Elizabeth Warren Uses Coldest ‘Polar Vortex’ In Decades To Call For ‘Green New Deal’ To Fight Global Warming

From The Daily Caller

Michael Bastasch | Energy Editor

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren used the bitter cold sweeping the Midwest and Northeast to announce her full-throated support for a “Green New Deal.”

“Our children & grandchildren should grow up in a world where they can breathe the air & drink the water – and go outside without risking their lives in extreme temperatures,” the Democrat tweeted Thursday using the hashtag #PolarVortex2019.

The “polar vortex” event refers to an atmospheric phenomenon that’s brought extreme, record-breaking cold to millions of Americans, with temperatures 10 to 20 degrees Fahrenheit below zero and wind chill down in the negative 50s and 60s. It’s the coldest weather many states have seen in decades, meteorologists say.

For example, Chicago hit negative 23 degrees Fahrenheit, which is the coldest since 1985. Mount Carroll, Illinois, recorded negative 38 degrees, which, if certified, would be the coldest temperature recorded in the state.

“It’s time to protect our planet & pass a Green New Deal,” said Warren, who’s considering running for president in 2020.

U.S. Senator Warren is joined by her husband Bruce and dog Bailey as she speaks to reporters in Cambridge

U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren is joined by her husband Bruce Mann and their dog Bailey as she speaks to reporters, after announcing she has formed an exploratory committee to run for president in 2020, outside her home in Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S., Dec. 31, 2018. REUTERS/Brian Snyder

The implication is that global warming is behind the record cold that’s forced factories to shut down, schools to close and taxed natural gas supplies across the country. Some climate scientists promote this theory, but many more disagree and see little to no data to back it up.

“The bottom line is that folks claiming that cold waves are increasing in the U.S. are ignoring observations and the peer-reviewed literature that state the opposite,” University of Washington climate scientist Cliff Mass told The Daily Caller News Foundation on Tuesday.

This is the first time Warren endorsed a “Green New Deal.” The 2020 hopeful’s staff previously said she endorsed the “idea” of a “Green New Deal.” Other 2020 Democratic hopefuls, including Sens. Kamala Harris of California and Cory Booker of New Jersey endorsed the proposal.

New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the main proponent of a “Green New Deal” and is set to unveil legislative text as soon as next week. While the details are sparse, a “Green New Deal” calls for the U.S. to abandon fossil fuels within 10 years, federal job guarantees and universal health care.

That may be a hard sell as millions of Americans rely on coal and natural gas to keep the lights on while renewable energy sources, like wind and solar, provide only a fraction of energy demand amid the record cold.

Coal and natural gas provided about 75 percent of the Midwest’s electricity during the ongoing cold snap as of Thursday afternoon, according to the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, which oversees the region’s grid.

PJM Interconnection data for the Mid-Atlantic show coal and natural gas provided 68 percent of the electricity as temperatures plunged Thursday. Nuclear power also carried a major load, generating 26 percent of the region’s power.

2 1 vote
Article Rating
257 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Donald Kasper
January 31, 2019 10:04 pm

Another fact-deficient apostle of shamanism and Ghia.

Editor
Reply to  Donald Kasper
January 31, 2019 10:53 pm

She is stupid enough to not realize that she is making a public fool of herself.

NorwegianSceptic
Reply to  Sunsettommy
February 1, 2019 1:03 am

The smartest one in the picture must be the dog. Just look at the smile: ‘heh, heh – are they really buying this? I’ve buried bones with more common sense !’

Hivemind
Reply to  NorwegianSceptic
February 1, 2019 3:00 am

Look at her husband. He is completely dissociating himself from her.

Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  Hivemind
February 1, 2019 6:57 am

Just like he did in her “Have me a beer” video. Bet he didn’t count on how feisty squaws could be. 😉

Tom in Florida
Reply to  NorwegianSceptic
February 1, 2019 7:08 am

My left wing liberal sister also has a dog named Bailey. Maybe there is a correlation.

Pillage Idiot
Reply to  Tom in Florida
February 1, 2019 7:20 am

My left wing neighbors have a daughter named Bailey.

Do we have enough data points to now run a GCM?

Bryan A
Reply to  Tom in Florida
February 1, 2019 3:13 pm

2 more and you can make it wiggle it’s trunk

Robertvd
Reply to  Sunsettommy
February 1, 2019 1:50 am

The question is whether politics has improved with all those emotional women? Politics should be about ‘things’ not ‘feelings’.
https://youtu.be/xTiaZyUtKGQ
Jordan Peterson — Men and women are different

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  Robertvd
February 1, 2019 2:03 am

Don’t think the likes of very prominent politicians such as Nancy Pelosi or Angela Merkel can be described as ’emotional women’. A stupid sexist comment if ever I saw one (and I am certainly no feminist). The great Nancy P. is currently running circles around the Donald … and long may it continue 🙂

SoundsFishy
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 2:18 am

Mate thank you for your service, I really believe in space flight, but you can come back down to Earth now, space cadet.

Hivemind
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 3:00 am

Princess Pelosi, please.

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  Hivemind
February 1, 2019 3:08 am

A woman of steel. Took on George W. Bush and now taking on the Don. Many US sceptics secretly admire her toughness but cannot publicly admit it 🙂

Ve2
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 4:37 am

And I sure the good people of Minnesota will pleased she aims to drop the temperature by 3f.

Robertvd
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 5:19 am

I suppose you hate freedom Ivan.

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  Robertvd
February 1, 2019 5:23 am

Love it Robert and love the way Nancy deports herself. She is no snowflake like Hillary but one smart level-headed politically savvy cookie.

Schitzree
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 6:11 am

Nancy deports herself”

Damn it, you got me all excited for a moment there. Thought maybe she was heading for Europe after Ocasio-Cortez stole her thunder.

[Edited formatting for clarity…cause this made me laugh. -mod]

~¿~

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 7:14 am

Took on George W. Bush…”

Ivan,

Clearly you know zero about Warren’s history. You are making stuff up (lying IOW) just to troll here.

ripshin
Editor
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 1, 2019 7:45 am

Joel,

I’m fairly confident Ivan is referencing Pelosi, not Warren, in that comment.

rip

observa
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 8:14 am

Look at her entourage Ivan and then look at hubby.

Hoyt Clagwell
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 8:56 am

Ivan, I don’t think you know the difference between a strong woman and a stubborn woman. Pelosi isn’t doing what she does because of some intellectual plan to help Americans. She is simply consumed with her emotional hatred of Donald Trump, and will use every power she has to stop him from doing anything that the American people want him to do. If Trump had a bill that would cure cancer on his desk, Pelosi would stop him from signing it. She is nothing but pure emotional blind hatred. If you disagree, tell us what exactly has she has accomplished for the American people?

MarkW
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 9:07 am

As always, Ivanski see’s only what he’s paid to see.

MarkW
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 9:08 am

Robert, like all liberals, Ivanski loves the freedom provided by free money from government.
Beats working for a living.

Joz
Reply to  Robertvd
February 1, 2019 6:18 am

“You can take your toxic masculinity and your oppressive white patriarchy and just leave.”

Says every radical feminist alive today.

Matthew Drobnick
Reply to  Joz
February 1, 2019 8:09 am

At which point I ask them…
“Hmm, well what other nation would you prefer to establish citizenry?”

They inevitably say some Norwegian or Scandinavian
Nation.

To which I respond “you mean white Nations?”

Sometimes I need to ask them a follow up question:
” If this is a male patriarchy, why do men have the highest rated of war death, mental health, suicide, work related deaths, pay outrageous child support while having limited parenting time, etc..”

Usually that’s enough for them to walk away, which is what I really want because like any cancer, it’s best if it just leaves..

But then sometimes I get a really ornery Rosie supporter and I have to demonstrate how little they understand.

I ask them where non-whites (minus Asians since they never intend to include them because it destroys their narrative and they know it) stack up regarding the murder rates, abortion rates, high school drop out rates, fatherless home rates, IQ scores, income rates…

BTW they ALL track. Every metric tracks the same by race. Every. one. It paints a much clearer picture for how safe white Nations are for women. Very safe.

I was once one of these people, chanting baseless quips and trite nothings. I once thought the white man the devil. I once believed in all the fairy tales about co2….

And then a funny thing happened. I started reading. I began to listen to the people who shined light in the cracks of my feeble foundation.

It’s a matter of intelligence and it aligns perfectly with the quote regarding not being liberal at 20 no heart, still being one at 50 no brain. (PS my mom just told me last night that was probably a quote made by a conservative).

SMH.

John Endicott
Reply to  Joz
February 1, 2019 11:02 am

Matthew the no heart/no brain quote is often attributed to Winston Churchill, though the quote has many variants as to the applicable ages (20 and 30, 25 and 35, 15 and 35, etc.) and no one can cite a reliable source for him ever having said it, so it’s probably apocryphal. (much like “let them eat cake”, while variants of it had made the rounds, attached to various elites, long before Marie Antoinette came on the scene)

tty
Reply to  Joz
February 1, 2019 12:11 pm

It was actually Clemenceau who said it, but the original wording was:

“My son is 22 years old. If he had not become a Communist at 22, I would have disowned him. If he is still a Communist at 30, I will do it then.”

John Endicott
Reply to  Joz
February 1, 2019 12:23 pm

That’s certainly a similar quote but not evidence that it’s the source of the brains/heart quote.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Joz
February 1, 2019 2:18 pm

Joz February 1, 2019 at 6:18 am
“You can take your toxic masculinity and your oppressive white patriarchy and just leave.”

Says every radical feminist alive today.

I suspect that the only people complaining about “toxic” masculinity are a few of those that don’t have any balls and those who wish they didn’t.

Kenji
Reply to  Robertvd
February 1, 2019 7:30 am

When Lizzie Warren is rejected by Democrap voters … she will claim colonialist bias, and of course misogyny for her loss.

Sara
Reply to  Sunsettommy
February 1, 2019 3:24 am

She’s never done anything except make a public fool of herself. Now she’s backing AOC’s “green New Deal”, which rips off everyone except Fauxcahontas and her friends, and leaves the rest of us out in the cold.

The “green” power rate offered me is $0.099/KwH, which is 50% more than I pay now, at $0.064/KwH. And the “green” rate is variable, which means it can go UPPPP!! Yeah, like I’m really falling for scams these days, just like a tree in the forest!!

Hey, the temp this morning at zero five dark 20 is 0F. We’re having a heat wave!!!!

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  Sara
February 1, 2019 3:32 am

So, Sara, I suggest you move to Australia where you can really enjoy the record breaking temperatures of heat they are experiencing – why, you could even set up an Oz sceptic community site to explain how it is all just a natural phenomenon and there is no need to do anything but just sap it up.
https://mankindsdegradationofplanetearth.com/2019/02/01/australia-is-sweltering-through-record-breaking-heat-and-the-worst-is-yet-to-come-cnn/

R Shearer
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 5:24 am

Faux record breaking that is.

Robertvd
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 6:21 am

Fake news CNN

LdB
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 6:30 am

Oh noes I am apparently sweltering here in Australia and doomed.

Look on the bright side maybe a few of the inner green lefties will believe we are doomed and leave .. could be a silver lining.

ripshin
Editor
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 7:44 am

Ivan,

The Oz skeptic community already exists…led by the indefatigable Jo Nova:

http://joannenova.com.au/

Highly recommended.

Regards,

rip

Chris in Hervey Bay
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 7:48 am

Hey Ivan, what heat wave, take a look here, its be pissing down rain here for days, or is that stuff just steam.

http://www.bom.gov.au/products/national_radar_sat.loop.shtml

observa
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 8:39 am

Ivan apart from the BoM fiddling the books and they won’t accept record temps in the late 1880s from Glashier thermometers Oz had no white men before 1788 and we only had a reasonable Stevenson Screen rollout just after Federation around 1910, the same Pocahontas types here will lecture you ad infinitum on how aborigines have been here for 40,000 years. They suddenly get complete amnesia about that when it comes to such a pitiful Southern Hemisphere Continental temp record and get fits of the vapours with every weather event running about saying we’re all doomed.

I put the widespread malaise down to touchscreen dystopia and a false sense that they actually have their finger on the pulse of everything. They come to believe they have discovered in the plant food trace gas the thermostat to control the globe’s temperature. What about yourself there Ivan?

MarkW
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 9:11 am

As always with Ivanski, every warm blip is proof of global warming.
He also thinks history started 100 years ago.

Sara
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 11:23 am

Yeah, Ivan, I’ll take a pass on your hot days.

I already had that heat wave up here last summer when my fridge decided to shut off the freezer switch on the hottest day of the year. Switch in that had to be replaced.

I’ll stick with that I’ve already got. If I want a hot summer, we have them built in up here.

Nobogies
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 11:23 am

Take a look at the current sea surface temperature anomalies in the waters to the E and S of the Australian land mass. There you will find the prime reason for the Australian heat of their summer. Please refer to your dictionary to understand the nature of the word “anomalies”…

Joey
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 11:53 pm

Such a “reliable” source. I think I can see why people like Ivan are so dense. Open wide, Ivan…..I have some more BS to pour into your ear.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 2, 2019 12:27 am

All taken at airports!

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Sara
February 1, 2019 6:20 am

I would rather take my tax advice from Willy Nelson than climate advice from Elizabeth Warren or AOC.
EW says:
“Our children & grandchildren should grow up in a world where they can breathe the air & drink the water” – I thought they took care of the children and grandchildren problem by eliminating them before birth.

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Farmer Ch E retired
February 1, 2019 6:29 am

Love you Willie

drednicolson
Reply to  Farmer Ch E retired
February 1, 2019 8:47 am

She’s using the royal plural in that statement, methinks.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Sara
February 6, 2019 1:03 am

Sara calm. Alles wird gut.

Steve O
Reply to  Sunsettommy
February 1, 2019 4:26 am

People who realize that she’s spouting nonsense aren’t going to vote for her anyway, and she’s smart enough to realize that she’ll get more votes by pandering.

Robertvd
Reply to  Steve O
February 1, 2019 5:15 am

That’s very sad. But than nobody respects the constitution as it was written by the founding fathers. Those people were not stupid !

They did NOT want a democracy for obvious reasons.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Sunsettommy
February 1, 2019 11:48 am

She is stupid enough to not realize that she is making a public fool of herself.

She is public fool enough to realize that she is making not a [] herself.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Sunsettommy
February 1, 2019 11:57 am

And here we go omitting just one word from herself:

She is stupid enough to not realize that she is making a public fool of herself. –>

She is public fool enough to realize that she is making not a herself.

ilftpm
Reply to  Sunsettommy
February 2, 2019 7:42 pm

I spent a winter in Boston-Cambridge before Lizzy arrived. Walked to work down to 3 below, bundled up, including insulated pants. It was fun. We had a power outage for 3 days in Oregon, with temps to -3 F. Fired up the wood stove, piled into our down sleeping bags and got through it. I’ve been outdoors at -10 F with 20 mph winds= -52 F windchill, and once went outside for 10 minutes at -33 F , windless, in Colorado. My son spent 6 weeks in Fairbanks, and discovered what -42 F was, he also experienced winters in New Hampshire down to -27 F. He considered these experiences adventures.

With ff energy,

Goldrider
Reply to  Donald Kasper
February 1, 2019 6:42 am

This crazy ass is running on changing the WEATHER???

Folks, we have hit Peak Human Stupid.

Rocketscientist
Reply to  Goldrider
February 1, 2019 7:57 am

Isn’t there a saying about “If you don’t like the weather…wait 15 minutes.”
Massachusetts is no different. I went to school in Cambridge MA. During a one hour period the weather outside went from bight, partially cloudy, 65 °F to white out blizzard with 20 ft. of visibility back to bight and sunny w/o a cloud in the sky. Of course this was back in the ’70s so the climate must have evolved substantially since then.

Kenji
Reply to  Donald Kasper
February 1, 2019 7:27 am

Never let an EXTREME weather CRISIS go to waste. Close the schools, stop the mail, no beer delivery Oh My!!! The fossil fuel industrial complex is KILLING us all!!! Apologies to Mother Jones magazine, if any of my mockery matched their oh so serious publication.

Pedric
Reply to  Donald Kasper
February 1, 2019 9:02 am

Please — sha-personism. Or maybe, following His Virtueness Trudeau, sha-peopleism.

And just look at her high cheekbones! Clear evidence of antecedent value-added somethingorothers.

Both of us are
January 31, 2019 10:14 pm

Green house gases make the Earth warmer, and also colder. Without all those gases the planet would be colder, and also warmer. This is a fact, and also not a fact. Anything can be said, and also not said. So vote for Pocahontas, and also don’t vote for her.

All this is completely understandable if you are schizophrenic.

NorwegianSceptic
Reply to  Both of us are
February 1, 2019 1:05 am

We know what you mean… 🙂

HotScot
Reply to  NorwegianSceptic
February 1, 2019 2:01 am

NorwegianSceptic

Or we don’t……..

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  HotScot
February 1, 2019 9:12 am

Both are true.
There are 63 genders, so I’m sure there are 63 varieties of true and not-true.
Non-binary true?

Robertvd
Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
February 1, 2019 10:05 am

The good thing is that most of those 63 genders don’t procreate. Those genes stop there.

And why is Elizabeth Ann Herring still using Warren ? They divorced in 78 .The man in the picture is Bruce H. Mann.

John Endicott
Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
February 1, 2019 11:41 am

what’s the distribution of those 63 genders among the 57 states? 😉

John Endicott
Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
February 1, 2019 11:43 am

Robertvd, it’s not uncommon for a divorced woman to keep her ex’s name, particularly when they have children together.

Robertvd
Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
February 1, 2019 12:10 pm

John Endicott But doesn’t sound very progressive to obey to the patriarchy system.

John Endicott
Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
February 1, 2019 12:26 pm

You mean, a “progressive” is engaging in hypocrisy? who would ever have thought it possible 😉

Rich Davis
Reply to  HotScot
February 1, 2019 2:04 pm

You mean: “And we don’t.”

Schrödinger’s cat was named Bailey

Curious George
Reply to  NorwegianSceptic
February 1, 2019 7:52 am

Always pick whatever you need.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  NorwegianSceptic
February 6, 2019 12:35 am
Notanist
Reply to  Both of us are
February 1, 2019 2:57 am

If more CO2 makes it warmer AND more CO2 makes it colder, what is less CO2 supposed to do?

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  Notanist
February 1, 2019 3:05 am

Don’t be disengenuous. Polar vortex linked to warmer water in the arctic resulting in abnormal movements in the jet stream.

A C Osborn
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 3:12 am

That is an interesting Fairy Tale.
Perhaps you can point to the area the size of the current Polar Vortex over the USA that is warm in the Arctic that has displaced the cold air as I can’t find it.
Please point it out to us.

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  A C Osborn
February 1, 2019 3:14 am

Jet stream becomes a lot more ‘loopy’ allowing the frigid air to drop much further south.

Notanist
Reply to  A C Osborn
February 1, 2019 3:37 am

“Loopy” is the right word.

LdB
Reply to  A C Osborn
February 1, 2019 6:35 am

Yep the jet stream is controlled by the climate unicorn and follows in his wake as it rides around because as a science theory the idea has little evidence.

Even or favourite left rag the guardian has only said the claim has some way to go
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/30/polar-vortex-2019-usa-what-is-it-temperatures-cold-weather-climate-change-explained

For Ivan that is good enough it’s proven 🙂

Philo
Reply to  A C Osborn
February 1, 2019 9:38 am

I think Ivan’s name used to be Griff

Nobogies
Reply to  A C Osborn
February 1, 2019 11:30 am

AC…Dig in and read all you can about “Sudden Stratospheric Warming” episodes. Therein you will find the mechanism that broke apart the polar vortex and sent a piece into the central U.S. Last time it happened to any great extent was January 2014. Northern Illinois set many record lows in this outbreak…records that were set in 1966 and 1985. Those records were set following…wait for it…Sudden Stratospheric Warming episodes. CO2 didn’t have a damn thing to do with it…

Rhys
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 4:27 am

That’s why in the 70s this weather pattern was more common and we had record high sea ice.
What would it take to get you to admit you’re wrong about global warming being a threat.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 7:13 am

As I jokingly said on another thread, this is now going to be called Jet Stream Disruption. Perhaps I was more correct than I thought.

MarkW
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 9:26 am

Small problem Ivanksi, that’s a theory, it’s never been proven. Regardless as another of today’s articles demonstrates, the number of cold snaps like this has gone down in recent decades, which completely disproves your pet theory.

John Endicott
Reply to  MarkW
February 1, 2019 11:37 am

MarkW, don’t you know by now that facts don’t matter to ivanski

Matt G
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 2:08 pm

If the Polar vortex was linked to warmer water in the Arctic resulting in abnormal movements in the jet stream, then why did these occur before with a much cooler Arctic?

“For example, Chicago hit negative 23 degrees Fahrenheit, which is the coldest since 1985.”

How does a warm Arctic cause the polar vortex to meander in 1985?

Answer

The polar vortex meanders with change in the jet stream from zonal to meridional due to lower solar activity. Warming of the Arctic is the effect of this happening not the cause.

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/sidc-ssn/from:1984/to:1986

MarkW
Reply to  Notanist
February 1, 2019 9:27 am

Notanist, less CO2 also makes it colder and warmer. Often at the same time.
Right up to the point where plants die from CO2 starvation.

bonbon
Reply to  Both of us are
February 1, 2019 3:37 am

LOL! If it wasn’t so deadly serious!

observa
Reply to  Both of us are
February 1, 2019 8:52 am

Pocahontas is really funnelling Goldilocks. Not too hot, not too cold but just right and follow me with the global thermostat folks.

ResourceGuy
Reply to  Both of us are
February 1, 2019 8:54 am

Just make your indulgence payments instead

….in Wampum or Bolivars.

Admin
January 31, 2019 10:19 pm

Where does the solar and wind energy come from when the solar panels are covered in snow and the wind turbines are covered in ice? Assuming the wind is actually blowing, which it frequently doesn’t during bitterly cold winter high pressure systems?

The idea of 100% renewable energy is utterly absurd.

tonyb
Reply to  Eric Worrall
February 1, 2019 12:00 am

eric

We have just got back from Austria where exactly what you describe has happened.

we had three weeks of huge volumes of snow, very cold temperatures, no wind and very little in the way of sun. the solar panels had snow over them, some were broken and were being temoved. In many of the deep valleys where chalets are festooned with such panels, the sun goes behind the mountains in October and don’t appear again until march.

horses for courses. solar power has little place in high latitude countries and can be nothing more than an adjunct to other forms of power in many others. Until the question of battery storage is resolved-which seems a long way away- it seems difficult to imagine renewables playing a large part in the energy mix when most needed -the winter and shoulder months

tonyb

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  tonyb
February 6, 2019 1:17 am

+++

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  tonyb
February 6, 2019 1:29 am

Ever said +++ is triple A rating.

AAA Tonyb.

Alan Tomalty
Reply to  Eric Worrall
February 1, 2019 12:26 am

Above 25% penetration by solar and wind and the costs become too high. Germany is already above 26% . Denmark is at 53%. The Danes have been able to take advantage of a lot of thermal power from straw, waste, and biogas to generate 6.3% of generated electricity. However Denmark is still a net importer of electricity. The real problem in the future is that backup power will be unavailable privately. The wind and solar operators will have to assume it at some point. However their subsidies still exist and will probably even rise as the Danes push for even more wind. Along with South Australia these 3 countries have the highest electricity prices in the world. The bottom line is these prices are not going to come down anytime soon.

Hivemind
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
February 1, 2019 3:04 am

South Australia is above 50%. What this means is that if the wind doesn’t blow, then the dispatchable power is insufficient to make up the slack and you get rolling blackouts, like SA and Victoria suffered through last week. This will get worse next year because of the additional coal fired power stations due to be shut down.

Matthew Drobnick
Reply to  Hivemind
February 1, 2019 6:35 am

[Snip. Way off topic. -mod]

Roger Knights
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
February 1, 2019 1:34 pm

“However their subsidies still exist and will probably even rise as the Danes push for even more wind.”

I read that Denmark cancelled additional forays into renewables.

leitmotif
Reply to  Eric Worrall
February 1, 2019 4:23 am

Warren obviously hasn’t taken Scott Walker’s advice.

Joel O'Bryan
January 31, 2019 10:20 pm

Forrest Gump gives the reply to Senator Pocahontas’s claim that Polar Vortex is related to climate change:

January 31, 2019 10:35 pm

Forget about Global Warming and Climate Change, what the World desperately needs protection against is Elizabeth Warren and Alexandria Occasional-Cortex.

William Astley
Reply to  Nicholas William Tesdorf
February 1, 2019 9:04 am

Elizabeth Warren and Alexandria Occasional-Cortex are a US Democrat party, creation.

If you really passionately believe in something and speak loudly, then what you believe must be true.

Talk is free.

Petit_Barde
January 31, 2019 10:40 pm

Sen Warren (and also, NOAA and all the alarmists band wagon …) should read Dr Roy Spencer last article where he and Dr John Christy establish what can be interpreted as a perfect anticorrelation between “artic blast polar vortex” events in the US and global temps :

http://www.drroyspencer.com/ -> home/blog

Keitho
Editor
January 31, 2019 10:51 pm

Well as long as those kids don’t get born in Virginia where instead of breathing and drinking they may have their brains sucked out just after being born.

In the meantime Ms Warren is just another wagon jumper.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Keitho
January 31, 2019 10:55 pm

In West Virginia, that’s probably for the best.

philincalifornia
January 31, 2019 11:00 pm

The scary thing is that she may be the best the democrats have.

Oh, pardon me, I forgot about Kamala Harris.

Flight Level
January 31, 2019 11:03 pm

Beg you pardon M’aam, just for my understanding, now cold is the new deal hot and that snow is not the thing of the past, right ?

And it’s because it’s so warm everywhere that poles, namely only one of them, produce vortices at high altitude because, how funny, that new deal of cold air rises above the supposedly globally very warm atmosphere layers below.

And our instruments & weather radars have been hacked in by big oil hackers so we’d better use the numbers to play bingo while waiting for your Ponzi scheme deals to buy us safer globally cold and dry weather.

*palmface*

Serge Wright
January 31, 2019 11:05 pm

It’s an interesting theory.

Polar air masses moving south over the USA never occured prior to human CO2 emissions. Further, only the emissions from developed nations cause weather extremes. Finally, large taxes on fossil fuels and adding some wind farms and solar panels in just a few wealthy nations will miraculously restore the global weather to a perfect climate scenario where the temperature and rainfall never deviate from their long term average prior to 1980, resulting in no heat waves, cold waves droughts or floods.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Serge Wright
February 1, 2019 7:52 am

Yeah, funny how these polar air masses just happen to occur where the great ice sheets of North America were and will be again.

Rocketscientist
Reply to  Tom in Florida
February 1, 2019 8:12 am

I most cogent observation, one I will use when attempting to educate the ignorant:
“Look at the polar vortex affected areas. Look at the areas last covered by ice age glaciers….notice the similarity? Think this sort of thing has ever happened before?…long before man could have had any impact.”

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Serge Wright
February 1, 2019 8:08 am

“It’s an interesting theory.

Polar air masses moving south over the USA never occured prior to human CO2 emissions.”

My experidcen is that arctic air is pushed into the lower 48 states every year. Sometimes the cold air pushes as far south as the Gulf of Mexico.

I think one would be hard-pressed to find a year when arctic air did not intrude into the U.S.

Elizabeth Warren implies she can stop such weather. It’s so dangerous going out in extreme cold temperatures. All we need is the Green New Deal and a large increase in taxes and we can get this fixed. It’s time to fix our planet, she says.

If only she knew just how misinformed she is. The Democrats offer nothing that will help the United States. What they do offer, a delusional vision of the future and of humanity, will lead to the destruction of the United States.

John F. Hultquist
January 31, 2019 11:08 pm

go outside without risking their lives in extreme temperatures,

Regarding most of what I’d read about her ideas, I figured she was just wrong.
With this statement (above), I now have to question her mental state.
I’m older than she is, but not by a lot. I have never lived in a locality where a child, or adult, could survive the yearly temperature extremes without proper gear, whether for cold or heat.
She is from Massachusetts. I must have missed the memo on how benign the place was until humans started using Carbon-based fuels.
Good grief, lady — get a clue.

Garland Lowe
January 31, 2019 11:12 pm

Logic and Common Sense “RIP”

Bill Hunter
January 31, 2019 11:21 pm

Warren is doing a great job for skepticism! Can’t make that stuff up! Pure politics what white is black and black is white.

Fenlander
Reply to  Bill Hunter
February 1, 2019 2:07 am

“Oh, that was easy,” says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.”

Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

Gary Pearse
January 31, 2019 11:34 pm

How much of this stuff can these people take before their minds say Whoa! The Arctic blast is not proof that the planet is cooling and it is bordering on a loss of reason to say it is proof of progression of Global Warming. What possible mechanism that isn’t silly can be invoked to explain how the heat trapping CO2 of the ‘Theory’ can do this?

Surely if we are progressing rapidly into a crisis of dangerous warming that requires central command of the world economies and terrible measures that will kill a billion people or more, these Arctic blasts should be showing that their edges are being at least modestly taken off. After all the most confident part of the theory is supposed to be polar amplification of this dangerous warming. If this is the case, where is all this cold air coming from in the first place?

I’m certain that this sort of weather instills doubt in the minds of reasonable scientists and that there is a lot of anxiety among those who once were confidently pushing this stuff and today remain fairly silent. The NOAA retort to Trump and the picture of a flying kettle making steam over the Atlantic is a shocking disconnection. It’s the cold, not the snow which in much of this central area is the headline.

Gary Pearse
January 31, 2019 11:36 pm

Mod please find my reasoned, on topic kindly comment that disappeared.

Gary Pearse
January 31, 2019 11:39 pm

The only reasonable explanation for the Arctic blast taking all the evidence into consideration is that Natural Variation is the elephant in the parlor. My home was on the Canadian Prairies from the late 1930s to the end of the1960s. Most of the warming weve had since the end of the LIA had occurred by the time I was a toddler. I went through bitter cold years afterwards that scared the scientists of the day. New Years Eve/Day in Winnipeg set a record of -51°F degrees in 1968 and a few years later, pigeons that had died in flight littered streets in Edmonton, Alberta. We’ve experienced all this before in my lifetime.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
January 31, 2019 11:50 pm

And you will again!

davidmhoffer
Reply to  Gary Pearse
February 1, 2019 12:48 am

The Long Winter
Laura Ingalls Wilder (published 1940)
The winter in the book is 1880-1881

’round ’round we go…

fred250
Reply to  Gary Pearse
February 1, 2019 2:09 am

Yes you have…

comment image

Steve
February 1, 2019 12:07 am

Maybe Pocahontas needs to have another beer and chill and thank her husband for coming to his own home.

Curious George
Reply to  Steve
February 1, 2019 7:49 am

Do all Cherokees have a really great imagination?

huls
Reply to  Curious George
February 3, 2019 10:40 am

Only the 1/1024th do !

StephenP
February 1, 2019 12:14 am

According to some researchers at University Çollege London the Little Ice Age was brought about by the colonisation of America in the 15th century.
The drop in indigenous population, mainly caused by the spread of European diseases that the American First Nations had no resistance to, resulted in about 56 million hectares ‘rewilding’ and this sucked so much CO2 out of the atmosphere as to cause a drop in global temperature.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-47063973

Does Warren want a repeat of this?
You may be able to breathe the air and drink the (frozen) water, but will renewables provide enough electricity?
Maybe we can cut down the trees grown in the resulting resulted land and burn them, thus creating a type of dynamic equilibrium?

Phoenix44
Reply to  StephenP
February 1, 2019 12:56 am

That story is just garbage. It assumes a vast population for the Americas and then makes claim see largely about North America where even the highest population estimates are far too small for the effects claimed. It also ignores the reports of colonists and explorers describing the vast forests of North America.

davidmhoffer
Reply to  StephenP
February 1, 2019 1:08 am

I read through the article. It is so absurd as to defy ridicule.

The logic is that North American natives were cultivating vast swaths of land, they were wiped out by diseases brought by Europeans, the land they were cultivating returned to the wild, and the wild regrowth sucked enough CO2 out of the air to chill the earth.

That’s a lot of claims all strung together, let’s poke a hole in just one. Agriculture exists because it allows MORE plant production on the same amount of land. So if large agricultural areas were abandoned to the wild, that would mean LESS co2 being sucked out of the atmosphere, not more.

HotScot
Reply to  StephenP
February 1, 2019 2:10 am

StephenP

Tell me you didn’t actually fall for that one……..

StephenP
Reply to  HotScot
February 1, 2019 6:01 am

No I didn’t!
Maybe I should have put a /S at the end of the post.

Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 1:04 am

The wizard-in-chief of the US sceptic community – one Donald J. Trump – is completely clueless about the connection between extreme cold, as currently being experienced by the US, and climate change. If he got off his arse from watching Fox News all day and attempted to read something for a change e.g The New York Times, he might find out a bit more about this phenomenon: https://mankindsdegradationofplanetearth.com/2019/01/31/how-cold-weather-and-climate-change-are-connected-the-new-york-times/

NorwegianSceptic
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 1:21 am

Ivan:
As several others have pointed out earlier, Orwell’s 1984 was meant as a warning, not a manual.

davidmhoffer
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 1:35 am

LOL. Ivan, the article says a cold snap is not indicative of climate change. You say that Trump should read this. This thread is about Warren saying the cold snap IS indicative of climate change. Perhaps you should tell Warren to read it?

E J Zuiderwijk
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 1:44 am

I suggest, Ivan, that you come off your own backside and educate yourself in a proper library on the fundamentals of thermodynamics.

fred250
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 2:14 am

Poor Ivan,

Donald Trump has some of the world’s foremost atmospheric physicists advising him

You have ,who,

It seems that it is extremely likely that he has a FAR better grip on the facts than you will ever have. ???

“Global Waming” and DTS has gone to your head.

Seek psychiatric attention..

Gary
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 5:16 am

Ivan, some free advice: if you’re going to troll this sight, bring your A-game. Pathetic comments like this don’t make it.

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  Gary
February 1, 2019 5:21 am

Sorry what exactly is pathetic? Doing nothing to combat AGW but simply deny the scientific evidence constitutes pathetic in my view. Too much waffle on this site.

RHS
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 7:36 am

Ivan – Proof of change does not equate to proof of cause. Any findings which rely on IPCC gospel are as short sighted as the IPCC. If you look at their charter, they are only allowed to consider CO2 as the cause of change.
They are not allowed to consider land use changes, natural weather fluctuations, or other natural changes.
The IPCC has never had to prove what effect changing CO2 levels have when mixed with other atmospheric conditions. They have no study showing how 1 molecule of CO2 is more powerful than 10,000 molecules of water vapor.
For the record, anyone who has to resort to name calling, such as saying someone is a denier, especially in this case is rather lazy.
After all, we’re not denying the climate changes. rather, just questioning the appearance of science which hasn’t been proven.

MikeH
Reply to  RHS
February 1, 2019 8:55 am

RHS,
Do you have a link to the claim that the IPCC’s charter is to only look at CO2? I would like to see that on their website or published papers.

Regards..
MikeH

RHS
Reply to  RHS
February 1, 2019 10:04 am

Here go MikeH:
https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2013/01/the-ipcc-s-fatal-founding-flaw/
Specific wording:
“The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.”
If I had more time, I would have underlined or bolded:
human-induced climate change
Under this guidance/charter, they limit their investigation to CO2. IMO, we have more problems from land use and short term memory than CO2.

MikeH
Reply to  RHS
February 1, 2019 10:54 am

RHS,
Thank You for the response and the link to the article. FYI, if someone tries to click on the IPCC link inside that article you provided, “Its charter gives the game away:” The page no longer exists, it looks like the IPCC revamped their website and it’s a dead link.
BUT…
If in the web address one were to substitute the word ‘archive’ for the ‘www’ designation in the link, the page you reference on the IPCC website will appear…
Good link:
https://archive.ipcc.ch/pdf/ipcc-principles/ipcc-principles.pdf

Bad Link from article:
https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ipcc-principles/ipcc-principles.pdf

This might be good to know in the future, especially if looking for documents that seem to be no longer on the IPCC website.

Thanks again..
MikeH

huls
Reply to  RHS
February 3, 2019 11:55 am

This is what the IPCC really wants. The lead author of the IPCC report is open and frnsak about it:
“But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy… One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy any more.
Ottmar Edenhofer , UN IPCC official.”

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottmar_Edenhofer

Pat Frank
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 9:19 am

If you’d actually read this site over time, Ivan, you’d know what most here know: there is no scientific evidence — none — backing the AGW claim.

The whole AGW ball game rests on climate models, and climate models are useless (except to generate real incomes and fake careers for climate modelers). They can’t predict, verify, or validate anything about the climate.

Want peer-reviewed and published? Here

Joel Snider
Reply to  Pat Frank
February 1, 2019 12:55 pm

Oh he knows – he’s just using the Goebbels-method of constant repetition. Quite popular with Leftists.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 12:52 pm

It’s really more pathetic to claim you can get the results you want by micromanaging once species fractional contribution to a single greenhouse gas.

It’s also pathetic for you to keep repeating the same bullshit, over and over, despite being corrected over and over.

But being stuck-up, rigidly close-minded, and arrogant seems to be prerequisite warmist character trait.

Joey
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 11:57 pm

Ivan….take your pills and go to bed. You are making a fool of yourself.

observa
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 9:21 am

Loved this bit Ivan-
“Kendra Pierre-Louis has the answer in a story that explains that, while climate can affect weather extremes, climate is not weather.”

I had another brainwave for them to contemplate. While climate can affect summer autumn winter and spring climate is not seasons.

This is really deep stuff Ivan and only the chosen ones can get their head around it all.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 10:57 am

Ivan, you buy into polar amplification as part of the theory do you not? Like , its warming 3x as fast or so as the rest of the globe? Be bold, this is not a trick question.

Okay now, never mind the snow being greater because of the warming. Focus on the cold. Where in the deuce did all this exceptionally cold air come from in this scheme of things. Here is a NASA image of the Arctic Blast covering two huge continents, most of the NH. At source this air mus have been impossibly cold given global warming and Arctic amplification. Ivan, thinking must be this detailed, a talking point from the script and a handwave won’t do in a logical arguement.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Gary Pearse
February 1, 2019 10:59 am

Oops the image:

comment image

E J Zuiderwijk
February 1, 2019 1:35 am

Another politician taken in by the delusion that cold is the new warm. She really ought to read 1984.

Hivemind
Reply to  E J Zuiderwijk
February 1, 2019 3:09 am

She did. What instruction manual do you think she’s using?

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  Hivemind
February 1, 2019 9:42 pm

2 + 2 = 5 billion, we’re all RICH….Wooo Hooo!

Free stuff + more free stuff = we’re all RICH….Wooo Hooo!

malkom700
February 1, 2019 1:40 am

Excessive disinformation on climate change is evidence of how many global players are able to influence public opinion in the light of their economic interests today. Of course, this is greatly influenced by the erroneous policy of liberal circles in some areas such as population reduction, migration, etc. For this reason, they have lost their credit in an area such as climate change.

Chris Morrison
February 1, 2019 1:41 am

If this woman succeeds in her attempt to abolish winter, then my name is Chief Sitting Bull.

vukcevic
February 1, 2019 2:11 am

By the next November thid cold winter weather will be nearly forgotten. The USA electron time table is biased against the climate scepticism. If the elections were held in February not many of the candidates would be inclined to call for fossil fuels taxation on account of CAGW.

February 1, 2019 2:13 am

I (we) predicted natural global cooling would recommence by 2020-2030 in a Calgary Herald article published 1Sept2002. I stand by this prediction. One of my cynical friends said: “Allan, even if you are correct, the global warming extremists will just say that cooling is a sign of warming!” I looked at him with scorn and replied “C’mon, NOBODY IS THAT STUPID!”

Apparently, I was wrong – many millions of people ARE that stupid.

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
February 1, 2019 2:47 am

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation wrote this gem:
“The fact is, it’s climate change, or global warming, that’s behind this extreme cold.”
https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/climate-change-polar-vortex-1.4998820

NOAA is saying something similar. Yes, really! I did not believe it either until I read it – twice.

This is what happens when certain types of people get their predictions all wrong – they make up more nonsense to say they really were correct – but note that none of them actually came up with this excuse BEFORE the unexpected event happened – it always surfaces afterwards, as a rationalization of their failed prediction, like “This cold is really hot!”.

Maybe I can use this tactic if my 2002 prediction of “natural global cooling starting by 2020-2030” fails to materialize – this is quite new to me so I have to practice – if global warming resumes and even if it accelerates in the 2020’s, how about this trick: “You see, I was right all along! This warming is really cooling!”

[I suppose I must say “sarc/off] 🙂

Rod Evans
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
February 1, 2019 3:35 am

Allan, It will get much much worse as time goes by. With the now almost universally accepted projections of the Earth getting colder over the coming decade and possibly the one after that, The Warmists will steadily switch their rhetoric, they have already almost managed to drop Global Warming from their lexicon, now Climate Change has proven to be so much more flexible and useful to them. Up to now, the AGW crowd have stuck to the claim, CO2 is the climate control knob. They will project this view forward and claim, CO2 is why the world is cooling so dramatically. They will find a story line to justify their change from CO2 causes runaway warming to, CO2 causes runaway cooling. Perhaps they will claim all the extra CO2 is absorbing incoming radiation thus stopping it reaching the earth’s surface. Whatever they conjure up, the outcome will always be, we must do all we can to stop CO2.
Why are they so fixated? It’s because they are determined to stop Energy availability and thus stop growth.

Reply to  Rod Evans
February 1, 2019 8:08 am

Thank you Rod. I also seriously question the motives of the entire cabal of socialists, Greens, global warming alarmists (aka warmists) etc. Their history is horrific and reprehensible.

It is clearly NOT about the environment or the well-being of humanity – almost everything they have done is anti-human AND anti-environmental.

In the 20th Century, socialists Stalin, Hitler and Mao caused the deaths of over 200 million people, mostly their own citizens. Lesser killers like Pol Pot and the many tin-pot dictators of South America and Africa killed and destroyed the lives of many more.

Modern Green Death probably started with the 1972-2002 effective ban of DDT, which caused global deaths from malaria to increase from about 1 million to almost two million per year. Most of these deaths were children under five in sub-Saharan Africa – just babies for Christ’s sake!

Warmists can take credit for the food-for-fuels fiasco, the clear-cutting of the rainforest to grow sugar cane for ethanol and palm oil for biodiesel, the rapid draining of the vital Ogallala aquifer for corn ethanol and biodiesel, bird-and-bat-chopping wind turbines, runaway energy costs and reduced grid reliability, increased winter mortality and similar social and environmental disasters.

The number of Excess Winter Deaths and shattered lives caused by runaway energy costs in the developed world and lack of access to modern energy in the developing world probably exceeds the tens of millions of malaria deaths caused by the DDT ban.

The best objective measure of scientific competence is the ability to predict. Note that every very-scary prediction by the warmists over past decades has FAILED to materialize. Nobody should believe anyone who has a PERFECTLY NEGATIVE PREDICTIVE TRACK RECORD.

Read Dr. Patrick Moore’s essay, “Hard Choices for the Environmental Movement”, written in 1994, especially “The Rise of Eco-Extremism”
http://ecosense.me/2012/12/30/key-environmental-issues-4/

Patrick observed that Eco-extremism is the new “false-front” for political Marxists, who were discredited after the fall of the Soviet Union circa 1990 and took over the Green movement to further their political objectives. I have corresponded with Patrick on this essay and we both agree that he “nailed it”.

Regards, Allan

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  Rod Evans
February 1, 2019 8:51 am

Rod, not so much stop energy availability and growth, but CONTROL it. It is via control over continuing use of a product or process that bureaucrats obtain $trillions to fund their larger, hidden agendas.

ChrisDinBristol
February 1, 2019 2:21 am

If they had actually predicted this then the claim might have some credibiity. However, didn’t they predict the opposite (warm winters & less snow)? So now warmer air = more snow and warmer arctic = colder winters, eh? Post-hoc-post facto-rationalisation perchance? At the very least a Big Red Flag . . . cc

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  ChrisDinBristol
February 1, 2019 2:23 am
ChrisDinBristol
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 2:32 am

Taliking of ‘reading’, you clearly didn’t read what I posted. Oh, and by the way, that nyt article again claimed ‘growing evidence’ without actually providing any (see Roy Spencer’s post linked to in previous comments). I think they mean that there have been a couple of (speculative) papers claiming this, which, of course, proves it.

ChrisDinBristol
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 2:36 am

. . . and, of course, the nyt is a completely reliable source. Did they predict colder winters and more snow before this decade (apparently one of the snowiest on record – not that it’s a very long record)?

ChrisDinBristol
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 5:25 am

Hmmm.. . no answer, though you’ve commented below. . .
Thought so.

MikeH
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 8:41 am

Ivan, to quote you, “Read and learn”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/02/01/if-the-polar-vortex-is-due-to-global-warming-why-are-u-s-cold-waves-decreasing/

Maybe you should lookup some of Dr. Spencer’s history on his work with measuring the climate, I think he has a leg to stand on…

Europefirst
February 1, 2019 3:38 am

Reading all your comments about 21 people dying makes me very happy i am not an american idiot.
If this had been a mass killing, you would all scream about going to war
But it is climate related and you want to continue polluting the earth, so good luck over there.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Europefirst
February 1, 2019 1:48 pm

” very happy i am not an american idiot. … it is climate related and you want to continue polluting the earth, …”

U.S. emissions are flat, unlike those of the developing world.

Joe Civis
Reply to  Europefirst
February 1, 2019 7:47 pm

well you may not be an American but you surely are an idiot!

Cheers!

Joe

drednicolson
Reply to  Europefirst
February 2, 2019 4:56 am

Mocking the alleged lack of intelligence in Americans is so last decade.

Why don’t you go lecture China, India, etc about polluting the earth, if you care so much about it?

bonbon
February 1, 2019 4:05 am

Someone got to Elizabeth and Ocasio-Cortez
forcing them to make Sophie’s Choice.
Same with Bernie.
I wonder who forced this Sophists Choice?

A green new deal means mass depopulation, to save the population.

So it is not just snow is black or any shade of grey depending on the cost,
as Lord Bertrand Russell wrote, or cold is warm, but a pervasive hatred of humanity,
as Lord Russell expressed volubly :
“I hate the world and almost all the people in it. . . . I hate the planet and the human race. I am ashamed to belong to such a species,” wrote Russell to Colette (Lady Constance Malleson) in 1916, expressing the view he sought to propagate.

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  bonbon
February 1, 2019 4:24 am

What does a pervasive hatred of humanity have to do with depopulation? What is the connection here?

Many commentators agree there should be less people in this planet from a sustainability perspective. I agree. It doesn’t mean that I hate humanity. It just means that people in sub-Saharan Africa, the Philippines etc. should be having 2 rather than 6 children for example. Europe also doing well in depopulation – people just naturally wanting to have either less or no children. Doesn’t mean they “hate humanity”

Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 4:45 am

“What does a pervasive hatred of humanity have to do with depopulation? What is the connection here?”

Millions of abortions a year?

Andrew

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  Bad Andrew
February 1, 2019 5:14 am

Why are abortions a hatred of humanity? Thank god women choose to have them. And there should be free government-subsidised contraception all over the world.

R Shearer
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 5:25 am

[Snip. Unnecessary. -mod]

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  R Shearer
February 1, 2019 5:30 am

Now, now life isn’t that bad is it? You may want to kill thoosands by denying AGW but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be on this planet. Free speech after all.

Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 5:31 am

“Why are abortions a hatred of humanity?”

Because they kill a little human being?

Andrew

malkom700
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 6:15 am

Free tablets for everyone on earth, this is the only humane and necessary solution.

LdB
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 6:24 am

There it is the everyone else should pay the classic socialist left catch cry.

So the person having the sex has no responsibility?

We could go the other extreme how about you need a license to have children … watch all the socialist lefties squirm because it means you have to have the financial capacity to afford a child.

pigs_in_space
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 6:45 am

A tiny problem in practice rather than preach Ivan.
It’s all been done before.
What da ya expect?

You seem to be unaware free government-subsidising anything usually ended up in long visits to a Gulag, or some place like Auschwitz in the past, to find a top performing. government subsidised solution.
That was based on well subsidised experiments in places like California using forced sterilisation for those “not fit to have kids”…
Are you aware it spawned monsters like Mengele?

If that wasn’t enough, that didn’t work, the USSR performed such a radical policy of abortion come the 80s it became state sponsored abortion.
Sadly that experiment was a dreadful failure too.
The reason why Russia now has a fatal demographic trend, is because almost EXACTLY the numbers of abortions performed (millions) is the numbers Russia today would need to have a healthy balanced demographic.

You better know what you want.
Go read a little about Stanley Millgram too.

It’s like any market, once the government claims it has the right to act and interfere in a market be it peanuts or human births, you can bet your ass, the result will be catastrophically failure or worse!
Look at what happened to the Aral sea!

What S-M proved is that people will commit mass murder for precisely the reasons which you think are good.

Joz Jonlin
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 6:48 am

If you’re going to troll this site, fine, but at least present something scientific. Give us something peer reviewed to support your position, not an article from the NYT or something from CNN. If you don’t do that, you just come off as a troll living on cheetos and Mountain Dew down in your stepmom’s basement. There are a lot of highly educated scientists on this site who would likely be happy to engage you in a good faith discussion of climate science.

Personally, I won’t be engaging you further unless you have something of scientific substance to add to the discussion. Nothing else is worth my time and effort. I would suggest other people do the same.

John Endicott
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 11:48 am

Why are abortions a hatred of humanity?

Because they end human life. Every abortion is another dead human being. Why do you hate humanity so?

Joel Snider
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 12:59 pm

You may want to kill thoosands by denying AGW but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be on this planet.

I’m trying to keep count on how many have died by pretentious elites forcing eco-policies.

Watching people like you try to claim the moral high ground literally makes me puke.

[Applied blockquotes for clarity. -mod]

MarkW
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 2:34 pm

Ivanksi, global warming hasn’t killed anyone, and never will.
On the other hand Forcing renewable energy on countries is already killing 10’s of thousands every year. You never complain about that.

The tiny amount of warming that CO2 may be capable is a 100% good thing. Fewer deaths, more crops, better gardens. Nothing to worry about.

John Endicott
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 4, 2019 5:19 am

If anything, MarkW, global warming would *save* lives as cold kills far more than warm every year.

bonbon
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 6:33 am

The connection is amply explained by Dr. Schllnhuber, CBE (that’s commander of the british empire) who calculated the population with decarbonization – around 2 billion.
The intention to get rid of 5 billion people, keeping hands clean of course, is beyond hatred, exactly in line with Lord Bertrand Russell.

The question is who put Sophie’s Choice to Elizabeth and Alexandria?
In the movie a sadistic SS criminal, but now who I wonder?

Gunga Din
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 2:29 pm

Ivan Kinsman February 1, 2019 at 4:24 am
What does a pervasive hatred of humanity have to do with depopulation? What is the connection here?

Many commentators agree there should be less people in this planet from a sustainability perspective. I agree. It doesn’t mean that I hate humanity. It just means that people in sub-Saharan Africa, the Philippines etc. should be having 2 rather than 6 children for example. Europe also doing well in depopulation – people just naturally wanting to have either less or no children. Doesn’t mean they “hate humanity”

You do know that in the Avengers movie “Infinity Wars” Thanos was the bad guy?
You sound just like him.

MarkW
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
February 1, 2019 2:36 pm

There isn’t a shred of evidence that the earth is anywhere close to being overpopulated.
Why do you hate people so much Ivanski?

leowaj
February 1, 2019 4:14 am

Dog: This is my owner. Please help.

Warren’s Husband: This is my wife. Please help.

leitmotif
February 1, 2019 4:16 am

“U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren is joined by her husband Bruce Mann ……”.

Mann, Mann … ? Where have I come across that name before? Hmmm?

wilt
February 1, 2019 5:15 am

Elisabeth Warned-You?

Bruce Cobb
February 1, 2019 5:27 am

Dizzy Lizzie, like a lot of Warmunist retards, confuses and conflates actual pollution with the fake pollution, CO2.

Richard
February 1, 2019 5:35 am

Well there is some truth in this. We are the largest polluters of this fine earth and now we are paying the price, could this be karma ?

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Richard
February 1, 2019 6:52 am

Nope. And what “price” exactly is it that we’re supposedly paying?

John Endicott
Reply to  Richard
February 1, 2019 11:27 am

What is this “price” you speak of?

MarkW
Reply to  Richard
February 1, 2019 2:37 pm

What’s this pollution that you speak of?

MarkW
Reply to  Richard
February 1, 2019 2:37 pm

Who’s this “we” that you speak of?

ResourceGuy
February 1, 2019 5:45 am

It also appears to be a non-diverse Green New Deal.

Venril
February 1, 2019 5:52 am

Finishing the job Wilson and FDR started. I suppose when it gets really cold we could just burn the Constitution to warm the room, huh Liz? After you’ve shredded it, I suppose it’ll burn rather nicely.

philincalifornia
February 1, 2019 6:06 am

Seriously though, and yes I mean that, has any “scientist” or scientist proposed any non-garbage, plausible hypothesis as to how increasing CO2 has affected the polar vortex or vortices?

LdB
Reply to  philincalifornia
February 1, 2019 6:37 am

The theory is proposed but little evidence .. even the leftist guardian acknowledges that … link is up above

Kevin kilty
February 1, 2019 6:15 am

Heap magical thinking.

John the Econ
February 1, 2019 6:42 am

The Progressive War on the Middle Class continues unabated via the “Green Raw Deal”, factories closed for a few days versus permanently.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  John the Econ
February 1, 2019 8:38 am

“Green Raw Deal”

I like that description better! 🙂

Davis
February 1, 2019 6:59 am

Hey lady! It’s called “WINTER”.

George Daddis
February 1, 2019 7:28 am

In my opinion, Ms Warren finally caught on to AOC’s latest ploy.
When Cortez proposed free medical for all, she was laughed out of the arena when she couldn’t explain how it was to be funded. (“Just pay for it” was the best she could do.)

However by proclaiming our demise is only a dozen years away, they can now say it doesn’t matter what it costs; we have to DO SOMETHING.

What most folks are missing, is that the New Green Deal has the “skin” of a Climate Change effort (Part A), but the meat of DO SOMETHING it is in Part B, which is a list of all the desires of the Left including guaranteed wage, medical care and social justice, all to be defined and controlled by the Select Committee that would be formed.

So if Medical Care for all is ridiculed as a standalone, where are the same critics, including those in the Democrat Party when it is combined with their entire platform PLUS the elimination of fossil fuels?

bonbon
Reply to  George Daddis
February 1, 2019 7:53 am

You mention the skin and meat, but forgot the bones – those of 5 billion people to be eliminated by green ideology starting with the young old and ill, followed by the decarbonized able-bodied.

Greeniness is not a “leftie” “socialist” thingy – it is population reduction.

ResourceGuy
February 1, 2019 7:42 am

This new deal is not going to connect with the people and will be seen as a threat. So call it the New Green Teapot Dome Scandal or some other historical reference to scandal or policy plague.

Joel Snider
February 1, 2019 7:46 am

When stupidity and dishonesty meet.

ResourceGuy
February 1, 2019 7:48 am

Outlaw pets in the New Green Deal and let’s see how that goes over.

ResourceGuy
February 1, 2019 8:01 am

I’d wear large, dark sunglasses too if I was around this staged nonsense.

Gordon Dressler
February 1, 2019 8:42 am

Uhhhh . . . I thought that Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had trademarked the term “Green New Deal.” Does this mean she’s collecting royalties from pretenders-to-the-throne Warren, Harris and Booker?

RockyRoad
February 1, 2019 8:51 am

This woman doesn’t know the difference between cold and hot just like she can’t understand the difference between Indian and Caucassian! She definitely lives in a post-political (aka post-logical) world!

Tom Abbott
February 1, 2019 8:54 am

I see where some company (didn’t get the name) is going to be doing an advertisement promoting Windmills during the upcoming Super Bowl Feb. 3, 2019.

I have also heard a couple of news reports claiming the Super Bowl stadium in Atlanta will be powered exclusively by windmills and solar.

John Endicott
Reply to  Tom Abbott
February 1, 2019 11:15 am

I don’t know about “exclusively” but the stadium does boast 4000+ solar panels:
https://mercedesbenzstadium.com/4000-georgia-power-solar-panels-place-mercedes-benz-stadium/

John Endicott
Reply to  Tom Abbott
February 1, 2019 11:22 am
ResourceGuy
February 1, 2019 9:05 am
MarkW
February 1, 2019 9:06 am

Say what you want about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, but she is definitely dragging the entire Democrat field drastically to the left.

Joel Snider
Reply to  MarkW
February 1, 2019 10:39 am

Well, she’s just the first of a long procession of rats called out by the Pied Piper Obama.

At this point the Dims seem to be in a race to find the biggest disaster they can inflict upon the country as their presidential nominee.

And as idiotic and ridiculous as they may seem, I don’t see anything funny about them at all – because half the damned country seem to be nodding bobble-heads, who will give them their vote – just so long as they point their discrimination and bigotries in the favored direction.

MarkW
Reply to  Joel Snider
February 1, 2019 2:42 pm

Promise the people enough free stuff, and a majority will vote for you.
Paid for by the evil rich. (Usually defined as anyone who makes more than I do.)

Joel Snider
Reply to  MarkW
February 1, 2019 3:35 pm

And the first and foremost part of that is the simple playground rule of giving them someone that it’s okay to hate – that way you can take from them with impunity – property, rights – even lives.

Happens every @##$#$%!! time. And always from the proclaimed moral high ground.

Gordon Dressler
February 1, 2019 9:35 am

From the article: “While the details are sparse, a ‘Green New Deal’ calls for the U.S. to abandon fossil fuels within 10 years, . . .”

So, within 10 years, look for (1) the end of all passenger and cargo air transportation using US-based aircraft, (2) the end of all passenger and cargo transportation by US-based ocean-traveling ships, and (3) the end of all passenger and cargo transportation using US-based railroad locomotives.

Or perhaps, someone really believes any of these high energy density-storage dependent vehicles can be powered by electrical batteries within 10 years? And especially aircraft, where “fuel” mass and high instantaneous power output are critically important.

Also, say goodbye to the current SpaceX Falcon rockets and the ULA Atlas V rocket launch vehicles, which use RP-1 (a refined kerosene obtained from petroleum, a fossil fuel) as the fuel in their first stage rocket engines.

John Endicott
Reply to  Gordon Dressler
February 1, 2019 11:10 am

Not to mention the end to anything made from plastic (plastic comes from petrochemicals, IE fossil fuels) – so everyone needs to ditch those iPhone and iPads and TVs. And cloths, unless its 100% made from cotton or wool or other natural fibers. Good by polyester and nylon. time to clean out those closets.

drednicolson
Reply to  John Endicott
February 2, 2019 8:22 am

And no hydrocarbon-derived fertilizer for the cotton, or tractor-driven hay balers to feed the sheep!

And no butane-fueled little fires to light the marijuana they’ve legalized.

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  drednicolson
February 2, 2019 3:25 pm

drednicolson, that last sentence of yours might be the single thing that ends any chance of the Green New Deal coming to fruition . . . it will be “green” fighting “green”.

beng135
February 1, 2019 10:01 am

Elizabeth Warren Uses Coldest ‘Polar Vortex’ In Decades To Call For ‘Green New Deal’ To Fight Global Warming

Can an adult be that stupid?

On the outer Barcoo
Reply to  beng135
February 1, 2019 10:20 am

“Can an adult be that stupid?” Yes … next question?

John Endicott
Reply to  beng135
February 1, 2019 11:04 am

Can an adult be that stupid?

the Democrat party gives us plenty examples of adults being that stupid (and worse), so as unbelievable as it may seem, the answer is yes.

drednicolson
Reply to  beng135
February 2, 2019 8:26 am

adult? more like a dolt!

February 1, 2019 11:04 am

It is amusing to note that those who make outlandish claims that cold is hot and vice versa only have two solutions; increased taxes and increased regulation, neither of which can have the slightest effect on the weather or climate.

John Endicott
Reply to  Bill Sticker
February 1, 2019 11:19 am

Well yes and no. In theory if man’s actions are the cause of the weather or climate, then regulating those actions would have an effect. In reality, since man’s actions do not control the weather or climate what you says is true. For most sane people reality trumps theory, for leftist and alarmists theory trumps reality.

Gunga Din
Reply to  John Endicott
February 1, 2019 2:35 pm

And the rabidness enters in because Trump has played the reality card.

Gunga Din
Reply to  John Endicott
February 1, 2019 2:41 pm

(I miss the edit function. But I understand why it’s gone.)
The rabidness enters in because it is President Trump who is playing the reality card.

ResourceGuy
February 1, 2019 11:13 am

The message to the unwashed is to not look beyond the tag line and don’t think about the weak science (models) that is getting weaker. They paid good money for that tag line after all, from the brightest minds in political marketing.

TRM
February 1, 2019 11:31 am

Good thing for Pocahontas that PT Barnum (or whoever said it) may have been correct with the line “There’s a sucker born every minute”.

I’m kind of thinking that no amount of cold in reality will change their minds and agenda. We will have glaciers advancing and record cold for decades and they’ll still be blaming CO2.

We had almost 18+ years of statistically insignificant warming during a period when CO2 was increasing steadily and while a few honest scientists threw in the towel (Dr Lovelock, Dr Bates, etc) most just rationalised it and kept ignoring reality.

Would 2 decades of cold change their minds? At this point from what I’ve seen I doubt it.

John Endicott
February 1, 2019 11:33 am

“I’m gonna get me, um, a beer,”

drednicolson
Reply to  John Endicott
February 2, 2019 8:34 am

“Scratch that, a double of whiskey and Coke, hold the Coke.”

JimG1
February 1, 2019 11:49 am

Pocahontas is running for president. Possibly one of the few who might be worse than Hillary, that’s a might be. She will say or do anything to help her toward that goal. Again, the frightening thing is how many really stupid people there must be in this greatest of all countries to believe the lies being told by these left wing idiots.

John Endicott
Reply to  JimG1
February 1, 2019 12:21 pm

Her policy choices are certainly as bad as Hillary’s as is her pandering to the left, but she hasn’t done anything as bad as the various Hillary scandals (or if she did, unlike Hillary, she’s managed to keep it well hidden). for example, faking being native American pales in comparison to the email server or whitewater.

JimG1
Reply to  John Endicott
February 1, 2019 12:35 pm

Or the money grubbing Clinton Cartel which approved selling 20% of our uranium to Russia among other things. You are right. Hillary is worse. But how do you rank these shills? Disgusting, disgustinger, and disgustingest?

MarkW
Reply to  John Endicott
February 1, 2019 2:44 pm

She’s never been in a position to pull of the corruption that Hillary is known for.

bonbon
Reply to  John Endicott
February 2, 2019 5:31 am

And Hillary’s infamous “We came , we saw, we murdered” ,when Obama obliged the WH to watch live the Qaddafi overthrow. Hillary is responsible for the Benghazi deaths and the Med. Migrant crisis and had the incredible chutzpah to advise Europe now to slow migration down!
Warren is nowhere near that – yet.

TRM
Reply to  JimG1
February 1, 2019 4:39 pm

You raise an interesting point. Which country has the fewest percentage buying into the “CO2 controls the climate meme?”. It would be an interesting way to measure a societies critical thinking capacity.

I’m not sure if it is dishonesty, stupidity, greed or brainwashing via repetition. To me it would seem that the scientists are greed, the politicians could be all of the above but the vast majority of the rank and file I think have just been brainwashed by the near saturation propaganda.

ResourceGuy
February 1, 2019 12:34 pm

Ignorance on a neighborhood block near you……….with cameras.

ResourceGuy
Reply to  ResourceGuy
February 1, 2019 12:42 pm

It’s really not so different from the red scare teleplay episode in the original Twilight Zone series.

Robber
February 1, 2019 1:14 pm

I have a solution for green deal devotees like Elizabeth Warren and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who have suddenly developed a phobia about extreme cold – move to Mexico. Temperatures in Mexico City seem ideal – 5-22 degrees C in January, 12-24 C in July. But do it now, before The Don builds the wall.

Roger Knights
February 1, 2019 1:57 pm

How will reducing American emissions abate global warming when the developing world’s emissions rising trend dwarfs it?

Svend Ferdinandsen
February 1, 2019 2:05 pm

Words are magic. Especially Climate Change. It can explain everything. Cold, warm, rain, storms, its all climate change and peoble are convinced that it is because the average temperature have risen only 1 Kelvin.
Think of the temperature changes over days, months and years. And then some get obset of a small change like 1K. If 1K is enough then Illinois must have serious climate change for the moment.

Joe Civis
February 1, 2019 2:37 pm

soooooo let me get this straight… the “greenies” are afraid of the impending “climate” and the vagaries of the weather but they want to get rid of reliable energy sources and become 100% dependent on energy sources that are unreliable and 100% dependent on the weather. Guaranteed not to be available when you need them most!! Wow…… what a smart plan………. it still boggles my mind how anyone that can add 2+2 and get 4 doesn’t laugh hysterically and point at the person/persons who say such idiotic crap.

Cheers!

Joe

oh.. rant off/

Gunga Din
February 1, 2019 3:57 pm

I saw a story today where she apologized to the Cherokee Nation for having that DNA test done. She didn’t apologize for claiming she was part Cherokee. Only for the have the DNA test done that showed more Europeans Americans have a better claim to being part “Native American” than she does.
(Paving the way for her run for president. “But I said I was sorry!”)

So now she’s trying to attach herself to that Nut from New York’s “Green New Deal” to stop the Polar Vortex’s cold that Global Warming has caused.
What does she want to do?
Build a Wall around the Arctic?

Derek Colman
February 1, 2019 4:58 pm

When the ice gets a mile thick over NY they will still be blaming it on man made global warming.

John Endicott
Reply to  Derek Colman
February 4, 2019 7:24 am

Well of course they will, didn’t you ever see “the day after tomorrow” – global warming leads to ice ages.

February 1, 2019 5:10 pm

But do the Greenies, especially the young ones, realise that if we close down everything, including manufacturing, then we the country you live in, will not have the money to buy all of their electronic toys. that they love to play with.

Perhaps then the younger Greens will tell their Elder s to get lost, and go for Nuclear.

Another thought , if people of the USA vote for the likes of this lady, does that mean that they are as nutty as her. Or is it a case of saying that the party, in this case the Democrats , are not on the whole “Like her” But wait, someone must have voted for her in the first place.

MJE

Steve Reddish
Reply to  Michael
February 1, 2019 6:13 pm

I had to rush that post because dinner was calling. I did not mean to say I think there is justification for claiming polar air incursions actually happen more often, only that I can see the warmists trying to make that claim.

SR

John Endicott
Reply to  Michael
February 4, 2019 7:31 am

Sadly, there are a lot of people who vote “their” party regardless of how incompetent the candidate or how much better the “other” parties candidate. I recall discussing an upcoming presidential election with a co-worker (this was back in the 90s). Facts and policy issues made no difference to him. His family always voted Democrat and he would too. Even though he was more in agreement with the policies the Republican candidate was running on didn’t matter. He was a Democrat, and that’s who he’d vote for no matter what.

Steve Reddish
February 1, 2019 5:37 pm

Elizabeth Warren Uses Coldest ‘Polar Vortex’ In Decades To Call For ‘Green New Deal’ To Fight Global Warming

The claim was that global warming is causing polar air temperatures to rise above the historical norms.
Now, the claim is that global warming caused polar air to move down to the temperate latitudes this week.

I can see how they might try to claim polar comes south more often these days, but how can they say thatpolar air is colder than it used to be as a result of global warming?

SR

bonbon
February 2, 2019 5:24 am

I wonder what Athens, Greece thinks of their former Fin. Min. , very fake, Varoufakis pushing the Green New Deal with Bernie and now Elizabeth and Alexandria?
Along with a very fake Bitcoin version of Keynes’ Bancor world currency that FDR blocked at the Bretton Woods 1944?

Talk about Tales from the Crypt-o-currency!

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Johann Wundersamer
February 6, 2019 2:06 am

When the Roman emperors came over the ever cloud dizzle hanging Alps.

And asked:

Who is your speaker.

WHOM SHOULD WE TALK WITH!

majestatis pluralis.

%d bloggers like this: