The Guardian: Only “Radical” Climate Action Will Save Us from a Bleak Future of Watching Game of Thrones Reruns

“Daenerys Targaryen with Dragon-Emilia Clarke” by Uploaded by TAnthony.

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

The coffee machine is running hot in Guardian Climate HQ.

The heat is on over the climate crisis. Only radical measures will work

Gaia Vince
Sun 19 May 2019 01.00 AEST

Drowned cities; stagnant seas; intolerable heatwaves; entire nations uninhabitable… and more than 11 billion humans. A four-degree-warmer world is the stuff of nightmares and yet that’s where we’re heading in just decades.

The good news is that humans won’t become extinct – the species can survive with just a few hundred individuals; the bad news is, we risk great loss of life and perhaps the end of our civilisations. Many of the places where people live and grow food will no longer be suitable for either. Higher sea levels will make today’s low-lying islands and many coastal regions, where nearly half the global population live, uninhabitable, generating an estimated 2 billion refugees by 2100. Bangladesh alone will lose one-third of its land area, including its main breadbasket.

Rockström doesn’t like our chances. “It’s difficult to see how we could accommodate a billion people or even half of that,” he says. “There will be a rich minority of people who survive with modern lifestyles, no doubt, but it will be a turbulent, conflict-ridden world.”

Others are more sanguine. “I don’t think that humans as a species or even industrial civilisation is seriously threatened,” says Ken Caldeira, climatologist at the Carnegie Institution for Science in California. “People live in Houston, Miami and Atlanta because they live in air conditioning through the hot summers. If people are rich enough to air-condition their lives, they can watch whatever is the successor to Game of Thrones on TV, as the natural world decays around them,” he says. But he points out that while richer people risk a loss to their quality of life, the poorer risk their actual lives.

Read more:

Good old Ken Caldeira.

I must say this climate communique is a little more garbled than the Guardian’s usual efforts, but I think we get the idea – if we don’t mend our wicked ways we might need to spend more time indoors basking in air conditioned comfort while the house robot weeds the garden. Or something like that.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 20, 2019 10:28 pm

This nonsense only verifies my thesis.
A growing proportion of the population realise that the entire CAGW meme is nothing but wacky balderdash. From beginning to end, it is fantasy, from the ‘warming’ that is actually cooling, through the idiotic hypothesis of a ‘greenhouse effect’, through the notion that human activities can alter the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, to the histrionics about sea levels, is simply make-believe.
The remainder of the population is not only stupid, but ignorant, and gullible as well.

Reply to  Karabar
May 21, 2019 12:12 am

“it is fantasy, from the ‘warming’ that is actually cooling, through the idiotic hypothesis of a ‘greenhouse effect’, through the notion that human activities can alter the concentration of CO2”

No one going to challenge Karabar’s crackpottery? Or is everyone in agreemement?

Reply to  Loydo
May 21, 2019 1:23 am

I agree with Loydo. Except, we might eventually need to find a way to alter the concentration of CO2 in the air. A huge amount of it has already been sequestered in the oceans and rocks. 280 ppm is dangerous, 410 ppm is nowhere near optimum. Like one day engineers might have to find a way of stopping the moon from slowly drifting away. Just a touch … not too much or … Or has that danger been dismissed?

Reply to  Martin Clark
May 21, 2019 6:47 am

280 ppm CO2 is “dangerous”?


That is practically the minimum at which vegetation can grow at all.

Given that during the same timeframe that CO2 concentration grew from 280 ppm to 410 ppm also coincided with the greatest human population boom in the history of our species, and not only grew the population but provided the highest standard of living and food security in the life of our species .. it seems pretty clear that more CO2 is better than less CO2 .. at least t a point that is vastly higher than 410 ppm.

Most of it ends up in the ocean anyway, where it gets taken up by the food chain and eventually sinks to the bottom where it becomes limestone, a terrifically useful product to human civilization.

Reply to  Duane
May 21, 2019 12:31 pm

Duane, you have the answer to your question, but failed to grasp it. 280 ppm CO2 is dangerous BECAUSE it is, “practically the minimum at which vegetation can grow at all.”

It is dangerously LOW.

Reply to  Duane
May 21, 2019 1:15 pm

Read what he said again.

280 ppm CO2 is dangerously LOW.

Reply to  Duane
May 21, 2019 2:01 pm

280 PPM is VERY dangerous!! Once the glaciation resumes, the ocean cool and pull CO2 out of the air dropping from 280 to 150 is not unthinkable. In fact we dropped to 170-180 during the last glacial phase. Way too close for my liking.

I feel much better with a bigger buffer before the next glaciation. Somewhere north of 400 and hopefully 500 PPM. We’ve only got a century according to some (David Dilley) so let’s get on with it. More CO2!!

John Endicott
Reply to  Duane
May 22, 2019 11:26 am

280 ppm CO2 is “dangerous”?


Yes, seriously. as Others have pointed out he’s calling 280 out as TOO LOW which should have been obvious from the second half of his sentence “410 ppm is nowhere near optimum”: if 410 is less than optimum, than clearly he is not calling 280 dangerously high as you seem to have mistakenly assumed.

Reply to  Loydo
May 21, 2019 2:28 am

Loydo, surely youv’e realised by now that WUWT is a place where the gullibles don’t live?
yes warming WAS actually a “hiatus” to use the warmists eventual admission when they couldnt fake heating after being exposed.
greenhouses are closed environments our atmosphere isn’t dust comes in from space and we leak atmosphere out
we can affect local climate UHI or real pollutants
but globally to the degree claimed?

Reply to  Loydo
May 21, 2019 5:41 am

Agree 100%. But thanks for asking. Is your mom aware you snuck out of the basement?

Reply to  Loydo
May 21, 2019 6:03 am

One crackpot whining about another crackpot.
The irony is rich in here.

R Shearer
Reply to  Loydo
May 21, 2019 6:28 am

Seriously?! Karabar makes a lot more sense than you Loydodo.

Bill Powers
Reply to  Loydo
May 21, 2019 9:38 am

Loydo. as an apparent acolyte it would be your job to cross swords with the atheist challenging your “Man is destroying the planet and we must all repent by eschewing fossil fuels” church of the New Environmental Movement. And please spare us all the recitation of your beads that your High Priests the Climate Scientists all agree and that their consensus is supported by a High Council of Druids Peer Review process that blocks all heresies and allows only the truth to be redistributed to the great unwashed. So Say Us ALL.

The only thing you really need to understand is that heretics like Karabar exists in rebellion to your faith based religion that your Druids are making every effort to install as the one true, One World Government Religion.

Reply to  Loydo
May 21, 2019 10:10 am

No one going to challenge Karabar’s crackpottery? Or is everyone in agreemement?

Well, YOU didn’t. I would assume because all your arguments boil down to variations of ‘there’s a concensus’ and ‘the science is settled’, which even you know doesn’t impress anyone but the other Climate Faithful.

As for what Karabar said, I agree with some of it and disagree with the rest.

“from the ‘warming’ that is actually cooling,”
Self evident. The data manipulations have reached epic portions, and it isn’t being to WARM that is tormenting the farmers this year. Or last year.
“through the idiotic hypothesis of a ‘greenhouse effect’,”
Nothing idiotic about the hypothesis, though it is a poor name for the effect. It does explain the apparent disagreement between what the temperature on a planet without an atmosphere should be and what we actually have. But there ARE a lot of unanswered questions. And it might be wrong. It’s at the same point Einstein’s theory of relativity was at before proof of gravitational lensing was first seen.
“through the notion that human activities can alter the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere,”
We know roughly how much CO2 human civilization releases each year. We know how much CO2 it would take to rise the amount in the atmosphere by 1ppm. And we’re releasing almost twice what it would take to get the rise we’re seeing. So it’s reasonable to assume humanity is causing the rise. But we also know that there’s a LOT more Co2 in the ocean then the atmosphere, and in a naturally warming world it would be outgasing and should cause a similar rise. So maybe ALL the CO2 released by humans would be being sequestered and not just half if it wasn’t already warming. Again, we don’t have enough data to prove it one way or the other.
“to the histrionics about sea levels”
No argument here, everything written by the Climate Cultists about sea level rise is pure histrionics. Even if we got all the warming they claim we will (and we won’t) it would take centuries to see the kind of sea level rise they are predicting. They act like the sea will come rushing into our cities and island will disappear under the waves any day now. It’s pure nonsense.

And I’ll just add to all this that their predictions for how much warming is coming are becoming farcical. The predictions in the papers and TV keep going up, from 3 to 4 to 6 degrees, while the amount that is deemed ‘dangerous’ and can’t be passed (in other words, the amount they actually think we might get) keeps dropping, from 3 to 2 to 1.5. So before you write all this off as Crackpottery, maybe you need to find some definite proof. Because name calling really doesn’t cut it here, even for those of us who accept some of your ‘Science’.


Reply to  Loydo
May 21, 2019 2:41 pm

Exactly what is your comment supposed to achieve?

* Karabar accurately defines what the alarmists pass off as science if balderdash.
* Many of the unadjusted temperature stations outside of urban areas do show cooling long term.
* The “greenhouse” effect is an inaccurate portrayal of H₂O, CO₂, methane and other gases that interact with infrared radiation.
* Human CO₂ emissions are approximately 4% of the atmosphere [CO2]. They are a very minor influence.

Meanwhile, loydo starts with an ad hominem against Karabar without providing a single bit of evidence and then demands to know site commenter compliance?

Pathetic loydo.

Michael H Anderson
Reply to  Loydo
May 21, 2019 4:32 pm

Challenge this, troll:

Reply to  Michael H Anderson
May 21, 2019 10:04 pm

Repeatedly refuted:

No thanks I’m not hungry.

No one thinks it necessary to call out Karabar’s lunacy, but me pointing it out causes a pile-on. I guess because that is what Mr Watts is encouraging here.

Steve O
Reply to  Loydo
May 22, 2019 9:28 am

It’s worth pointing out Karabar’s views are far, far outside the mainstream skeptics’ general positions. But it’s not like alarmists don’t have people on the fringes as well.

Most people accept a long term warming trend, some of which is attributable to human emissions of CO2. There is mostly agreement on the direct impact, but great disagreement on the multipler effect of forcings. There are disagreements on the reliability of the data, and skeptics generally believe too much credence is given to faulty models. We don’t know as much as what many alarmists imply. Warming is not as dangerous as is advertised. Current trends are not abnormal. Groups with vested interests have adopted the issue to advance their own agendas. Huge expenditures are not justified based on what we know, and in any case, most of the proposals are simply not justified based on the economics even if you did beleive all the alarmist propoganda.

D. Cohen
Reply to  Loydo
May 22, 2019 1:30 am

The Australian swing voters realized that the proposed cure is worse than the supposed disease.
In general, the assumption that global warming is, on balance, “bad” is hard to justify.

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  Karabar
May 21, 2019 1:02 am

Now that’s a denier worthy of the title.

Reply to  Karabar
May 21, 2019 12:41 pm

I am of the opinion that at least 75% of American’s couldn’t care less about anything as long as they internet. Nuclear war? No problem. No internet, holy crud, it’s the end of life as we know it. Global Ebola outbreak? So what, do I still get a phone signal?

Reply to  Karabar
May 21, 2019 2:43 pm

You just gotta read this guy’s wishful thinking:

‘Greenhouse model is incorrect but climate problem remains’, by Sjaak Uitterdijk

comment image?w=803&ssl=1

Reply to  Karabar
May 21, 2019 3:44 pm

Right on Karabar. The first paragraph is so hyper that anyone reading it will wonder what drugs the guy was on. There have been enough kids, even in our worst schools that have asked about where coal comes from and read about it would know that 10 ft thick beds of dead plants turned to coal meant there had to be a lotta, lotta, plants. Why would that be bad?

Most people who can balance a check book, or at least keep the credit card under control, can understand that the weather isn’t all that extreme, the warmth is slight at best, Miami is still above water. The climate cultists have put out so much extreme propaganda that it just seems silly. Major propagandists such as Mark, Engels, Bernay, and Lenin that people had to be fed the propaganda in small, believable amounts. when they got in power then they could call out the troops.

Joel O'Bryan
May 20, 2019 10:54 pm

Volume level 11 hype. Yawn.

These millennial “jornalists” are so boring and trite about ordinary weather they can’t even think their way past the most recent TV episode they watched. Sad.

She even had to change her first name to “Gaia” to sound interesting. The word “banal” came to mind when I saw that. I wonder if she even knows what the word means?

Her “bio”:
“I am a journalist, broadcaster and author specialising in science, the environment and social issues. I travelled the world meeting the people, plants and animals that make up our unique living planet.

This is a uniquely critical time in our planet’s history, in which climate change, globalisation, communications technology and increasing human population are changing our world as never before.

So she’s an author “author specialising in science…” Awww… geee… isn’t that cute. And she’s even “met plants!” Yes, a true Gaia if there ever were.
Not a “scientist who specializes in writing” though. Then she might be qualified.

As I have commented here at WUWT before, we all like to think we live in extra-ordinary times. Because then to think these times are extra-ordinary, means by extension our living and managing through them makes our otherwise dull, “banal” lives also extraordinary, by extension.

We all want to be extraordinary. The reality though is far different of course.
Does she really think this time is less stressful than WW2 when her country and cities were getting bombed everyday by Nazis at the doorstep and thousands of civilains were being maimed by those bombs?
Or when millions of men from the UK were being slaughtered in the trenches of France and Belgium in 1914-1918?
Or when the industrial revolution was hitting Britain and making 2 classes, the rich of London and the poor street urchins of a Charles Dickens story?
And so forth.

Ms Gaia is far from from extraordinary though, both in her perspective and in her writings. Hackneyed and stale also come to mind.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
May 20, 2019 11:55 pm

I meant “more stressful” not “less stressful”. I’m and still missing “edit comment”. (sigh)

May 20, 2019 11:05 pm

Gaia is loved by the BBC. Enough said.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
May 21, 2019 1:36 am

… and the Royal Society, having won their once prestigious “Science” Book Prize, with a load of stories about bad weather around the planet.

Richard Patton
May 20, 2019 11:06 pm

I wish they would review their elementary Science classes. At one time the Earth had tropical climate nearly to the poles, And We haven’t had as much biodiversity since. If I recall correctly the Global mean temperature was 18C° warmer than today.

May 20, 2019 11:14 pm

Sweet do we get dragons and can I burn Kings landing down?

Reply to  LdB
May 21, 2019 12:32 am

You can burn down the Granuiard office.
Deal ?

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  LdB
May 21, 2019 1:00 am

You’ll have to buy carbon offsets first.
Then get a burn permit.
Your dragon also requires a CCS on its muzzle prior to operation.
Then you’ll need a vet certificate to get a pet license to take it out in public.

– Modern Life with Progressives.

Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
May 21, 2019 4:41 am

Hmm. What about the endangered species act? Aren’t dragons considered critically endangered? Animal cruelty could be an issue. Deliberately placing the dragon in an environment where people launch large spears at it and try to attack with a variety of weapons… where’s the Sierra Club, SPCA, the Audubon Society, etc. when you need them.

Would the ATF have to get involved since a dragon could be considered a destructive device… err, creature?

Doc Chuck
May 20, 2019 11:17 pm

You know, there was a time when it was quite often better than we could have imagined. But I say that with a certain advantage of length of years. Lately it’s apparently consistently worse than we thought and we badly need a massive overturning of what our forebears deeded us via copious blood, sweat, and tears in order to prevent a coming assured disintegration (while thus triggering a self-fulfilling one in its place). I guess that’s what passes for progress(ive) now.

Coeur de Lion
May 20, 2019 11:25 pm

And when it gets cold? Shoot a polar bear and wrap up?

May 20, 2019 11:26 pm

“generating an estimated 2 billion refugees by 2100.” Hmmm, I wonder how they got that number. Seems high. So I clicked on the link in that very sentence. That abstract says “Global mean sea level rise may dislocate hundreds of millions of people by 2100.” Hmmm. Close enough for Guardian work.

May 20, 2019 11:28 pm

“There will be a rich minority of people who survive with modern lifestyles, no doubt, but it will be a turbulent, conflict-ridden world.”

So nothing changes then.

May 20, 2019 11:36 pm

Be honest… ice age or melted Greenland, we are also doomed to GOT reruns, till the giant meteor strikes…

Reply to  griff
May 21, 2019 1:54 am

In that case (Eternal GoT reruns), it will be the sweet, sweet, meteor of death…

M Courtney
May 20, 2019 11:39 pm

The Guardian and WUWT recognise that bot Emilia Clarke and dragons are very eye-catching.

May 20, 2019 11:45 pm

Such sings of increasing levels of panic are not a sign of any climate emergency, but a feeling that their chances or getting their ideology enforced on the population is slipping away .
But this has been the reality for years , politics was always the main driver behind ‘climate doom’ for the science never was ‘settled ‘ , the Australia elections is merely the latesit in a long list of elections where ‘climate doom ‘ is either a none-issue or has turned the voters off. And once the politicians understand the voters are not buying into the game , they have no reason to support it either.
Oddly this is a situation that can be made worse by the ‘chicken little ‘ approach being taken by the greens , for people see and understand that the sky is not falling and although they may support less plastic going in the ocean , they are not going to buy into turning to clock back 300 years to the ‘good old days ‘ the greens hatred of modernity requires .
And the fun part is the green/left wing toxic mix means that far from being able to understand this , they will go for ‘the people are stupid and cannot be trusted ‘ approach they always go for and so make their already slim chances even smaller .
The madder they get the more extreme their claims , the better it is for skeptics , so it is an approach we should encourage.

May 20, 2019 11:59 pm

…LOL…..The”CLIMATE” has been “CHANGING” for 4.5 billion years…Let me know when it STOPS changing, then I’ll start worrying…

Dodgy Geezer
May 21, 2019 12:14 am

4 deg C is the temperature variation of a few degrees of latitude – that is a couple of hundred miles.

I didn’t know that people couldn’t live or grow food a couple of hundred miles south of me. Or north, if I happen to live in the Southern Hemisphere…

Reply to  Dodgy Geezer
May 21, 2019 2:06 am

And the fun part is when given a choice most people will spend their own time and money ‘chasing the sun ‘ on their holidays. Something, apart from skiing, no one does when it comes to the cold.
That is how much people ‘dislike’ warmer weather .
So it an odd sell , ‘be warned it could get warmer ‘ which is close to reality ,is a very poor pitch , hence the need for ‘climate doom’ claims . For its by ‘panicking the heard ‘they are hopping to get control over it .

May 21, 2019 12:20 am

Winter is coming. It has been snowing hard today (May 20th) in Southwestern Colorado. It is the first time since we moved here in 1991 that I have to run all heaters during the daytime, and wear a wool cloak at home this time of year.

According to the news, cold weather is not limited to our area — it’s winter again in Minnesota and other Northern Central states. I was surprised to read that hundreds of yaks died of cold this spring in Himalayas. Yaks! The Sun itself is working against the warmists’ brainless propaganda.

Reply to  Alexander Feht
May 21, 2019 4:31 am

Yes, it is still winter despite what the calendar says. I have not seen one bee busily buzzing in the apple tree next door, even on a sunny day. TOO CHILLY!!! And I’m still running the furnace late in the season, just like last year and the year before.

That SURE IS some glow bull warming, isn’t it?

May 21, 2019 12:22 am

I suspect it is actually the fear of a looming global cooling that leads to this hysteria of the alarmists!
In about four or five Years we will know more!
Let cycle 25 begin and come to its peak in about 2025/26 and we will see who are the morons!

Reply to  alacran
May 21, 2019 12:48 pm

Well, only if they can blame fossil fuels or capitalism for global cooling.

May 21, 2019 12:36 am

O course this is as usual aimed at the Western nations. What about India and China, plus S/E Asia. and Africa.

What a strange world, or half gets hotter and the other half stays just the same.

As for the rich surviving , what rubbish, if indeed there were a few billion climate refugees floating around, nowhere would be safe. Remember the French Revolution.


Ed Zuiderwijk
May 21, 2019 12:36 am

What else do you expect from someone called ‘Gaia’.

Jimmy Haigh
May 21, 2019 12:38 am

She’s insane.

May 21, 2019 12:39 am

”Many of the places where people live and grow food will no longer be suitable for either” and ”entire nations uninhabitable… and more than 11 billion humans” tends to suggest a massive increase in food productivity (possibly due to increase C02?) for the remaining arable land to support a population almost double that of today.

Paul r
May 21, 2019 12:46 am

So the future will be like mad max 2 But with electric cars.

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
May 21, 2019 12:51 am

Well now I guess it is official – you can be a completely hysterical and scientifically innumerate fool and still get a job working for today’s Gruaniad. Sad. And the BBC will always be there if you fancy
a change of scene.

Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
May 21, 2019 10:21 am

“and still”

Dude, it’s a REQUIREMENT.


Mark - Helsinki
May 21, 2019 12:55 am

skepticism of doom is increasing and belief in doom is decreasing.

its a slow creep, the alarmist screeching is having the opposite effect they are hoping for, and as this decline in belief in doom continues to grow, the screeching gets louder and turns even more people off.

When you have to resort to manipulating and exploiting an autistic child to front your doom cult, in my opinion, you have already lost, despite appearances.

Skeptical Critical mass is being reached, and this will be born out in elections around the world and it is already happening.

May 21, 2019 12:56 am

If the warmers have their way so that we no longer use carbon based fuels then electricity prices will skyrocket, putting air conditioning cost too high for many people.

Reply to  Stevek
May 21, 2019 2:00 am

That is merely the start, transport and housing etc will be massively hit, remember the idea is to return to mythic golden past of pre-industrialised society before the ‘evil planet killers ‘
The greens idea world is very dull, very grey and for most a very much grimmer life than most people live now , without any improvement for those whose lives are already this way .

Reply to  knr
May 21, 2019 9:27 am

Ah, but only for the 99%. The ‘Greens’ will get to keep their Zil limos and air-conditioned dachas in the country.

And that’s what really counts.

Reply to  Stevek
May 21, 2019 12:43 pm

I grew up in Atlanta without AC. NBD, you just adjusted your lifestyle accordingly.

Oh, and we vacationed in FL. Just as warm, but with beaches. NO ONE VACATIONED UP NORTH TO GET ‘COOL’.

Mark - Helsinki
May 21, 2019 12:57 am

The Guardian has done do much to create skepticism. Mann and co have done so much to create skepticism. NASA and NOAA have done much, while smashing their reputation at the same time.

Please continue this screeching, as it only serves to expose what these people are, liars and loons.

The Guardian editor Viner, has made an elemental mistake in advising skeptical people should be called deniers, that is a serious error on her part.

May 21, 2019 12:59 am

Does Beijing allow the distribution of a Mandarin version of the Guardian in China?
If what was printed was in any way probable, surely the solution lies not in our hands, but in those of China’s leaders.
Why does no one in the media or at the BBC acknowledge that fact, so constantly pointed out here and in similar sites?

May 21, 2019 1:00 am

Meanwhile, in the Dakotas and Nebraska over the last 2-3 days:

Reply to  4TimesAYear
May 21, 2019 1:13 am

It’s been snowing all day (May 20th!) in San Juan foothills in Colorado, 15 miles from New Mexico.

Reply to  4TimesAYear
May 21, 2019 8:53 am

Meanwhile … in California …

Winter in JUNE!

PS … the snowmelt after a year that saw Squaw Valley collect 60 FEET of snow, hasn’t even gotten started. That’s not a misprint … 60 FEET of snow this season at Squaw. Hey! Jerry Brown! You. Are. A. Liar. A. Fool. And. A. Mo.Ron. There is NO “permanent drought” in CA. You just say shit to shill your FAKE eco-hysteric politics. So. Glad. You’re. Gone.

Reply to  4TimesAYear
May 21, 2019 12:39 pm

Meanwhile … here in CA … during Jerry Brown’s “permanent drought” …

Snow, rain, “winter-like” conditions in CA … at the END OF MAY!!! After a winter that dumped 60 FEET !!! Yes … 60 FEET of snow on Squaw Valley.

Why do we listen to (and elect) Warmist Politicians? Why have we ceded total control of our lives to Warmist bureaucrats?

May 21, 2019 1:39 am

“Stagnant seas”? That can arise only with no wind, did she clear this with the wind power dept of Big Green HQ?

May 21, 2019 2:01 am

Ms Gaia Vince
“I was the news editor of the science journal Nature. I have been the opinion, analysis and features editor for the journal Nature Climate Change, which publishes the latest research in the field. And before that, I was an editor at New Scientist magazine.”
Sceance Fiction magazines , all of them

May 21, 2019 2:08 am

Catastrophic Climate Change is like Hell. It’s a fairy tale but it has staying power.

May 21, 2019 2:43 am

Katherine Hayhoe (at LSE) discusses propaganda techniques to proselytize the Alarmist Misanthropic Climate Faith
Changing the Climate Dialogue

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  brent
May 21, 2019 10:30 am

Hayhoe is a neurotic loonie. It’s not that she won’t debate, it’s that she emotionally cannot handle disagreement.

This utter dingbat will claim you are using ad hom, purely because you disagree. She’s a deranged evangelical loony who probably believes she is on a mission from god.

The emphasis is not on Evangelical, it’s on “loony”

Richard Patton
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 21, 2019 12:31 pm

How can you call her evangelical? Evangelicals preach what they feel is good news, she is preaching doom and gloom!!!!

May 21, 2019 3:31 am

So for the best part of 20 years the atmospheric CO2 levels continue to climb but the temperature fails to track it. Are we now only putting out weak and flaccid CO2? Or have they run out of historical records to cool?
Either way it’s still an epic enough failure of the CO2 supposition for me.

May 21, 2019 6:03 am

“… while the house robot weeds the garden. Or something like that.”

Not farfetched. I recently saw a highway mowing crew using an automated mowing robot (like a house robot floor vac) on a bank too steep for human operated mowers.

Bruce Cobb
May 21, 2019 6:17 am

The good news is that Ms. Gaia is a moron. The bad news is that plenty of other morons will believe the nonsense she is spouting.

Shoki Kaneda
May 21, 2019 6:32 am

I’ve got news for Rockstrom. Not only are all his assumptions absurd, “rich minority” will not mean squat if billions are starving. It would, as in all history, devolve to the strongest and best able to assert dominance. Thankfully, his apocalypse will not occur until we descend into the next glaciation.

Michael H Anderson
May 21, 2019 7:10 am

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

– H. L. Mencken, 1918

Where are the Menckens of today? Oh, right – here.

May 21, 2019 7:31 am

Just bought a small window AC unit for a small corner sun room of the house to supplement that one room. The energy rating sticker showed to expect $53 per year in energy cost but we have lower than U.S. average electricity costs so it’s a little inflated. So deluded “researchers” in California and the UK think I’m rich based on that? And no, the natural world is only decaying in your mind. Get a life!

May 21, 2019 8:08 am

How can ANYONE take seriously an article under the pen name: Gaia Vince?

What a JOKE!

Proof Positive of how make-believe this entire charade has been from the start. The Warmists have made cartoon characters of themselves. First crazed sex poodle Al (rub me there) Gore, then Bill Nye the Scienci Guy, and now Gaia Veni Vedi Veci … uggh what a complete JOKE!

May 21, 2019 8:40 am

Maybe I’m way too superficial, but just the first name, ‘Gaia”, sends up red flags.

And anybody who uses the word, “Anthropocene” gives me the first impression of an Anthropophobe.

William Astley
May 21, 2019 9:36 am

These guys are just loyal Zombies.

We already are taking ‘radical’ action to fight the fake CAGW problem. Our actions concerning climate ‘change’ cannot get any more ‘radical’.

CAGW Radical action = Destroy economy, damage environment, hurt people in developing countries, lose more jobs to China, stop the normal process of science that leads to breakthroughs, and waste billions of dollars on green stuff that does not work, to fight a fake problem.

The sudden unexpected Greenland cooling is a big deal as the most amount of warming in the last 25 years occurring in the Greenland region.

This high latitude regional warming which does not match the signature of AGW, has occurred before and is cyclic.

• Summer average temperatures for 2018 were lower than the 2008-2018 average by more than one standard deviation.

• In 2018, 26 of Greenland’s 47 largest glaciers were either stable or grew in size.
• Overall, the 47 glaciers advanced by +4.1 km² during 2018. Of the 6 largest glaciers, 4 grew while 2 retreated.
• Since 2012, ice loss has been “minor” to “modest” due to the dramatic melting slowdown.

Michael H Anderson
Reply to  William Astley
May 21, 2019 10:56 am

“We already are taking ‘radical’ action to fight the fake CAGW problem. Our actions concerning climate ‘change’ cannot get any more ‘radical’.

CAGW Radical action = Destroy economy, damage environment, hurt people in developing countries, lose more jobs to China, stop the normal process of science that leads to breakthroughs, and waste billions of dollars on green stuff that does not work, to fight a fake problem.”


Greentard says “whaddaya mean, ‘damage the environment’? We’re SAVING the environment, maaaaahhhnnn!”

Well then, you’ll want to take it up with these people:

This of course represents only a tiny fraction of the orgs dedicated to keeping MAABs (Migratory Aerial Animal Blenders) out of their backyards. Here’s a resource for finding out about more: Good one-stop shop for sharing with alarmists.

Michael Jankowski
May 21, 2019 9:56 am

“…People live in Houston, Miami and Atlanta because they live in air conditioning through the hot summers…”

People lived there before A/C as well. But why didn’t he mention LA or San Diego? Lol

Reply to  Michael Jankowski
May 21, 2019 12:42 pm

Are the Amazon warehouses that deliver the Author’s trinkets … in 48hr. … via a daisy chain of ICE vehicles, and jet airplanes … air conditioned?

May 21, 2019 12:16 pm

Expletive. Really. No. This leaves me despaired at human stupidity. Somebody please store this **** for later times so that the latter day greens may be destroyed in 2100 with verbatim preaching from the true believers of this time of madness.

Edward A. Katz
May 21, 2019 2:03 pm

No matter how dire the climate alarmist predictions are, all the evidence points to the reality that neither governments nor consumers, industries and businesses intend to do anything close to what’s supposedly needed to arrest any future warming. Poll after poll shows more people claim to be aware of or concerned about a changing climate, but just as many other surveys show very few want or intend to pay the big taxes and/or make the lifestyle changes evidently needed to combat climate change. So it’s time everyone conceded this and started or continued building the type of infrastructure that would withstand the predicted weather events that ostensibly will be plaguing us.

Steve O
Reply to  Edward A. Katz
May 22, 2019 9:31 am

Lots of people seem willing to do the hat-tip to CAGW as long as they don’t know the costs that are being proposed. As soon as you say, “Okay, now I’m going to need you to give me the keys to your car” they wake up a little bit.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
May 21, 2019 2:40 pm

The good news is that humans won’t become extinct – the species can survive with just a few hundred individuals; the bad news is, we risk great loss of life and perhaps the end of our civilisations.

And returning the planet to 18th century technology would be different how?

michael hart
May 21, 2019 10:59 pm

“…as the natural world decays around them,” he says.

As the Guardian “news paper” recently came up with Newspeak instructions for how contributors should employ language when writing about global warming, I sometimes think that bolded upper-case red lettering above is insufficient to fully convey the climate-droning we are so used to these days.

Perhaps somebody needs to invent a new font which not only conveys the deluded hysterical screaming of the warmunist, but also the ennui and earache of those on the receiving end.

Craig from Oz
May 22, 2019 3:25 am

Love that desperate attempt to appear cool by name checking Game of Thrones.

Stick to the programme! GoT hasn’t been cool for weeks. Season Eight has been so big a Hero to Zero self destruction that it can be seen from space.

If you were remotely following anything apart from your own ego you would know that GoT is now to be mocked mercilessly, not name checked.

May 23, 2019 11:16 am

Does this mean the Guardian will disappear or will the bed wetters have moved onto scary global cooling ?
I think the Guardian just says stupid stuff to get its hit numbers up . They really can’t be that retarded .

%d bloggers like this: