The New York Times has devoted an entire edition of its magazine, some 30,000 words, to a terrifying piece about climate change. With 2C warming – an unlikely best-case scenario at this point, scientists were quoted as saying – the planet faces “long-term disaster”.
With 3C warming, we are looking at “the loss of most coastal cities”. The possibility that the Earth might warm by 5C, wrote the author, Nathaniel Rich, had prompted some of the world’s leading scientists to warn of the end of human civilisation.
…
I was having lunch with friends in Brooklyn on Sunday, in a low-lying area that will be under water when all of this comes to pass and, political analysis aside, all we could focus on was: what on earth are we going to do? More specifically, how to ensure the survival of our children, and should it involve buying a compound in some remote part of Canada?
The difficulty is knowing how to recognise the klaxon call when it comes. Is this, the summer of forest fires and record heatwaves, the climate disaster equivalent to Kristallnacht? Or can we safely not think about it for another 10 years?
My advice? Pack up and leave civilization now lady, we’ll see how long you last without lattes and the NYT Sunday edition to read while having lunch with friends.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
STRUTH!!!
There are some lame brained idiots out there all right.
Actually if you look carefully at it, its a tribute to the little echo chamber she lives in. Amongst her peers there will not be a single ‘climate denier’, and amongst her peers there will not be a single ‘hard’ scientist or engineer. Climate change, along with making the world a better place without lifting a finger, (preferably using someone else’s money) will be high on the list of topics to all agree about at that white whine and “cheers” party in Islington…and having stroked each others egos with mutual appreciation of how liberal and concerned they all are, they can all bask in a rosy glow of mutual smugness and Chardonnay.
Life doesn’t get much better than that, for the grandchildren of housemaids…
[Snip. Totally and completely off topic and not part of the conversation here at WUWT. -mod]
Pretty much in accord with my theory Leo, one which goes back the best part of 5 decades observing leftard vulnerable people of my acquaintance which is that this has nothing much to do even with politics let alone science but is all about bum sniffing and ear scratching one’s way into a social cohort where comfort, conversation ( the all in agreement type) and cooperation all the ay to cohabitation are the end result, the target, the raison.
Its about being part of a tribe.
Basically it appeals to monkeys which is a bit sad but nice for the monkeys I suppose.
Monkeys eat each other in the end, much like Leftists as well.
Figuratively speaking ofcourse………
Or was it chimps,
she wrote to her time
the fact she did get published and obviously did earn…wasnt “polite” to mention.
and being honest she WAS a rarity in that time. women inherited money if they didnt have sons to take it or family ie fathers to also take control
remember ALL the legal setups were male dominated
Quote
I suspect this informs the debate
Unquote
Drives me mad, what does it mean, what language is it?
Spot on Leo! “…and having stroked each others egos with mutual appreciation of how liberal and concerned they all are, they can all bask in a rosy glow of mutual smugness and Chardonnay.”
[Snip. Totally and completely off topic and not part of the conversation here at WUWT. -mod]
I guess that’s why it got 31 upticks
no mostly left.
“Pack up and leave civilization now lady, we’ll see how long you last without lattes and the NYT Sunday edition to read while having lunch with friends.”
I wish alarmists would however, “they” want everyone else to take the action.
Don’t worry – increasingly, “everyone else” ain’t that stupid. 😉
Yes, but I don’t want them moving anywhere near me.
If they all moved into a walled enclave, like that walled-in acreage in “The Village”, I would be happy to guide them there. That should be their “safe” space that no one ever leaves or disturbs.
…and then lock the gate from the outside.
“More specifically, how to ensure the survival of our children, and should it involve buying a compound in some remote part of Canada?”
Maybe she could buy properties that were abandoned in rural remote Ontario because industrial wind turbines were sited too close and people had to leave to protect their health from noise, LFN and infrasound.
Edmonton Alberta experiencing record high temperatures this week, so no area is free from the exacerbating effects of climate change. There are extreme temperatures being hit all over the planet but still the climate sceptics remain in denial. Talk about ostriches sticking their heads in the sand…
Ivan it is called weather as your side continually tell us when it is cold.
This past winter Ivanski was insulting anyone who pointed to the large number of cold records that were being broken. Pointing out that this was weather, not climate.
Ivan
Ho hum, how dull.
Ivan – the only reason I might think of sticking my head in the sand is to avoid reading, watching and hearing total cr@p (aka BS) as spouted by the likes of yourself and Ms Brockes.
Edmonton maximum temperatures recorded so far this August:
1. 29.6C
2. 23.9C
3. 21C
4. 21C
5. 25.8C
6. 29.4C
7. 25.6C
8. 28.3C
9. 34C
10. 32C
The warmest day in July was 29 30.8C.
The highest temperature recorded within the City of Edmonton was 37.2 °C (99.0 °F), on June 29, 1937 (Wiki).
[Format edited for clarity. -mod]
Today we tied a record high for August that was set in 1967 at 40.0C (67 was a great year for record highs). As I was going through the records I was very surprised to see how many daily minimum records were set in December, January and February in the last two years. Being Canadian, that worried me a lot more than tying an old maximum.
Facts don’t mean anything to these people. They do not wish to hear things that don’t agree with them. I work with a lot of highly educated people who do not have a clue in hell about anything that is not related to their work..
“I work with a lot of highly credentialed people who do not have a clue in hell about anything that is not related to their work”
FTFY, David. No charge. 🙂
“I work with a lot of highly educated people who do not have a clue in hell about anything that is not related to their work.”
As do I; fortunately it also creates my employment.
“Facts don’t mean anything to these people. “
Facts mean nothing by themselves. Meaning is an emotional response. The meaning you ascribe to a particular temperature is likely to vary from the meaning I ascribe to a particular temperature.
“Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts don’t do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them”
heh- i’m not in your panic, mmk?
In 1937 when the record high of 37C was recorded the population of Edmonton was around 100,000.
In 2018 the population is 1.8 million.
can anyone supply a photo of the location and instrument used today and in 1937?
tonyb
Uhhh… no.
Are you DARING to propose that 1.7 million (added) people establish an urban heat island? Nonsense … it takes at least 30 million people to alter local temps by even 0.5 degree F. … I know that … because the Global Warmists told me so. 1.7 million people hardly add any new paving, homes, buildings, and industry. How could so “few” people alter local temperatures? How silly.
Oh … and the top climate scientists, really top people, top … people … have already “adjusted” climate data for UHI.
/sarc.
I’m glad you mark that as sarcasm. When I was going to meteorology school they pointed out that 300 people in a village is enough to measurably change the temperature between in the village and away from the village.
there should be something like population-weighted high temperature records. with the greater population the temperature should be discounted a certain percentage per population
Ivan
When you turn on the air conditioner on a hot day do you stay inside or do you stand in front of the compressor outside?
What about last winter when Edmonton broke the record for the number of consecutive days at or below zero? link
In the city where I live, the current weather station has been in place for only around thirty years. That means we set record high or low temperatures almost every year. Record temperatures aren’t nearly as significant as you seem to think they are.
Who is saying the climate isn’t changing? Every sceptic I have ever heard or read says climate changes and always has done. You seem to implicitly be saying climate does not change, unless man changes it. That’s a pretty wacky view, given that all the evidence shows climate changes all the time.
So now how about actually listening? Sceptics doubt how much influence man-made CO2 has on the climate. Got that?
No luke warmers doubt how much influence man-made CO2 has on the climate.
Deniers know it has zero impact, because deniers know the RGE is a thermo-dynamic nonsense.
The highest temperature recorded within the City of Edmonton was 37.2 °C (99.0 °F), on June 29, 1937.
So not up to 1930s standards yet
Ivan – tell me; do you actually live in Edmonton? I’m assuming not, because no Edmontonian would complain about it being warm.
Let me get this straight.
If it’s bad, it’s caused by CO2.
Is that how you have been paid to think?
You’re slipping, Ivan. You forgot the obligatory link to your stupid website.
Most on this board think that record warm temps outpacing cold records by 2:1 or greater are natural.
When Winter hits the northern hemisphere they will be sure to tell you how cold it is, even though all seasons are warmer and becoming more so.
Most on this board recognize that we are still coming out of the little ice age and have yet to reach the temperatures the planet enjoyed as recently as the medieval warm period.
The 0.2 to 0.3C degrees of warming that CO2 might, at the absolute most, be responsible is a very pleasant addition to the much larger warming that was already occurring.
No, all seasons are not becoming warmer. Winters are, supposedly. That’s it for N America. There are seasonal stats available by calendar quarter. Waterloo Ontario has not gotten warmer on average for 100 years. I am a little worried about that because we should be seeing at least something from all our efforts to boost temperatures a tad. My house is warmer in winter because I insulated it better. It was actually bloody cold this winter, again. The record -34.5 C was set only three years ago. I hope my furnace can burn natural gas condensate.
WFGW
(Waterloovians in Favour of Global Warming)
Ontario has been experiencing warming. Waterloo? Your house? If you want to understand climate science, a larger area and at least decades are important. A cold winter in Waterloo was recorded and is part of the overall average, I can assure you.
Here you go, Alley:
Least Extreme Summer On Record In The US
Posted on August 10, 2018 by tonyheller
The summer of 2018 has (so far) brought the smallest number of daily record temperatures and the smallest number of all time record maximum temperatures in the US.
https://realclimatescience.com/2018/08/least-extreme-summer-on-record-in-the-us-2/
Here ya go, Tom. I’ll get my science from the experts. What the scientists are saying: there is a 2:1 ration of warm records to cold ones.
Heller? Who is that? I wonder what he’s doing (or more likely not doing) to get to the answers he wants.
But Alley! So what!!! Even if that were true, what is your point??? Over what time scale? At what level of analysis? The climate can get colder, stay the same or get warmer! The warmists cherry pick events or trends to fit the theory. The sheer stupidity of your thinking! Please examine your reasoning. How do you explain all the other constant changes in the climate for billions of years. What is your point????
“Even if that were true” It is true.
“Over what time scale?” In the link below. Pick your scale!
“At what level of analysis?” Did you forget what the point was? Record warm vs record cold temps ratio, which does not require the same number of temp stations across decades.
“The climate can get colder, stay the same or get warmer!” But globally it’s getting warmer, as you must know. Why pretend that a cherry-pick location and/or a cherry-pick time is real science?
“The warmists cherry pick events or trends to fit the theory.” HA HA HA HA HA!! No, scientists pick the entire globe and decades to show global warming. There’s that word again: global.
The sheer insanity and lack of depth in your thinking! How do you explain the warming earth?
“How do you explain the warming earth? ”
How do YOU explain it before we even walked on the earth? How do YOU explain the fact that it was warmer during the 1930s? How do YOU explain the Medieval Warm Period? How do YOU explain the pause in temperature rise, if CO2 is the driver of global warmth? How do YOU explain CO2 following temperature increases historically? How do YOU explain the lies the media tells, which are regularly and easily falsified by actual data? How do YOU explain and justify the failed predictions that can be verified with your own eyes? I am quite convinced there are only three reasons why anybody says they still believe in CAGW. They are unintelligent; they haven’t bothered to reason through the issue and look at the data and political history of it (which is partly related to the first reason); they have vested political or financial interests in lying.
It’s entirely about scale. The globe is cooling or heating depending on where you take your starting point from. It’s not that complicated. This afternoon, the temperature will go up. The temperature is declining from the start of the week to the finish. Who gets to decide what scale we consider and what the starting points are for the graphs that make it into the public consciousness? There is nothing remarkable about the temperature rises seen so far.
What’s that saying about never wrestling with something or other, because something, something, you only end up getting dirty?
“Heller? Who is that? I wonder what he’s doing (or more likely not doing) to get to the answers he wants.”
Why don’t you go to his website and ask him? Be nice and maybe he will be nice to you.
I asked long ago. He uses raw data, does not adjust or use gridding, and takes simple averages. His code is available for you to look at. Pretty amateur stuff.
You make this claim about his code he writes as a computer expert, without presenting evidence that it is bad.
Stephen, Nick and now you make claims but never back them up. Heck you don’t even realize that he is an expert in computer coding as he used to work for INTEL and got an award for his work there.
You are more pathetic by the day.
You are simply being dishonest. Some of the graphs that Heller shows are NASA’s own! He shows how inconvenient earlier data either disappeared or was altered. Are you now questioning NASA’s own graphs? There is documentation and testimony from a number of people about the MWP and how problematic it is for the theory, and that they needed to get rid of it. Why are you so deluded? Or do you know exactly what you’re doing. but you don’t care about the truth?
Alley can’t reply, he was caught sockpuppeting, in violation of our policy, and so his comments go to the bit-bucket now.
“He uses raw data, does not adjust or use gridding…”
Does not adjust? Adjust for what? To make the data fit the theory?
http://www.climatesignals.org/data/record-high-temps-vs-record-low-temps
Link here.
Do you know where Heller is getting the data from?
Your argument is silly since you have yet to make a case that the warming trend is unusual.
I have to make the case? Why, since climate scientists have already made it.
Do you know what a 2:1 warm-to-cold record ratio means? It means we are warming, not cooling as Heller pretends. I wonder how many people he has duped with his poor code.
Your 2:1 argument doesn’t address the PER DECADE warming rate at all, which is why I said you haven’t made a case for it being unusual. You also don’t understand what Heller is saying either since he isn’t saying there is no warming, he is saying there are FEWER days above 100, 95 and 90 degrees than there used to be in America using NOAA data.
Stephen Mosher and Nick Stokes were INVITED to show that the code he wrote which is 100% based on NOAA data is bad, which they contended.
They never showed any evidence that it was bad, I even gave those two big mouths FULL access to the code, which you can download and check for yourself. They talked a lot, but not walk the talk.
Here it is:
GHCN Code https://realclimatescience.com/ghcn-code/
GHCN Software https://realclimatescience.com/ghcn-software/
Lets see if you will be honest on this.
I wish I understood what possible pleasure you or Ivan or Chris get from coming here and posting half-assed statements with very little thought or backing. Then at least I could understand the reasoning behind the posts. But I don’t see any. Clearly none of you are interested in any discussion or exchange of ideas. I’m guessing you don’t realize how bad you come across. I wish people would stop responding to you, so that we could try to keep the conversation interesting. I would love an in-depth exchange of well thought opinions, but that’s never what any of you post. I just don’t get the point of what you’re doing with these posts. Surely there are better ways to spend your time.
Tom Abbott – here’s how Tony cherry picks the data in order to find SOMETHING that supports his “nothing to worry about” position. https://tamino.wordpress.com/2018/08/08/usa-temperature-can-i-sucker-you/
Well, I tried to post this over at the tamino website but it’s software isn’t cooperating with me (I guess I need to upgrade to Windows 7:), so I’ll post it here (was going to do that anyway:)
I don’t know who wrote this article (at tamino’s) but your argument doesn’t make any sense to me.
Hansen measured a point in 1934 as being 0.5C warmer than the highest temperature in 1998, in his 1999 U.S. temperature chart.
The UAH satellite charts show that 2016’s highest temperature is 0.1C warmer than 1998, which means that 1934 was 0.4C warmer than 2016. THAT is your trendline. The United States has been in a temperature downtrend since 1934.
No amount of temperature chart manipulation will change these facts. I assume you do believe Hansen’s 1999 measurements were accurate at the time. If not, you should.
So Hansen is telling you something completely the opposite to what you are proposing in this post: The temperature trend in the U.S. is DOWN! Since 1934.
How can you be so wrong? Think Climategate. That’s the origin of your errors. You are using bogus, bastardized charts courtesy of the Climate Change chart manipulators. How can you expect to get accurate data out of something like that?
Here’s Hansen 1999:
And, for good measure, the UAH satellite chart:
Ivan, please illustrate to us your knowledge of the consistency of global temperature records dating back to as far as you can. I’m interested to see where you can substantiate these claims.
Also, please discuss the homogenization, southern hemisphere, adjustment of raw data, and removal of thousands of Siberian land data temp gauges, as well as the inconsistency with many of the land based temp gauges.
Please also discuss why the uah satellite data doesn’t track with noaa and giss since they have altered the data. Also, would you mind explaining how these are calibrated to be as accurate as you claim? And please explain the 1930s in comparison to today’s records.
Many thanks
Tell me you see the glaring irony in the fact that you used an idiom that was created by large swathes of people believing, through science, that Ostriches bury their heads in the sand when in actuality such widespread belief is completely incorrect.
“Talk about ostriches sticking their heads in the sand…”
Sure, you betcha.
“Ostriches don’t bury their heads in the sand; they wouldn’t be able to breathe! They dig holes in the dirt to use as nests for their eggs. Several times a day, a bird puts her head in the hole and turns the eggs.” https://kids.nationalgeographic.com/explore/nature/animal-myths-busted/
Calgary, Alberta, right now 91F 33C. Not sure if that’s a record; doesn’t seem extreme.
Ostriches do not stick their heads in the sand, and
the rest of your comment is equally delusional.
Thanks for trying.
For you Ivan,
Edmonton breaks record for consecutive days at or below zero
https://globalnews.ca/news/4140452/edmonton-winter-weather-record/
Try not to be so dumb next time.
Just as the Druids used to hold mid-winter festivals to ensure that the Sun would reverse and head to spring, these Warmistas panic and hold latte festival, plan trips to the Arctic in the hope that summer will turn into autumn, as it always does.
Barking at the moon. With computer modeled graphs to motivate the barking.
We should expect nothing less from a self confessed “hysterical” woman.
Maybe this is the mentality for that kind of talk
https://chaamjamal.wordpress.com/2010/05/16/171/
Wow…..thanks for the link
“Then the devil appeared in the form of humans who came on spaceships from outer space. These humans are not part of nature but an external force alien to nature and an abomination.”
Try David Icke to see how truly insane much of the world’s population is – the crap they believe in seems boundless.
I fear the lunatic fringe is way more than a fringe.
WTF happened to the “Age of Reason”
Ken Irwin
As mad as Icke is, he makes more sense than alarmists.
Unfortunately skeptics (realists) get bundled up with the likes of Icke and are called conspiracy theorists. It’s deeply frustrating. Can anybody explain to me how they get around the CO2 rise following temperature rise? I have read the explanation, and I am none the wiser. What is the twisted logic that allows them to circumvent something that is so, um, ‘problematic’?
Sylvia
Getting branded ‘deniers’ ‘conspiracists’ ‘crackpots’ and all the other derogatory terms applied to sceptics is fine by me. The longer it goes on the more curious people get. I think all of us have had a peek at a conspiracy theory or two that appeals to our less rational side. Same with alarmists. It’s how I ended up here, I couldn’t shake off the nagging doubt that there’s always two sides to a story.
The single most convincing case for scepticism I have found was one I watched Patrick Moore express on a number of presentations “There is no evidence whatsoever that CO2 causes global warming”. (paraphrasing)
I figured that was a pretty sweeping statement so set out to find the empirical studies that demonstrate CO2 causes global warming. I mean, after 40 years of the best minds in the world studying the subject, that’s got to be a shoe in racing certainty, there must be hundreds of them clearly explaining why the fate of the world should be determined by a single trace gas.
No doubt you’re ahead of me here, but I found one study, just one, which David Middleton has pretty well rubbished on his site https://debunkhouse.wordpress.com
The alarmists can say what they want but until they comprehensively demonstrate that single, fundamental, critical phenomenon, I don’t care if the world boils over, it’s not the fault of man made CO2 emissions, which are, by the way, something in the region of 0.12% of all greenhouse gases. CO2 comprises at most 4% of greenhouse gases whilst water vapour is around 95%.
CO2 itself is around 0.04% of all atmospheric gases so mans contribution is 0.0012% (?).
And John Tyndall himself “concluded that water vapour is the strongest absorber of radiant heat in the atmosphere and is the principal gas controlling air temperature. Absorption by the other gases is not negligible but relatively small.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tyndall
Nor do I like quoting Wikipedia but the link to it directly from the web page devoted to him by the Royal Institute http://www.rigb.org/our-history/people/t/john-tyndall
Hope it helps.
I am pretty up with all the arguments against the theory, and believe it is possible for any lay person to reason through the fundamental difficulty with it, which is that it is impossible to control or even identify the variables that influence climate, and there is no ‘control’ to compare the effects of different inputs. That’s why it SO stupid when they compare the ‘fossil fuel conspiracy’ to the smoking conspiracy. Without knowing the specifics of the smoking-cancer link studies, one can at least see that the possibility for replication, control groups, and better understanding of variables exists. The CAGW theory arose before the information came out about CO2 rises following temperature. Had that information been available, surely no reasonable scientist would dream of putting forwards a hypothesis that CO2 drives temperature? So, I would like somebody who believes in the theory, to explain how they get around that basic fact. Why does the CO2/temperature relationship suddenly change when we came along? I have read an explanation (I think it was in Nature) and I am none the wiser!
Yes sir. That is the $ 64000 question
What happened to the age of reason?
People who claim that ancient man lived in “harmony” with nature have never actually lived in nature. Nature is an unforgiving bitch that has forced man to struggle for survival for all of our time on earth … UNTIL about 120 years ago. When industrialization and cheap, abundant, energy freed man from a subsistence lifestyle.
Do people who write wacky eco-treatises like these have any historic or biological understanding at all? I highly doubt any of them would survive 1-year living as a Neanderthal man. Even Ted Kaczynski had to build a crude cabin to live in. He would have DIED … living … IN … nature.
Great comment. Thank you.
“I highly doubt any of them would survive 1-year living as a Neanderthal man.”
A year is pretty generous.
Agreed. There was nothing “harmonious” about it. Kill or be killed, eat or be eaten, sting or get stung. It was horrible, diseased, worm-infested and itchy, all the time. I lived in tropical West Africa for a couple of years. You do not want to live there “in the native state”.
Friday funny indeed.
Chaamjamal
That link was good for a laugh.
Thanks, they are certifiable.
There are many, many more deeply stupid and irrational people on earth than highly intelligent and rational ones, so it doesn’t bode well for the future. The supposed purpose of expanding education and making it more democratic was to tilt the balance in favour of intelligence and wisdom. Instead, it’s done the opposite.
“There are many, many more deeply stupid and irrational people on earth than highly intelligent and rational ones,”
The question is: What’s the ratio? Are we doomed, or is there hope?
Not sure. The entire project of the academic left is to flatten out the normal distribution curve by destroying all means of creating hierarchies of value and truth and merit. This has happened in every intellectual, scientific and artistic endeavour. It becomes impossible to make value and truth judgements. They do this to make everybody ‘equal’ – an exception is made for themselves, of course, who seek power over others. They hover above the equalised population, arbitrarily calling the shots and defining what is ‘true’ and ‘good’ for everybody else. If they can’t make everybody equally talented, then they change the definition of talent. If they can’t make everybody equally intelligent, then they change the means for defining and measuring intelligence. If they can’t make reality fit the climate theory, then they change the parameters for defining and measuring the climate. Are we doomed? A flat line is not a good indicator of life.
The New York Times became redundant when toilet paper came on a roll.
That must be the real reason that a once decent Independent newspaper has now morphed into an online-only rag.
Me-ow! 😀
She needs counselling by a WUWT reader. A clear case of CAGW syndrome.
It wouldn’t be successful with people like that. They revel in disaster. Their whole world revolves around whining about things. The trauma they go through when they break a nail or the coffee isn’t served appropriately is something to behold.
I wonder how much she was paid for producing a piece of gin induced maundering triviality that demonstrates no research, no library studies or even a Google search. This is modern journalism in a newspaper that is supposed to be for the most educated in British society.
How C P Scott would groan.
They are … RESISTING … our technological and industrial society. Heh. While simultaneously enjoying and exploiting the hell out of it. What they are RESISTING … is common sense, logic, and … science. REAL science.
They’re whacky survivalists, jumping at shadows. As soon as the general public realise that the AGW scare is over.
Yesterday upon the stair,
I met an alarmist who wasn’t there.
She wasn’t there again today,
I wish, I wish, she’d go away.
Apologies to William Hughes Mearns
I love that old poem. I used to have a really old book full of them.
Emma Emma Emma. Please try and keep up. You should not take advice from the NYT, Sunday edition or otherwise because you are a white person and in the words of the NYT latest star member of the editorial team, “White people can’t read.”
You are not their target audience.
As soon as you stop reading the NYT – or at least looking at the pictures – Sarah will stop insulting you and you will feel a whole lot better.
Then when you still move to Canada for no rational reason, at least you will be relaxed enough to enjoy the cold.
Have you checked out the history of New York? Do you believe the city has never experienced hot summers or cold winters? If you actually believe the lying media, academia and politicians – then don’t touch anything to do with fossil fuels, go live in the forest and live like the pioneers that built your country.
The average height of NYC above sea level has risen a lot in the past 250 years. During that time sea level has come up close to half a metre. I wonder how they accomplished that? I wonder if it involved modern science and engineering.
No, I will still insult her because she’s a kindergartener in an adult body. She probably believes that the Tooth Fairy really does leave quarters under your pillow – stuff like that.
I am becoming more and more convinced that people like Emma are either completely detached from reality, or WANT to be that way. I find it difficult to believe that anyone her age is as dense and unwilling “to find things out” as she presents herself to us.
I do not enjoy poking fun at people who really are this dumb, but when it is an intentional dumbness – as in a refusal to see an alternative – then the gloves come off. Seasonal changes are NOT climate change. That’s all there is to it. She refuses to accept anything else.
I’m enjoying the nice cool air of early August, now that the heat wave has left us. If the heat wave has anything to do with lack of hurricanes in the Atlantic/Gulf of Mexico, fine by me. Less damage and more strawberries. I’m going to spend some time late today getting dragonfly photos before they all disappear with the onset of Autumn.
Sara, I am right with you. I have actually had friends and family say to me “but I don’t WANT to know’. How can a thinking adult, who votes, decide to be deliberately ignorant? It seems they want to avoid having to deal with upheavals in their world view. Or they don’t like to concede that somebody might know something they don’t. If they have a university education, they cannot cope with the thought that their education has failed to equip them with curiosity and critical thinking skills. They assume they are at the top of the intellectual tree, when in fact it is easy to pick holes in the theories and ideological positions they hold so dear. They cannot cope with the fact that people they trusted – the good guys, like Al Gore, and the Greens and Obama – are lying to them, that they have been fooled. To concede to being fooled, makes them look foolish. Whereas I would have thought to choose to continue to be fooled, when somebody has advised you that you are being fooled, is way more foolish! So they put their hands over their ears and go ‘la la la’. Unfortunately a large proportion of the population never grew up, and have no intention of doing so.
Sylvia, it is the closed mind that is the more dangerous. A refusal to even consider an alternative view or opinion is not normal. If the alternatives make the person with the “closed mind” uncomfortable or feel threatened, then it’s appropriate to ask for a reason for that reaction.
My issue is that The They want to force everyone else to go along with them, but they refuse to accept or consider that an alternative view of something like climate “science” may have even a smidge of validity to it. This is the “closed mind” at work. It has all the trappings of a form of religion, which is disturbing, because it corrupts science into a Diktat.: no alternative views are allowed, and you will be punished for even bringing them up, perhaps even shunned, as the Amish and Mennonites sometimes do.
I think this will sort itself out. But it is a very sad thing to see otherwise smart people close themselves off from other views. However, I’m waiting to see what they do and what they say when none of the dreaded forecast events occur.
Well, Emma darling, have you considered that Canada might not want you? Immigrating to Canada is actually hard. link The Canadians want their immigrants to be employable. You’re a writer. There isn’t much of a market for writers, Canada has a surplus. What other marketable skills do you have? Your wiki page says you read English at Oxford. link You’ve gotten yourself in a bit of hot water.
The facial expressions you keep pulling … are you a little removed from reality? That could get you barred, I’m not a psychiatrist though.
Nice … sounds like she needs therapy of some sort. Most likely for multiple personality disorder. However, I am not a psychiatrist either.
Why do supposedly intelligent people become like cult members on some issues?
theres an old line about it being easier to fool the educated than the (supposedly) ignorant uneducated
the IYI factor;-)
(Moved – See Below)
The smarter you are, the better you are at lying to yourself. And the first lie you tell yourself is that you’re obviously too smart to believe lies.
Lack of any belief system is a large part of this problem. By ANY belief system, I mean everything from politics to obedience training for house cats.
this is why they are scared –
https://patch.com/new-york/new-york-city/nyc-sea-level-map-state-adopts-official-climate-change-predictions
The tidal gauge record shows a constant rate of the past 168 years of +2.84 mm/yr, 28 mm per or about 1 inch per decade.
I can’t believe those cool New Yorkers can be that easily panicked.
It is more like Kool-Aid than cool.
Really, a high projection of 10 inches of sea level rise in the 5 or 6 years?
And they want to be taken seriously?
Apparently they do! That sea-level rise is going to flood the internet paper picked the most extreme scenario and then said they were surprised it was going to happen so fast!
‘low-lying area…. what on earth are we going to do?….. survival of our children,….’ I suggest she buy a house boat and put in in her front yard. Move into it when it starts to float.
Is there any historical precedent for that being a good strategy?
A mythical one, don’t you know-ah
I’ll buy her a bus ticket to MoonBeam, Ontario. Looks lovely.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Moonbeam,+ON+P0L+1V0,+Canada/@49.3414451,-82.1986151
https://goo.gl/maps/fSDo8zEccuM2
Ohhhh … I thought you were suggesting she move to Gov. Moonbeam’s 2,500 acre “ranch”. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/29/us/jerry-brown-california-ranch.html
Hurry though … before the place is loaded with illegal squatters.
How about nice and safe Punkydoodles Corners? Its near Waterloo. Good horse and buggy country.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Punkeydoodles+Corners,+Wilmot,+ON+N3A+3E5/@43.3535488,-80.7438899,15z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x882c01466c4a4653:0x693d01d69bf0504e!8m2!3d43.3535497!4d-80.7351351
Yet more convincing evidence that the Gruniad has become a pathetic rag written by and for the benefit of the ignorant and lazy. What has Canada done to deserve the attentions of someone clearly incapable of doing even the most basic research ? Presumably she will be very disappointed when she discovers Canadian winters haven’t become as warm of those in Bali.
It isn’t called The Groaniad for nothing.
It’s comments section, where I am persona non grata, is an echo chamber filled with the mentally unstable and the self-loathing.
Once, it really was a good broadsheet.
That was before it left Manchester, but even then ” the Guardian’s eccentric virtues often seemed to be outweighed by its peculiar idiosyncrasies: the absence of horse racing, high-handed moral posturing and woolly leaders.” (quote from the paper’s own history)
Once, it really was a good broadsheet.
No it wasn’t, never in my 40yrs as an adult, always been a marxist 5th column.
Its only so outrageously dumbed down now because of progressive-ism and the best educations money can buy.
My advice lady ….buy a beachfront property with a 30 year mortgage from a bank – enjoy it while you can.
Then ask yourself if your bank believes this nonsense.
Well if the article came out yesterday it coincided with a cold day of torrential rain across S E England
La La. What fools we make of ourselves
OMG! The flood! The flood!
I must move to the Himalayas!
Of course, it rained heavily, Leo. There is no irony to see here, move along. That is entirely consistent with what can be expected from Climate Change(TM). Climate Change (TM) causes floods, and droughts, and blizzards, and hurricanes and tornadoes, and every manner of weather as long as something negative can be attributed to it. Not only bad weather, it also causes poverty, and war, and pestilence, and the election of bad politicians. It even causes nice hot summer beach weather to be thought of as something bad.
Climate Change (TM) is caused by human vermin increasing a trace gas in the atmosphere from 0.028% to 0.041% through evil capitalist activities. This has set in motion irreversible catastrophic effects even though ten times higher levels prevailed naturally in geologically recent history. You see, at that time before humans created synthetic, artificial carbon dioxide, the atmosphere only contained carbon dioxide that was certified organic, non-GMO, all-natural, untainted by human hands. Natural CO2 can be present in any quantity provided that it arises from the natural body of mother earth, just do not vaccinate our mother with tainted unnatural CO2!
The only salvation from the sin and devastation of Climate Change (TM) is worldwide socialism under the guiding hands of wise and dear leaders like Al Gore. Socialism will purify the tainted carbon demonoxide through the ministrations of windmills and solar panels that do not commit the blasphemous crimes of producing affordable or reliable energy in sufficient quantities to maintain modern civilization. In our less scientific days, the role of CO2 was often referred to as the activities of evil spirits.
I’m surprised that you seem to be unacquainted with these self-evident facts.
/sarc obviously
Right now it is cool in the UK and I want my summer back again.
OMG! The ice age! The ice age!
I must move to Nigeria!
Those man-made archipelagos floating in the oceans are they, perchance, made of plastics?
face palm!
i wont be reading more of her brainsnappingly stupid drivel
Really? That’s Godwin’s Law on steroids.
Emma, if you can’t understand the difference between Kristallnacht and a slowly rising sea level, you are a moral midget. Christopher Munckton would refer to your bantering as intellectual baby talk. I’m disgusted.
I bet when they come to sell their beach front properties, they won’t let it go for a knock down price even though, according to them, it will soon be worthless.