Washington Post: President Trump “is complicit” in Hurricane Florence Because Climate Change

Donald J. Trump at a rally in Wilkes-Barre, Pa., last month. His promises to bring back coal mining jobs helped him win in Pennsylvania and Ohio. Credit Dominick Reuter/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Washington Post seems to think Presidents they don’t like can cause hurricanes.

Another hurricane is about to batter our coast. Trump is complicit.

By Editorial Board
September 11 at 7:45 PM

President Trump issued several warnings on his Twitter feed Monday, counseling those in Florence’s projected path to prepare and listen to local officials. That was good advice.

Yet when it comes to extreme weather, Mr. Trump is complicit. He plays down humans’ role in increasing the risks, and he continues to dismantle efforts to address those risks. It is hard to attribute any single weather event to climate change. But there is no reasonable doubt that humans are priming the Earth’s systems to produce disasters.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/another-hurricane-is-about-to-batter-our-coast-trump-is-complicit/2018/09/11/ccaed766-b5fb-11e8-a7b5-adaaa5b2a57f_story.html

It is difficult to think of a claim more ridiculous – though to be fair the Post article does go on to quote climate scientist Kevin Trenberth. But Washington Post does have historical precedent when they blame individuals for severe weather events.

Back in the late 1600s, the Salem Witch Trials accused defendants of using black magic to cause bad weather, during a prolonged period of bad weather.

… The Salem witch trials fell within an extreme cold spell that lasted from 1680 and 1730 — one of the chilliest segments of the little ice age. The notion that weather may have instigated those trials is being revived by Salem State University historian Tad Baker in his forthcoming book, “A Storm of Witchcraft” (Oxford University Press, 2013). Building on Oster’s thesis, Baker has found clues in diaries and sermons that suggest a harsh New England winter really may have set the stage for accusations of witchcraft.

According to the Salem News, one clue is a document that mentions a key player in the Salem drama, Rev. Samuel Parris, whose daughter Betty was the first to become ill in the winter of 1691-1692 because of supposed witchcraft. In that document, “Rev. Parris is arguing with his parish over the wood supply,” Baker said. A winter fuel shortage would have made for a fairly miserable colonial home, and “the higher the misery quotient, the more likely you are to be seeing witches.” …

Read more: https://www.livescience.com/19820-salem-witch-trials.html

Washington Post is accusing President Trump of causing warm weather and hurricanes, whereas the Salem trials accused people of causing cold weather. But The Washington Post also claims that CO2 causes more damaging winter storms – so maybe the Post is not so different in their thinking to the historical Salem witch hunters.

Advertisements

277 thoughts on “Washington Post: President Trump “is complicit” in Hurricane Florence Because Climate Change

  1. In London, England the Brexit debate continues but then there is this;

    https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/ready-aim-misfire-the-brits-just-aren-t-as-good-as-australians-at-leadership-coups-20180913-p503fu.html?loginAction=%5Bobject%20Object%5D

    “London: Political leadership speculation in the UK is like the weather, said senior Cabinet member Michael Gove on Wednesday.

    He intended to be dismissive but was spot on: it’s been unusually hot this summer, made worse by a dangerous change to the climate.”

    • Just to be factual:-

      40 years since the summer of ’76, a ‘monstrous’ amount of CO2 pumped out by man, and the CET (the ‘best’ English climate data) was still 0.5C colder than 1976. Even summer 1826 was hotter than 2018. 2018 had one day over 30C, 1976 had NINE. So much for man-made climate change. (The claims of hottest ever – by a tiny margin/tied – were based on extrapolation of airports, airbases, and 40 years of massive urban development.)

      • “To get an even longer-term perspective our multi-century Central England Temperature* (CET) series dates back to 1659. In this dataset summer 2018 looks likely to slip behind the summers of 1976 and 1826. If we look back through the CET series only 10 summers recorded an average temperature above 17C. Six of those have occurred since 1976, and only two (1826, 1846) were pre 20th Century …..”

        https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/2018/end-of-summer-stats

          • And with a negative North Atlantic Oscillation in place; I doubt they’ll think winter is hotter.

            That stuff they claim their children will never know, may not increase in volume; but what does fall is likely to stay for a visit.

    • Michael Gove is hopelessly deluded on climate change, so he’s perfect for the job.
      During heatwaves I measure the temperature in the shade. The highest I recorded during this heatwave was 30.0C. I’ve recorded higher temperatures in the past of at least 31.0C
      Of course, these temperature records are meaningless because the weather stations are not the same. A hundred years ago most of the stations were surrounded by grass and trees – trees have a significant cooling effect. Now most of them are surrounded by concrete, and more than half are at airports right next to the runway. If by some magic the weather was exactly the same every year, we would still have an endless stream of records – even without the help of ice cream vans in Scotland!
      Chris

  2. I think your comparison to Salem is correct. Ironically, the Washington Post did all it could to foist one of the World’s greatest witches upon us. Thankfully they failed.

    • The warmist minions are a strange breed – they typically have a soft degree in the humanities from some junior college, majoring in English, Sociology, Psychology, Gender Studies, Witchcraft, etc. and have no clue about the Scientific Method.

      Still, the typical warmist minion will scream their belief in manmade global warming catastrophism and climate change hysteria – all based on what they heard from their idiot friends on Facebook and Twitter or over a “Venti, Soy, Semi-Caf, No Foam Latte” at Starbucks – and they will verbally or physically assault anyone who disagrees with their imbecilic position.

      The following brief treatise on the Scientific Method is presented for the benefit of all the warmist minions out there. If they read it, it will be the most scholarly work they have done on global warming and climate change in their entire lives – but even this 3-minute treatise will probably be too long and complicated for them.

      Regards, Allan
      _______________________________

      ON THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD:

      Richard Feynman on The Scientific Method (1964)
      https://youtu.be/0KmimDq4cSU

      at 0:39/9:58: ”If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong.”
      At 4:01/9:58: “You can always prove any definite theory wrong.”
      At 6:09/9:58: “By having a vague theory, it’s possible to get either result.”

      THIS IS THE “CLIMATE CHANGE” ALARMISTS’ DECEITFUL STRATEGY:
      “By having a vague theory, it’s possible to get either result.” – Richard Feynman
      “A theory that is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific.” – Karl Popper.

      The “Climate Change” hypothesis is so vague, and changes so often, that it is not falsifiable and not scientific. It should be rejected as unscientific nonsense.

      The “Manmade Runaway Global Warming” hypothesis is at least falsifiable, and IT HAS BEEN ADEQUATELY FALSIFIED:

      1. By the ~37-year global cooling period from ~1940 to 1977;

      2. By “the Pause”, when temperature did not significantly increase for almost two decades, despite increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations;

      3. By the absence of runaway global warming over geologic time, despite much higher CO2 concentrations;

      4. By the fact that equatorial Pacific sea surface temperatures have not increased significantly since ~1982, and corresponding air temperatures increased largely due to the dissipation of the cooling impact of two century-scale volcanoes – El Chichon in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991+;

      5. By the fact that CO2 trends lags temperature trends by ~9 months in the modern data record, and by ~~800 years in the ice core record, and the undeniable reality that the future cannot cause the past.

      Global warming and climate change alarmism, in a few decades at most, will be regarded as a mass delusion, and its leaders and its followers will be widely regarded as scoundrels and imbeciles.

      In summary, there is no real dangerous global warming or wilder weather crisis. In fact, increasing atmospheric CO2 certainly improves plant and crop yields, and may cause some mild global warming, which will be net-beneficial to humanity and the environment.

      Regards, Allan

      • “In summary, there is no real dangerous global warming or wilder weather crisis. In fact, increasing atmospheric CO2 certainly improves plant and crop yields, and may cause some mild global warming, which will be net-beneficial to humanity and the environment.”

        You must have typed (or cut and paste) these same words a hundred times. I guess you believe them now. Repeating them again is unnecessary – we get it already.

          • “The point is to educate you away from ignorance …”

            In order for this site to “educate people away from ignorance” it needs to report science without the reflexive “claim” type of headline and attacking of it because people here dont like it. Education requires a balanced look at the science. The only “balance” here comes from the few posters (Nick Stokes, Leif Svalsgaard, and a few others) who are prepared to put up with that kind of comment, and worse.
            Otherwise without that input this site is nothing but an echo-chamber.
            No one gets educated in an echo-chamber my friend.

          • “it needs to report science”

            What “science?!” A “model study” which is pre-loaded with unfounded assumptions may pass as “science” to you, but not to those who actually understand what “science” is.

          • This site does report science.
            Unlike you, we don’t declare a priori that anyone who disagrees with us is not a scientist.

          • “Unlike you, we don’t declare a priori that anyone who disagrees with us is not a scientist.”

            Rubbish, you attack climatologists all the time, and the only evidence you provide is hand-waving generalisms like altered data, inaccurate models and rent seeking scientists. Zero science being practiced by you.

          • Anthony, so anyone who hasn’t drank the co2 Kool aid isn’t balanced?
            You are a child. A religious zealot who is clinging to your goddess, GAIA. Seriously.
            There is no unadulterated, pure data that supports anything other than a mild warming trend since the LIA.
            What are you going to say once the next decade cools dramatically. You better take your smarmy ass back here and apologize.

          • additionally, it disturbs me that those who typically vilify Christianity (yet seem to love islam [cuckold much?]) for being stupid/backwards/anti-science/superstitious end up being the atheistic type that believe everything is an accident while simultaneously believing in the religion of CAGW…wait… CACC…. wait… CACD….wait… Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Weirding?

            yea. let’s talk about hypocrites. I’d wager 75% of you antagonists on this site are not religious, not spiritual, and resent those who have faith in something larger than themselves. Yet at the same time religiously cling to your belief in manmade climate change, always for the worst.
            That is the definition of hypocrisy.

            A hypocrite despises those whom he deceives, but has no respect for himself. He would make a dupe of himself too, if he could.
            – William Hazlitt

          • Really Anthony?

            You ignore all the accomplished scientists who have posted here and mention only two – that alone discredits your statements.

            I was polite for about the first ten years of this discussion – lately I have little time or patience for trolls.

            There is a point where replying in detail to their nonsensical one-liners is a waste of time and effort.

            This is especially so since the deceitful and aggressive actions of the hockey team and other global warming conspirators have become fully known through the Climategate emails, etc.

            Anyone who still believes that the leaders of the global warming alarmist conspiracy are just “innocent scientists with a different viewpoint” are delusional. The extremist and disgraceful conduct of the warmists says otherwise.

          • Anthony:

            You caught me in a good mood – someday I’ll tell you how I really feel.

            Here is another reason why I no longer have patience with green fanatics.

            Green Leftist Extremists are the Great Killers of Our Age.

            Green extremism started with the banning of DDT from ~1972 to ~2002. The ban on DDT effectively DOUBLED the number of deaths from malaria, more than half of whom were children age 4 and under, whose deaths peaked at almost 1 million per year – just babies, for Christ’s sake! Half of these deaths were easily preventable.

            Add to this the numbers of deaths due to the great global warming scam and the “phony war” against increasing atmospheric CO2 and the total green death toll is in the tens of millions, similar to the number of needless deaths caused in the 20th Century by leftist icons Hitler, Stalin or Mao.

            It is difficult to believe green extremists could be this stupid and destructive for this long. There is evidence in some of their public statements that these were deliberate crimes against humanity.

            Conclusion:
            Leftist Green extremists are the greatest killers of our age – rivaling the death tolls of the greatest psychopathic killers of the 20th Century.

            They belong in jail – they’ll get to hell soon enough.

            “Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.”

      • Sadly there are plenty of people with scientific qualifications who blindly believe in global warming, and it would seem the higher their public profile the more their support for “the cause”. In the UK the late Stephen Hawking and Brian Cox spring immediately to mind.

        • Spencer and Christie of a couple of guest posts back do too – Anthropogenic and all. Well they don’t “believe”, they know it as incontravertable fact. So sorry, but to claim otherwise puts you on the crank fringe – flat-earth territory.

          • So the output of a model is automatically an “incontravertable fact”

            By the way, since you made a point of highlighting a spelling error earlier, it’s spelled incontrovertible.

          • oh how I love reading the simple dismissals of such simple beings. It is so easy to dismiss the trolls, I’m pretty sure my 4 year old son could do it with a simple hand wave while watching Thomas. I used to come here in the comments to learn, now I just come here to watch these Malthusian warmists get bludgeoned with facts, allthewhile never realizing how religious they are.

            I’m still waiting for the likes of Nick and Kristi to admit when they are incorrect, but I’ll avoid holding my breath on that one. The indoctrination is strong in those ones.

          • Ryan said:
            Well they don’t “believe”, they know it as incontravertable fact. So sorry, but to claim otherwise puts you on the crank fringe – flat-earth territory.
            and
            Sorry are you a flat-earther? I beg your pardon..

            Your childish Alinsky-ite tactics don’t work on intellectuals. Every time I see a post of yours that employs such pathetic fallacies I’m going to spoon feed you like the little child you are, to help you in your journey into intellectual adulthood.

            :ad hominem:

            “You attacked your opponent’s character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument.

            Ad hominem attacks can take the form of overtly attacking somebody, or more subtly casting doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument. The result of an ad hom attack can be to undermine someone’s case without actually having to engage with it.

            Example: After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe anything from a woman who isn’t married, was once arrested, and smells a bit weird.”

            In case you are so dense as to not understand the implications of your name-calling, let me help you. Associating the term “flat-earther” to anyone is a logical fallacy of ad hominem because you are making the assertion that anyone who questions you or the whatever you believe is the intellectual equivalent of someone who believes there is evidence the earth is flat. That is a boring personal attack that lacks any clever wit or effort. It is puerile.

          • Spencer and Christie of a couple of guest posts back do too – Anthropogenic and all. Well they don’t “believe”, they know it as incontravertable fact.

            I ‘know’ some ‘global warming’. Here near the Arctic there’s no denying we have had some local warming. Not that we’d beat the HCO yet, but clearly we beat the years of famine not very long, maybe 150 to 400 years ago.

            What you believe? You believe very high sensitivity, you believe in models predicting global average. You, by the way, believe in a global average of the mean temperature, as if it made sense in the first place.

            You believe in that a change is possible by an energy policy I don’t think makes the slightest good. You believe renewables are cheap. You believe America, despite not being great, must lead in your war.

            You believe in fairies and tales. Yet you feel you can educate at a comment thread.

            Your call.

          • RyanS lied when he wrote above:
            “Spencer and Christie of a couple of guest posts back do too – Anthropogenic and all. Well they don’t “believe”, they know it as incontravertable fact. So sorry, but to claim otherwise puts you on the crank fringe – flat-earth territory.”

            Dr Roy Spencer wrote here this week, in the last paragraph of his article:
            https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/09/12/global-warming-skepticism-for-busy-people/
            “The good news is that there is no global warming crisis, “

            So Ryan, you lied – because by now you must know the truth on this point.

            In scientific terms, you made a hypothesis, and ii has been falsified. 🙂

          • ““The good news is that there is no global warming crisis,”

            That is not what I said. Check it. Putting words in my mouth and calling me a lier, what does that make you?

            Watts, Spencer, Christie et al all understand perfectly well the AGW is an incontravertable and uncontraversial fact.

            Do you agree with them? A yes or no would suffice.

          • Your careful wording misrepresents the truth Ryan, and you know it.

            Many scientists accept that increasing atmospheric CO2 will probably cause a small (and beneficial) amount of warming.

            Your careful wording avoids the key question, the magnitude of climate sensitivity to CO2, which Spencer, Christy and Watts and I all say is low, such that there is no dangerous CO2-driven global warming crisis.

          • Allan, no scientist would state that any effect of CO2 is “beneficial.” If you think otherwise you don’t know what science is all about. Science does not bestow value judgements on the items it studies. It can’t. “Warming” cannot be determined to be good or bad with science. If you wish to talk about CO2 being “beneficial”, please go to a web site that discusses ethics, because science does not judge things as either “good” or “bad”.

          • Thank you Dave – here is scientific evidence that your opinion is false nonsense.

            Scientifically, we know that the world is colder-than-optimum for humanity. Excess Winter Deaths total about 2 million per year worldwide. Excess Winter Deaths are significant even in warm countries.

            Scientifically, there is ample evidence that climate sensitivity to atmospheric CO2 is far too low to cause anything more than mild global warming, which would be beneficial.

            The essence of science is the ability to predict.

            Scientifically, we know that every very-scary prediction by the global warming alarmists has failed to materialize, such that they have a perfectly negative predictive track record and thus negative credibility.

          • Dave Burton

            Allan, no scientist would state that any effect of CO2 is “beneficial.” If you think otherwise you don’t know what science is all about. Science does not bestow value judgements on the items it studies. It can’t. “Warming” cannot be determined to be good or bad with science. If you wish to talk about CO2 being “beneficial”, please go to a web site that discusses ethics, because science does not judge things as either “good” or “bad”.

            I see you have been given the assigned trollgate for today.
            Nonsense. The ENTIRE premise of the CAGW religion is that the POTENTIAL warming from the POTENTIAL future rise in CO2 is entirely harmful! The CAGW religoin does not permit the calculation of the benefits, nor the benefits of a slight warming.
            And that entire argument relies on the deliberate ignorance of and the igoring of the BENEFITS to 7 billion people now living due to the energy abd processing of fossil fuels to feed, clothe, shelter, warm and water them and their animals and their childrens’ children.

          • Well said Mr. Cook – thank you.

            It appears that the warmist cult is now taking aim at wattsup and has recruited a squad of mindless drones to attack skeptics who post here.

            I recall Richard Lindzen of MIT, when asked in an interview if he was a global warming skeptic – he replied with a slight smile, “I’m a denier”.

            I also deny global warming alarmism, in that I deny that humanmade global warming will be large or dangerous – there is NO credible evidence that this is true, and ample credible evidence that it is false.

            Global warming alarmism and anti-CO2 programs are not just scientific error, they are scientific fraud, and their proponents have scammed tens of trillions of dollars from society and have cost millions of lives. These warmist fraudsters belong in jail.

            Allan MacRae, P.Eng.

      • The problem here is that you are dealing with a religion. It’s really no different from trying to convince a creationist that there are far too many things in the universe which simply must be more than 6000 years (or whatever) old. The adherent will simply refuse to listen any data which contradicts their faith.

        • Not all creationists believe the earth is 6000 years old. And it is easy to disprove that the earth is 6000 years old by the very first words in the Bible: “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” How long that was is never stated. After that, comes the 6 creative days. So the earth was already here before the 6 creative days began. And, what is more, even in English ‘day’ does not always mean 24 hours. People say “In my day …”, that doesn’t mean one day but a period of time.

          • Parts of the Bible are allegorical, parts are historical.
            It’s not hard to tell which are which if you read it with the intent of learning and understanding.

          • Jeff makes a baseless claim from ignorance about meaning.

            Jeff, just because you have defined value according to your whims does not negate the copious amounts of information in that political collection of books.

            Especially considering the mostly unacknowledged gems of esoteric wisdom about the human condition, personal growth, best ways to treat other folks. Heck, I read a few places that the story of the stoning of the adulteress likely didn’t happen because it was recorded some 600 years later. Well, let’s say it isn’t true. The message is to treat others with compassion because no one is perfect.

            Or the forgiving of the sinner on the cross (when someone who has wronged you recognizes it and is LEGITIMATELY sorrowful for those actions, it is best for all parties to find peace in the situation and forgiveness).

            Or let’s visit one of the passages I’m sure you take umbrage. I’d wager good money you find this violent:

            Matthew 10:33-35
            33But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in heaven. 34Do not assume that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn ‘A man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law

            now, someone who dwells amongst the profane, or the un-initiated, such as yourself, most likely looks at this as a direct call for violence. But see, you understand nothing of why Jesus spoke in parables. Those parables were for people like you, not initiated in the occulted knowledge so he needed to dumb it down and talk in methods simple folks relate. But you don’t understand the true intent, and it was this:

            Jesus represents the holy matrimony of the sacred feminine (compassion, empathy, nurture, creation) and sacred masculine (force, strength, action, rigidity) aspect of each human, together known as the alchemical wedding (blade overlapped chalice) or the holy spirit – “as I think, so I feel, so I act”- thought, emotion, action in complete UNIson – the true undivided individual, which is alignment with godliness.

            The figure of Christ represents the true moral objectivism, or Truth, in simpler terms. So when the figure of Jesus spoke as of himself, he was talking about aligning with the truth of the universe, and that simply, theft is always wrong. There is no justification, only righteous operation. And to be with God is to align oneself with the truth. If anyone should deny objective truth and unwavering morality (do not steal- which includes murder, violence, lying, rape, etc – all theft), then they have pitted themselves against truth which is god. The inevitable discomfort that arises from that conflict is unavoidable, and he came to lift humanity up to stop living in moral relativism, which will pit people against each other. It is unavoidable.

            But most Christians don’t even accept that because they are profane, and haven’t the slightest understanding of the 7 hermetic principles of natural law or how that story has been recycled throughout history.

            So your arrogant, dismissive, declarative statements are uttered as though from youth who has only the slightest understanding of the complexities of the world, and they carry no value other than to offend.

          • “Jeff makes a baseless claim from ignorance about meaning.”

            No I didn’t.

            If you have to interpret “holy” words, then they are worthless, since they can be interpreted many different ways, and used to gain advantage over others.

            What’s the message in murdering tens, if not hundreds, of thousands simply because they inhabit the so-called “promised land”? That right after telling everyone “thou shalt not kill”?

            I fully agree that the Bible contains a lot of wise words, but if you can’t acknowledge that it also contains a lot of nonsense and brutality in the name of god, then you have blinders on.

          • Wade, you make a great point that I have understood since I was a kid and could quote the Bible better than our minister. My understanding was reenforced when I took anthropology. The first book of the Bible is about a people’s leaders trying to explain to a population of illiterate people how the Earth and humans came to being. Imagine trying to explain the Big Bang or evolution was we know it today. Even if you could, imagine then trying to explain what happened before the Big Bang or how we went from the Big Bang to life on Earth, both basically unknowns at this time and even possible unknowable even into the distant future.

      • ”If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong.”

        I don’t necessarily agree with that. Experiments can be, and often are, flawed. I would re-word that and say “If it doesn’t agree with observation, it’s wrong”

          • That’s true, Edwin. But I would say my version is more logical than the Feynman version, will all due respect to him.

        • Hi Jeff,

          Richard Feynman said that in one of his videotaped lectures, cited above. Had he been writing, he might have phrased is differently. I generally do not argue with Feynman – “just because”.

          Regards, Allan

          from wiki:
          “He assisted in the development of the atomic bomb during World War II and became known to a wide public in the 1980s as a member of the Rogers Commission, the panel that investigated the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. Along with his work in theoretical physics, Feynman has been credited with pioneering the field of quantum computing and introducing the concept of nanotechnology. He held the Richard C. Tolman professorship in theoretical physics at the California Institute of Technology.”

  3. When the Washington Post (WaPo) prints headlines like this:
    “Trump ‘complicit’ in hurricane Florence”
    Then
    1. The WaPo is admitting their liberal core of readers are complete morons
    2. If Trump is as powerful as Jesus (calm the seas) only Trump actually generates Cat-4 Hurricanes, then how can the WaPo say that they can take out Trump?

    Oh yeah! Rule number 1 applies!
    LoL!

    • Actually the WAPO is being quite consistent. If Obama was able to calm the seas … just by getting elected, then of course the corollary is true for Trump. Trump will make the seas rise (another 3mm size ball bearing), and Al Gore’s long-ago predicted increased hurricane activity will swallow up humanity. Burn Trump! He’s a witch!

      • Trump has to be a witch. US CO2 emissions have decreased since he became President, which means the only way he could have caused hurricane Florence is though the use of witchcraft.

    • Didn’t all the current Atlantic Heat Quotient get imparted into the ocean due to Obama Era decisions and policies? Doesn’t it take numerous years to increase Ocean Heat Content?

    • The Washington Posts and every leftists green loon on the planet is equally as guilty unless they are not exhaling CO2. We could ask what are they willing to do for the planet now hold you breathe and do it for the planet .. 🙂

    • The arrogance of alarmists is incredible – have they not watched the video of Florence from satellite, and they honestly think that man’s puny % of CO2 in the atmosphere has any effect on that colossal storm system (which by the way has been present every summer since man kept records). Neither an increase in number nor an increase in strength – in fact the opposite.

      One big storm comes along….cyclical weather blocks its passage and it swings in towards the shore rather than away …….and this is caused by one man who is presiding over a continuation of decreasing CO2 output while the rest of the developing world carries on increasing it. It defies any logical thinking whatsoever

  4. When Columbus discovered the “new world,” he encountered hurricanes. When the American colonies were established, the colonists encountered hurricanes. One of them, in 1752, destroyed the coastal city of Charleston. This week, another hurricane is meandering in the general area of Charleston.

    The editorial board of the Washington Post has gone mad. Who do they think was complicit in the hurricanes that Columbus encountered? With the early hurricane that struck Charleston?

    If hurricanes were “normal” when Europeans first arrived in North America, it follows that the natural forces that created them were not influenced by modern civilization.

    Man-made global warming is theorized to have begun impacting the climate around the year 1950.

    As hurricanes continue to appear from time to time, much as they did during earlier times, it is totally illogical to assert that man-made global warming causes hurricanes.

    To propose that a particular storm, in a particular year, was caused by a particular individual, is simply madness.

    • And the worst hurricane evah, the great hurricane of 1780 that passed through the Antilles between October 10 – 16 scrubbing islands clear and killing as many as 24,000

    • Don’t forget Tristan de Luna, consumate idiot. Parked his flotilla in Pensacola Bay and neglected to have them offloaded before he took off chasing for Indian gold. Hurricane took out his ships and supplies. They are still finding bits and pieces of his fleet. One of the more recent finds was after Ivan -2004 unearthed part of one of his ships.

    • “Man-made global warming is theorised to have begun impacting the climate around the year 1950.”

      Around the same time TV went mainstream .
      Getting started
      “Until the fall of 1948, regularly scheduled programming on the four networks—the American Broadcasting Company (ABC), the Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS; later CBS Corporation), the National Broadcasting Co. (NBC), and the DuMont Television Network, which folded in 1955—was scarce. On some evenings, a network might not offer any programs at all, and it was rare for any network to broadcast a full complement of shows during the entire period that became known as prime time (8–11 PM, Eastern Standard Time). Sales of television sets were low, so, even if programs had been available, their potential audience was limited. To encourage sales, daytime sports broadcasts were scheduled on weekends in an effort to lure heads of households to purchase sets they saw demonstrated in local appliance stores and taverns—the venues where most TV viewing in America took place before 1948.”
      https://www.britannica.com/art/television-in-the-United-States
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_television_broadcast_stations
      http://broadcasting.wikia.com/wiki/Effective_radiated_power

      “The first broadcast was on September 6, 1952 from its Montreal station CBFT. The premiere broadcast was bilingual, spoken in English and French. Two days later, on September 8, 1952, the Toronto station CBLT went on the air.”
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_television

      “Sometimes, weapons and other projects pushed by the urgency of war have been converted into civilian technology. Such is the case of nuclear power plants, the internet, but also radar tech, which inexpectedly and inadvertently led to the invention of the microwave oven — one of the most widely used home appliance in the world.”
      https://www.zmescience.com/science/physics/microwave-oven-from-ww2/

      http://broadcast.homestead.com/BroadcastTheory.html

      • If they have to “theorize” when CO2 started impacting the climate, it’s obvious that they haven’t been able to actually measure it.

    • Yeah but it makes for great headlines. Especially when they know their deluded “fan base” will gobble it up like thirsty dogs.

  5. “It is difficult to think of a claim more ridiculous ”
    What is ridiculous about it? I think claiming “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive,” is easily more ridiculous. And who said that? Oh wait it was that expert on climate change, private bone spur.

    • Simon,

      You obviously loved the koolaid. You Drank too much in 2008 when your Messiah said,

      “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal…” after he secured the Dimocrat nomination for President.

      So many people with agendas rode that wave, and the expensive wind and solar energy scam behind it, for 8 years. Time to return to reality. Take some Xanax or a crawl into bottle. You’ll be okay.

      8 years of Obama climate koolaid, and now you can’t deal with the hangover.

      Climate change alarmism is a fraud. It really is that simple.

    • Actually, Simon, that statement isn’t that far off base. Obviously, the Chinese didn’t invent the AGW scam, but they HAVE benefited from it. The odious regulations that have been passed in the name of AGW made it harder for US manufacturers to compete, and left Chinese mfrs free to compete without said regulations.

      • “Actually, Simon, that statement isn’t that far off base.”

        Not a good idea to double-down on kookiness. Makes you look um a bit kooky.

          • Nobody is denying that the atmosphere and the seas have been warming, the heat content of the oceans would therefore presently be increasing, noone denies that – so you produce a rather ridiculously scaled graph to back up your statement….as if it is needed, and it is merely a pictorial statement of the increase in temperature.

            How or why it is presently heating or whether it will continue is very open to debate and I would think the three experts you quote would struggle to identify with the A at the start of AGW. With the billions of humans on the planet all going about their daily business altering their direct environment to suit their needs it would be idiotic to think that to some extent humans don’t have some effect on global climate. What this effect is and how much it influences temperature is very open to debate and very much the reason I lurk around this site along with 100,000s of others.

            On top of all this you are under the misapprehension that the IPCC is a scientific body – I would beg to differ, it isnt – it is there to collate information and disseminate its conclusions to governments around the world – it is another producer of conjecture – and (ab)uses conjecture model results as the basis for its findings, the IPCC itself doesnt do science (IMO – just in case!!)

            You should take a leaf out of Simon’s book above where he says ‘time will tell’ – the only coherently accurate statement of the future in this latest stream of comments and leave it at that. ‘Nobody knows’ would be equally good

          • It isn’t a question of real, it’s a question of significance. Almost every poster here agrees with that statement.

            If ECS is 1.2C, the significance is that the AGW will be beneficial.

            BAGW not CAGW!

          • Ryan, can you tell us which of the IPCC models we can use to go back in time to show the medieval warm period, the little ice age, the Cool 70s and the period recently with little change in temperature.

            Show us that model and I will believe the IPCC has the science right.

          • ‘Thank you so much for ‘splaining this for me.’
            The utter conceit of that comment alone earns you this award, Ryan.

          • Ryan is not consistent.. imagine that! He doesn’t realize he needs to use the term Anthropogenic CLIMATE CHANGE, you know, since the pause lasted some 20 years, save for the last NiNo.

            oh boy.. some kiddies need to stop eating so much candy and stop drinking so much Koolaide. not good for the brain

          • ‘Anthony Watts, Dr. Roy Spencer and Dr. John Christy all agree AGW is real… but you don’t.’

            Boy, you can’t speak an honest sentence, can you?

        • You can always tell when a warmista has run out of arguments. They start declaring that anyone who disagrees with them is a kook, or it’s all a conspiracy.

          • AND once again announcing who they are by what they accuse you of.
            It’s the exception to the rule that every rule has an exception.

    • Chaamjamal
      Thanks for all your good work. I recently used one of your articles for a letter to the editor here in Bozeman Montana. They have refused to print several others that were trying to make the same point. We’ll see how this one goes:
      I recently saw an analysis of the effect of uncertainty in atmospheric CO2 flux , (https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/05/31/the-carbon-cycle-measurement-problem/), that confirms the the work of Professor Salby, Professor Harde and Dr. Barry showing that human emissions have little effect on the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. I thought of a reasonable example to illustrate this point.
      Suppose you have a very accurate gauging station on the Gallatin and another accurate gauge on Haylite Creek. You note that the increase in Haylite flow exceeds that for the Gallatin. Without knowing the other inflows and outflows you cannot assert that all of the increase in the Gallatin came from Haylite . Changes in Cottonwood Creek and Taylor Fork and all the others as well as the canal take outs make that assertion impossible. It is only valid to say the Haylite flow increase was larger than Gallatin increase. Even if the Gallatin flow had been nearly constant each year for the whole record and showed a small percent increase in the same years as Haylite’s increase you cannot conclude the increase was due only to the one well measured stream.
      The comparison with CO2 is obvious: We have good data showing fossil fuel emissions are larger than atmospheric increase but huge uncertainties in other much larger sources and all sinks. The referenced analysis concludes “ Therefore, the IPCC carbon cycle balance does not contain useful information that may be used to ascertain the impact of fossil fuel emissions on the carbon cycle or on the climate system.”
      In my words, the human addition to CO2 is lost in the natural CO2 cycle noise and its effect on global temperature is undetectable. The IPCC’s contention that all recent increases are human caused is indefensible. Reducing human emissions is all pain no gain.

  6. Climate change is the Left’s pagan religion.
    To expect them to see their own illogic defies rationality.

    This situation is exactly what Michael Crichton wrote about as why politicized science is so dangerous. It gets co-opted by those with a political agenda to rationalize anything they see necessary — from eugenics forced sterilizations to death camps to hyper expensive electricity to bring about socialism.

    And Donald J Trump is standing in their way on their march to One World Socialism. So of course they accuse him of being responsible for every bad thing that can happen.

  7. Is this what comes of doing an internship at Mad magazine as a stepping stone to becoming a journalist? Praise be to Buddha for the internet; at least there we can find some news … eventually … that’s not too slanted.

    • nah they are the three girls running around flapping their arms acting like they are possessed.
      Simon on the other hand is running about flapping his arms Shrieking and is possessed.
      maybe an exorcism is in order

      michael

  8. Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.

    The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

  9. Here is an answer to media outbursts:

    S. Jeevananda Reddy, “Role of Climate Change on Recent Weather Disasters”, Acta Scientific Agricilture 2.4(2018): 22-29

    Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy

    • The wind shear the models did not foresee ripped the south eye wall storms off to the northeast.

      Upper level wind shear is a tropical storm’s kryptonite. It kills it, like Superman.

      • “Upper level wind shear is a tropical storm’s kryptonite. It kills it, like Superman.”

        Off topic observation: kryptonite has never killed Superman (A monster named Doomsday did, but no kryptonite was involved in his killing. Superman got better as Monty Python says). While it theoretically could kill him, in actual observation, thus far, it’s only ever weakened him for brief periods of time. He always manages to get away before suffering a fatal dose.

        ETA: to be even more pedantic, only *green* kryptonite has the ability to kill Superman. There are other colors (Red, Blue, Gold, etc) with other affects.

    • Saw on the wheezer channel that they were putting 18 crews out to greet Florence. I am reminded of the law of large numbers. If there is a non-zero probably of something happening, the more often you test for the condition, the more likely it is that you WILL find it… (eventually). When that happens, we will be barraged with wall to wall coverage of how dedicated the dead reporters were.

    • I can guarantee you that if Florence doesn’t live up to the hype, the story will be about how “it could have been much worse” and how “lucky” we were that it wasn’t (because, you know, “climate change”). AND, they’ll be a million excuses for why the “warm water” that supposedly provides the “fuel” for hurricanes took the “gas” out of this one (pun intended).

      IOW, they’ll suddenly discover that “wind shear” thing, but they’ll conveniently leave out the part about if there’s no wind shear (and the storm is much worse), it’s “climate change,” but if there is wind shear (and the storm doesn’t live up to the hype), well that’s just “weather.”

      So if bad storms don’t happen, then we just got “lucky,” but if a bad storm(s) happen, it’s “climate change,” not “bad luck,” and it’s all our fault. Got it?

  10. Following the Washington Post logic they have been complicit in climate change by killing millions of trees to produce a product that doesn’t last one day .
    Who was complicit in producing the last billion or so years worth of hurricanes. Yep mother nature the very same natural variable that do it now .

    I would like to know how many Washington Post “journalists ” have been fed leaks by FBI , CIA , and
    DOJ cry babies trying to commit treason against the President ?

    So will the next President be responsible for future Hurricanes or will a socialist agenda and tax
    be their get out jail card .
    Could it be that the Washington Post and New York Times have become so addicted to free leaker trash that Trump threatens their business model .

    • “I would like to know how many Washington Post “journalists ” have been fed leaks by FBI , CIA , and DOJ cry babies trying to commit treason against the President?”

      Probably all of them.

      Reporters, a lot of them, were also paid by the government for their assistance. We haven’t heard much about this story yet. I don’t think that will continue forever.

      It looks like the reporters and the Obama administration were on the same team and colluded on news stories.

    • Scottish Sceptic,, Burning them? BURNING THEM! What is wrong with you man,,. All that extra needless CO2! Best to just attach them to the blades of some wind Turbines. At any rate it will give the birds something soft to bump against.

      michael

    • You just made me think of a great analogy – the belief that CO2 “drives” temperature increase is akin to believing that TODAY’s neo-nazis caused Hitler’s rise to power.

  11. Why don’t they just cut to the chase – President Trump is obviously responsible for the Sun coming up every day and causing unnecessary global warming (do these people ever get up early enough to notice the temperature change dawn brings?) and every other bad thing that ever happens, anywhere, anytime and that includes the past. I don’t doubt he was personally at fault for the collapse of the Roman Empire, the Black Death and the Napoleonic wars.

    This is already the preferred news style of the BBC and Gruaniad in the U.K. and the WPO is merely racing them to the bottom of the sewer. The Trump hysteria on the BBC however is a truly astonishing spectacle that makes me worry about the sanity, or perhaps sobriety, of its editorial staff.

  12. As each day goes by with Trump we learn the depths at which these nuts will go to get back into power from the news media, DOJ, FBI, CIA, people in his own administration and now Google…it’s absolutely crazy.

  13. Is it me, or are we getting more and more of these one-line chit-chat posts, that add nothing to the debate and clog up the threads..? Climate alarmists do this on purpose, to ruin arguments and devalue threads. I saw one thread on another site with 500 posts of ‘yes I did’ ‘no you didnt’, just to break the discussion.

    Can people put a bit more thought into their posts, instead of retorting with inane nonsense…?

    R

  14. The climate change we have been experiencing is so small that it take networks of very sophisticated sensors decades to even detect it. The climate change that we have been experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind and even President Trump have no control. There is no evidence that the climate change we are experiencing has any effect on hurricanes so hence there is no evidence that any of President Trump’s actions or inactions have has any effect on hurricanes.

  15. The withdrawal from the Paris Climate accord led to the US not sending any more $Lots to poorer countries supposedly affected by anthropogenic ‘climate change’ (sic). That is all the accord required that has not been done. The US has already reduced CO2 output more than required (and more than any other country).

    So how does not sending $Lots to some other countries lead to development of hurricanes?

    Einstein was right about stupidity being infinite. But perhaps the Washington Post just believes their readership is stupid?

    • It’s even better than that… All of the Gorebal Warming since Al Gore & Jimbo Hansen invented the “science” has occurred while Democrats were President.

  16. “Yet when it comes to extreme weather, Mr. Trump is complicit. He plays down humans’ role in increasing the risks, and he continues to dismantle efforts to address those risks. It is hard to attribute any single weather event to climate change. But there is no reasonable doubt that humans are priming the Earth’s systems to produce disasters.”

    There’s considerable doubt that humans are “priming the Earth’s system to produce disasters”, given that the warming we’ve had since the LIA (not all of which is anthropogenic) hasn’t increased weather-related disasters. It’s completely plausible that a warming world will actually *reduce* the impact of weather-related disasters. And there is no “reasonable doubt” at all that rich fossil-fueled nations are much more resilient to extreme weather events than poor nations with little fossil fuel use.

    But even if you granted the premise that Trump’s policy will have negative effects down the road (perhaps by pretending that the efforts Trump is “dismantling” would actually accomplish anything useful), Florence is happening *now*, and nothing that Trump has done in his brief term in office could have a detectable influence on Florence.

  17. WaPo is a joke – Old Headline from WaPo – “World to End Tomorrow – Women and Minorities to Suffer the Most” New Headline – “World to End Tomorrow – Trump is the Reason!”

  18. So it only takes 18 months for the climate to change due to CO2???? Michael Mann LIED???? IPCC lied??

    Come on, this makes the climate change cult look like the fanatics and liars they are.

  19. So now that Florence is weakening, it will be great to see the media praise President Trump’s accordingly for the the storm’s decreasing impact.

    • I do not intend to hold my breath waiting for WaPo to even acknowledge, no less praise, any potentially positive Trump influence. I don’t look good blue.

  20. Since presidential environmental policy causes hurricanes, we now know why there were so few in the previous few years, why isn’t Obama taking credit?

  21. If Trump is complicit in Cat 2 Florence, why isn’t Obama complicit in Cat 3 Sandy? Perhaps they are giving Trump credit for reducing the strength of land falling hurricanes on the east coast.

  22. This kind of open hack-job propaganda has become the norm rather than the exception.

    The damage to journalism is probably even greater than the damage to science.
    The only positive I can find is that they pretty much announce to the world at large that they are not to be trusted.

  23. Current max wind speed is 105 mph. That was very compassionate of DJT to weaken the storm. I doubt if the WaPo will credit him for it, though.

  24. How could President Trump be complicit in climate-change disasters, such as hurricane Florence, if CO2 emissions have decreased since he has been in office? In fact, the 15.8 metric tons per person in 2017 is the lowest measured levels in 67 years. In contrast, emissions have risen in Europe. So why isn’t Europe getting the blame? Why should they get credit for signing on to the Paris agreement even though they have no intention of keeping their commitments? Is virtue signalling all that matters when it comes to climate change?

    From Investor’s Business Daily a few months ago:

    “Last year [2017], European output of CO2 rose 1.5%, while U.S. output fell 0.5%. For the record, the disaster predicted when President Trump left the Paris climate agreement and rejected draconian EPA restrictions on power plants hasn’t materialized. On the contrary, the U.S. model has been shown to be superior.”

    “The U.S. Energy Information Administration’s latest energy report notes that, from 2005 to 2017, U.S. energy related emissions of carbon dioxide plunged by 861 million metric tons, a 14% drop. … Question: Over the same period, how did the rest of the world do? Emissions rose by 21% to 6.04 billion metric tons over the 12 years, mostly due to booming economic growth in India and China, where coal-fired energy output continues to expand.”

    See more at https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/u-s-co2-levels-drop-again/

  25. Now MSNBC (and the other ABCNNBCBS mouthpieces) add their voices to the many other media outlets the past two days: As if it were coordinated somehow. /sarchasm – The gaping whole between the news media and reality.

    MSNBC: How Can ‘Climate Change Deniers’ Respond to Hurricane?
    newsbusters.org ^ | 9/12/2018 | Kyle Drennen

    Posted on 9/13/2018 at http://www.freerepublic.com 11:21:20 AM by rktman

    On her 2:00 p.m. ET hour show on Wednesday, MSNBC anchor Katy Tur predictably exploited Hurricane Florence to push the left’s climate change agenda and condemn “deniers” in the Trump administration. She brought on liberal environmental activist Bill Nye and ex-Clinton administration official Paul Bledsoe to provide even more alarmist rhetoric.

    “President Trump says FEMA is ready for Hurricane Florence, but mounting evidence suggests it could incredibly difficult to deal with this disaster if climate change deniers are on the front lines of emergency response,” Tur proclaimed at the top of the segment. She then touted a new study “echoing the findings of previous research showing climate change as the cause of warmer ocean conditions that produce fast, intensifying storms like Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria.”

    Tur fretted over the White House policy agenda:

    But where does the Trump administration stand on climate change? Well, just yesterday, President Trump rolled back Obama-era mandates blocking rogue methane leaks from and oil and gas wells. Last month, the EPA weakened a rule limiting carbon dioxide pollution from coal-fired power plants. And in July, the agency reduced regulations capping greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles. These rules were all part of Obama’s three-part strategy for combating climate change.

    The transcript continues at the link above.

  26. I just mashed my finger with a hammer. Trump is complicit.

    A bee stung my dog. Trump is complicit.

    The wind is starting to pick up a bit. Trump is complicit.

    I have an upset stomach. Trump is complicit.

    Whatever is wrong, Trump … .

    Let’s just get right down to the simplest of all possible claims, by designating “human-caused climate change” by a new name — Trump-caused climate change. In this way, nobody has to defend the greenhouse effect anymore, because the issue has totally shifted perspectives from a magical molecule to an evil wizard.

    Think of the beauty of it — now climate “science” can metamorphose fully to POLITICAL “science”. Only ONE human causes climate change, and that human is Trump. It makes things so much easier.

  27. “Washington Post: President Trump “is complicit” in Hurricane Florence Because Climate Change”

    A statement like this makes perfect sense, considering how little globalwarmists specifically, and liberals in general, know about history. They act as though hurricanes never happened before ‘global warming’. Of course, these are the same people who see Joseph Stalin as a hero who created the perfect Worker’s Paradise.

  28. Ain’t that interesting!?

    Turns out that while researching genealogy, I lost a couple great great etc. Aunts during those trials.

    A third GGGGGGGAunt was acquitted and released.

    Why?
    She challenged the legality of Rev. Samuel Parris’s use of “spiritual” visions and evidence.
    With the Reverend daughter’s testimony about visions, dreams and whatnot discarded, the witch trial case collapsed.
    Unfortunately, the Rev. Samuel Parris’s fervor combined with his child’s visions and dreams regarding Rebecca Nurse and Mary Eastey were allowed during the Reverend’s rush to convict and terminate.

    The simile to CO₂ caused climate change and the Washington Post’s hand waving is very apt.
    1) Discard arbitrary adjustments
    2) Discard modeled stuff
    3) Discard estimates and assumptions
    4) Discard corrected or infilled temperatures from distant temperature stations

    And the Washington Post article is exactly like crusading Rev. Samuel Parris’s witch hunt; all emoting religious cause coupled with a thirst for blood. Without a mote of merit to their claims.

  29. “Yet when it comes to extreme weather, Mr. Trump is complicit. ” That is like saying that a Climate Scientist tracked the weather between January 2009 to 2017 and that sunny days were more prevalent during that 8 years so Trump is responsible for the excessive rainfall in the mid-Atlantic this summer. And they wonder why their subscriptions are down and people are tuning out?

  30. Hurricane Florence continues to weaken, down to 105MPH, might get down to 95-100 when it come onto land.

    3:00 PM EDT Thu Sep 13
    Location: 33.6°N 76.1°W
    Moving: WNW at 10 mph
    Min pressure: 955 mb
    Max sustained: 105 mph

    https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/

    The Compost is once again a babbling newspaper.

  31. Glad you picked up the story Eric. I am wondering if you saw where I posted it on Dr. Spencer’s post the other day?
    This crap from the leftist media is totally out of hand and over the top.

  32. Re photo: But coal is dead, right? Maybe nyet…

    SUEK Sets Longwall Record at Yalevsky Mine

    COAL AGE, September 13, 2018

    “The “hero of Kuzbass,” Yevgeny Kosmin, and his brigade set another record for monthly coal production record at the Yalevsky mine, according to the Siberian Coal & Energy Co. (SUEK). The brigade produced 1.627 million metric tons (mt) of coal in August, the highest monthly underground coal production figure for Russia and the world.”

  33. The current political decorum consists of people covering their ears screaming at the top of their lungs.
    Lying then feigned apologies to feed click bait cash registers .
    Now we learn Google is an internment camp for one tribe .
    This is not going to end well .
    Shut it off and the world looks a lot better because most people just want to get along .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *