total¡тая¡аи, elitist dystopian models.
The joy, which had been sucked out of life by these ugly corrupt people, rushes in and makes one giddy. Oh yeah! What I like is that the Pres is undertaking the first real empirical study of the real effect of CO2 on temperature. The deceitful anti – science CAGW oppressors have been fighting a rear guard, data manipulation scheme they hoped would hold back the truth until the Parisite Accord started sucking out the cash and they could claim when the temp only went up 0.6C that it was their doing. Now it will be below this level and Trump will be the guy that lthe the theory was wrong. Their will be no Nobel Prize for Trump, but failure to get this degraded prize is becoming a recognition of its own.

dennisambler
Reply to  Butch
June 2, 2017 2:26 am

If CO2 were a problem, we could worry about it.

Ken
Reply to  Butch
June 2, 2017 7:30 pm

Being from Oklahoma, I am extremely pleased with how Scott Pruitt has handled his new position as EPA head. He was ready for every question he got in his Senate hearings and every question in this interview. I really had no idea that he could do this job. But then when I think of who his predecessor was, she really didn’t set the bar very high.

SteveC
June 1, 2017 5:52 pm

Wow what a wonderful day!

RS
June 1, 2017 5:53 pm

Where’s my hockey stick????
At this rate, Trump Tower may need to add some beach cabanas in 1,700 years.
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=8518750

LewSkannen
June 1, 2017 5:56 pm

I was originally a sceptic and I supported Trump and hoped he would end the Paris Agreement.
Then I saw a GIF of a sulky girl putting a box over her head!

June 1, 2017 5:57 pm

Can anyone lend me an 18-wheeler? I need to haul in lots more popcorn.
Heads exploding everywhere because they can’t throw away trillions of dollars which, if AGW theory was correct (which it isn’t) and if all the Paris signatories kept their promises (which they won’t) would have slowed the rate of warming by the end of the century by an amount of… well, too small to measure with any great confidence.
A triumph of common sense over ideological dogma!

TA
Reply to  Mike Smith
June 1, 2017 7:03 pm

“would have slowed the rate of warming by the end of the century by an amount of… well, too small to measure with any great confidence.”
And on top of that, it is all speculative, as there is currently no evidence that human-caused CO2 is increasing the temperature or changing the climate.

troe
June 1, 2017 6:06 pm

Our response FU

pd2413
June 1, 2017 6:10 pm

glad everyone thinks it’s so much better to put billionaires’ wallets and 500 coal jobs ahead of tens of thousands of clean energy jobs, international leadership, public health, moral responsibility, and the future of the planet.

Dems B. Dcvrs
Reply to  pd2413
June 1, 2017 6:28 pm

You might have a point, IF:
1) future of the planet were at stake
2) there was a moral issue involved
3) there were a risk to public health
4) AGW was not about U.N. power & control over countries & people
5) clean energy jobs were not an oxymoron
6) Go’n Green wasn’t already stuffing wallets of rich like Gore.

pd2413
Reply to  Dems B. Dcvrs
June 1, 2017 6:35 pm

I’m actually really curious how “clean energy jobs” is an oxymoron? Congratulations, I don’t think I’ve ever heard an argument that stupid before. I’m also pretty sure Gore being rich doesn’t offset all the fossil fuel companies raking in billions, while receiving government subsidies and tax breaks and wrecking the planet with oil spills, methane leaks, and polluted water.

Dems B. Dcvrs
Reply to  Dems B. Dcvrs
June 1, 2017 6:56 pm

“I’m actually really curious how “clean energy jobs” is an oxymoron? ”
Because so-called Clean Energy Jobs have impact on Environment. Conveniently, AGWers ignored negative effects of resources used to manufacture Solar and Wind power, install said systems, and Life-cycle (retirement of systems). AGWers, also ignored issue of storing generated energy for when wind is insufficient or sun isn’t shinning. Battery storage has shown to be harmful both in making and disposal of.
As for fossil fuel companies raking in billions with tax breaks, care to guess who makes most profit from gallon of gas? It is Federal Government.

Owen in GA
Reply to  Dems B. Dcvrs
June 1, 2017 7:02 pm

PD,
Wow. I have never heard such a misinformed/malinformed/intentionally propagandized/ idiotic statement.
Let’s take apart this bit of assininity one statement at a time:
Oil Spills/methane leaks: You do realize the ocean absorbs millions of barrels a year (or more) of these substances from natural seeps in the ocean floor? Earth has these little things called bacteria that eat the heck out of hydrocarbons. They live in water, and dirt and probably even less so in the air. Just so you know that is a natural process that happens all the time.
While no one is advocating intentionally spilling oil in the drinking supply water, you do know that oil and water really don’t mix and will readily separate out? Basic chemistry really about the general shape of the bonds. It isn’t the oil and gas industry you need to worry about on water pollution – bacteria deal with the leakages and greed causes the industry to stop the flow and seal the leaks very quickly. You want to worry about water pollution – go talk to the EPA. First they mandated additives that turned out not to be very healthful when mixed in water, then they blamed the companies they so mandated. Also they were the ones that released a mine full of heavy metals into the environment that was well contained in the mine.
About fossil fuel companies “raking in billions”: Government makes more money on a gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel than the oil companies – when one does volumes in the hundreds of billions of units, one makes a large amount of money. That is one of those truths of economics that people of a socialist, world -dominion bent don’t seem to understand.
About “subsidies” and “tax breaks” for fossil fuels companies: You don’t know you hind end from a howitzer! There are literally NO subsidies for fossil fuel companies (at least not in the US) unless you are a socialist, world-dominion minded person who thinks all money belongs to the government and they, through their great benevolence, allow us to keep some of the money we so stridently fought for. The learned paper that stated the 5 Trillion dollars in subsidies started from the latter premise – thus concluding that virtually ALL fossil fuel profits were “subsidies”. As for “tax breaks” fossil fuel companies use the same equipment capitalization rules all other manufacturers use to write off the costs of doing business. That isn’t a tax break. Writing the tax code so GE could make almost as much money as Exxon did yet GE received straight up rebates and NO tax liability for almost a decade is a tax break (by the way GE did nothing wrong – they got the best tax code their cronies could provide).
So far nearly all “clean energy” companies have crashed and burned fantastically, but not before taking away and distributing to their already quite wealthy cronies, billions of dollars of tax payer funds. So yes, “Clean Energy Jobs” is an oxymoron UNLESS you are using it in the same manner you would use “snow job”!

Chimp
Reply to  pd2413
June 1, 2017 6:35 pm

The coal industry employed 76,572 people in 2014, the latest year for which data is available.
“Clean energy”, not so much, and all subsidized by the taxpayers and rate payers.
The planet is doing much better thanks to having one extra molecule of plant food per 10,000 dry air molecules in its atmosphere, ie four rather than just three a century ago.

Owen in GA
Reply to  pd2413
June 1, 2017 6:35 pm

IF clean energy becomes competitive with UNICORN FARTS, it will fund itself. Right now it costs about the same as unicorn flatulence and yet produces even less energy.
Clean Energy jobs will come when “clean energy” can actually produce reliable, grid-scale energy at a price that doesn’t pauper Midas. If special subsidies are needed, it isn’t competitive.
Your class warfare argument is a tell that you are really in this for the control and redistribution rather than any understanding of either climate or economics.

Reg Nelson
Reply to  pd2413
June 1, 2017 6:43 pm

CO2 emissions have nothing to with public health. Fuel poverty on the other hand is a real and serious problem in very many countries — including the UK.

Griff
Reply to  Reg Nelson
June 2, 2017 1:26 am

The main cause of fuel poverty in the UK is high (natural) gas prices and poor pensions.

AndyG55
Reply to  Reg Nelson
June 2, 2017 4:03 am

griff, fabricating fantasy , yet again.
grimm bros would laugh at your pitiful fairy tales.

Reply to  Reg Nelson
June 2, 2017 9:37 am

The main cause of fuel poverty in the UK is government interference in a free market and high taxation, plus loading up the requirements for ordinary householders to pay for very expensive, intermittent “renewable energy” such as wind and solar and connecting it to the grid (the hidden “infrastructure upgrade” cost) plus spinning reserve.
Project start in 2017 levelised electricity generation costs per MWh in the UK (data from Mott MacDonald):
Gas CCGT: £65 / MWh
ASC Coal: £60 / MWh
Nuclear PWR: £65 – £100 / MWh
Onshore Wind: £85 / MWh nominal PLUS £60 / MWh for addl system costs and planning reserve = £145 / MWh
Offshore Wind: £113 / MWh nominal PLUS £67 / MWh for addl system costs and planning reserve = £180 / MWh
So coal and gas power generation are almost the same cost at about £65 / MWh. That makes coal and gas less than the half (45%) the cost of onshore wind and nearly one third (36%) of the cost of offshore wind.
As for solar…in the UK…in winter…don’t make me laugh!

Reply to  pd2413
June 1, 2017 9:44 pm

pd2413,
First, let me congratulate you on your quick Straw Man Attack, but it wasn’t very effective. See it’s not a “billionaires’ wallets and 500 coal jobs” vs. your list of talking points. What it is, is NOT sending $100B per year of US taxpayer money to wasteful UN organizations and rent-seeking money-grubbing plutocrats.
Nothing about not giving huge sums of money away prevents anyone from doing the things you listed as being important. Lefty billionaires can still throw money at renewables and create those tens of thousands of clean energy jobs — that’s a thing called “capitalism,” wherein a person invests his own money in a financial venture, and reaps the rewards when things go well.
“International leadership”? I’d say the US just showed great leadership, by showing the way out of a wasteful wealth-redistribution scheme that wouldn’t have actually done anything toward “stopping climate change.”. It’s certainly not leading by following the pack; one leads by stepping out where no one else is going.
“Public health, moral responsibility, and the future of the planet” totally ignore the facts on the ground. Cold kills more than warm does, and more CO2 in the air just makes plants grow better. As the holder of a degree in Geology, I can tell you with certainty that there is no “runaway greenhouse” scenario in Earth’s climate. We’ve been at higher CO2 concentrations by far on Earth without such a thing occurring, and if it didn’t happen back in the Cretaceous, it won’t happen now.
It’s morally Irresponsible to waste so much money on something that could only have a statistically insignificant effect on global temperature. It’s morally Irresponsible to condemn millions of people in developing nations to death because of the lack of cheap, dependable electricity. That’s where the crime lies.

RockyRoad
Reply to  James Schrumpf
June 1, 2017 10:43 pm

That “$100Billion” per year is just for starters, too–it soon climbs to $450 Billion per year, or about 2.5% of the GDP.
And to put that in perspective, the US economy under Obama never grew at 2.5%; it was far less.
The critical point is that unless the US economy grows at 3% or better, it can’t attract investment capital so it eventually stalls.
Sending an amount equivalent to our economic growth to tin-horn dictators would be national suicide.

george e. smith
Reply to  pd2413
June 5, 2017 10:40 pm

If clean energy were efficient, it would actually get rid of jobs; not make more work for everyone.
Making more jobs is a sure sign of lower efficiency.
G

Broadie
June 1, 2017 6:19 pm

Thanks Anthony, Steve Mc, Ross, Roger, Judith, Willis, Tim and many more. This act, in effect by, the President of the Free World in withdrawing from an agreement for the United States to drink Kool Aid is in my opinion the result of the sacrifice you have all made in confronting the Totalitarians hiding behind the Global Warming Scare.
Thank-you, and I hope the dominos initially knocked over by ‘Surface Stations’ and the ‘Starbucks Hypothesis’ continue to fall.

TheLastDemocrat
Reply to  Broadie
June 1, 2017 8:22 pm

Yes!

FAKE BBC
June 1, 2017 6:21 pm

The BBC has been using the faked blackened smoke stack image that wattsupwiththat exposed in this article in 2011. It has been used all day on three different links on the home page. Not all at the same time though. See third,fifth and sixth image at this link.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/25/photoshopping-in-the-worseness/

michael hart
June 1, 2017 6:28 pm

If alarmists hadn’t already used up their supply of superlatives then they might have some left to make people think they actually had something new to say….but we’ve heard it all before.
Will they learn anything from the failure of previous exaggerations? History suggests not.

Verified by MonsterInsights