Climate change could end human civilization by 2050: report

Hyberbole from the New York Post

By Ebony Bowden

June 3, 2019 | 6:29pm | Updated

A harrowing new climate change report warns we may be on the way to extinction, claiming there is a “high likelihood” human civilization will come to an end by 2050 unless action is taken on greenhouse gas emissions.

The dire paper, which predicts a biblical-like scenario of devastating floods, drought, famine and a breakdown in international order, has been endorsed by the former chief of Australia’s military.

The analysis, published May 30 by Australian think tank the Breakthrough National Centre for Climate Restoration, calls for a new approach to climate change and paints a bleak picture of the world in 30 years if nothing is done to combat greenhouse emissions.

Assuming we stay on our current trajectory, emissions will lock in a 3 degree Celsius (37 degrees Fahrenheit) global warming, setting off a disastrous chain off events which the report’s authors claim will lead to “a high likelihood of human civilization coming to an end.”

According to the report’s central “2050 scenario,” one billion people will be forced to relocate from unlivable conditions while food production will become inadequate to feed the global population.

North America will suffer from devastating weather extremes including wildfires, heatwaves and drought — while other places in the world such as the Middle East and West Africa will become unlivable.

Meanwhile, 55% of the global population would be subjected to more than 20 days a year of lethal heat conditions, “beyond the threshold of human survivability.”

Read the full story here.

And even more hyperbole from Vice if you can hold your nose to go there.

And the full policy paper here, Existential climate-related security risk: A scenario approach.

HT/Alan T

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
June 4, 2019 6:11 am

How many climate scientists have publicly called out this ridiculous BS?

I’m aware of only one – Ryan Maue.

If they had any integrity they could put out a joint statement to the media, and kill it off.

joe - the non climate scientist
Reply to  Paul Matthews
June 4, 2019 7:32 am

“How many climate scientists have publicly called out this ridiculous BS?

I’m aware of only one – Ryan Maue.

If they had any integrity they could put out a joint statement to the media, and kill it off.”

That is one of the issues I have the alarmists/scientists credibility. Very few climate scientists, if any, ever call out the absurd BS

Joel Snider
Reply to  joe - the non climate scientist
June 4, 2019 11:51 am

And not one of the warmists regulars have offered even a single comment.

The end of the world, apparently, isn’t worth commenting on – they’ll wait until the argument is back about all the angels dancing on a pin.

Bryan A
Reply to  Joel Snider
June 4, 2019 2:37 pm

The original article has been altered to reflect the difference between C and F
3c – 37f has been changed to…

Assuming we stay on our current trajectory, emissions will lock in a 3 degree Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) global warming, setting off a disastrous chain off events which the report’s authors claim will lead to “a high likelihood of human civilization coming to an end.”

Reply to  Paul Matthews
June 4, 2019 9:56 am

It is amazing isn’t it? This is so clearly utter nonsense, so clearly ridiculous, yet no climate scientists put their head above the parapet and call out blatantly dishonest misuse of their discipline for political purposes.

Fraud aided by those unwilling to call out fraud.

Walt D.
Reply to  Phoenix44
June 4, 2019 10:28 am

Who wants to lose their grant money, boondoggle travel, and probably their job?

Reply to  Paul Matthews
June 4, 2019 9:59 am

One of the 3 authors of this tosh – Ian Dunlop – is a member of the Club of Rome.
This cabal generated the most egregious propaganda about the future prospects for humanity, basically holding that the majority of us should be offed.
It was also the genesis of the UNFCCC and the IPCC.

So to expect Club of Rome – infiltrated organizations like the WMO and national Met societies to pooh pooh stuff the CoR elders put out is bound for disappointment.

Reply to  Mr.
June 4, 2019 10:08 am

Club of Rome, huh? Not surprised at all. It would be nice if we could just transport them all to Mars. I hear it’s lovely up there in the summer. Then we can just get on with our lives.

Bryan A
Reply to  Sara
June 4, 2019 2:20 pm

and they can discover just how much an atmosphere enriched by CO2 is really warmed by it
Post Toasty Mars with 95.32% CO2

Reply to  Sara
June 5, 2019 7:27 am

But we have been there already. Mars´s polar cap has melted. It´s climate change in every planet. And we did it, because sun doesn´t beat human. Ask cats, they know.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Mr.
June 4, 2019 10:54 am

Considering the CoR has an accuracy level approaching (but still nowhere close to) those of National Enquirer psychics…stay tuned to the inevitable NetFlix 300-part mini-series narrated by [insert name of celebrity here]…

Reply to  Mr.
June 4, 2019 8:51 pm

Granted, the Club of Rome are in the alarmist category, they do have a good point, standing by the notion that infinite growth cannot and will not continue indefinitely. This is something we do need to understand and address. I am not suggesting that we go all Thanos on the planet, wiping half the population out, but serious consideration needs to be had with regard to our natural resources.

Reply to  Icarus
June 5, 2019 6:38 am

What infinite growth?
Everywhere I look, growth is happening because we are able to [do] more with less.

Reply to  MarkW
June 5, 2019 12:17 pm

lol. Are you serious? There are limited resources. The planet can’t keep sustaining greater numbers of people. That is not the way it works. Simple science tells you this. Technology won’t save us. It will only delay the inevitable demise of the human race…But to be clear that “inevitable demise” is not going to happen in 2050 (unless we blow ourselves up).

Reply to  MarkW
June 5, 2019 6:26 pm

Icarus: “There are limited resources. The planet can’t keep sustaining greater numbers of people.”

This is a straw man argument based on hyperbole. No one is suggesting that resources are unlimited. But no one knows how much resources are in the planet. No one can say that there are not sufficient reserves to sustain growth for 100 years, 1000 years, 10,000 years or ten million years.

The planet can sustain greater numbers of people without resources necessarily being ‘unlimited’.

Reply to  Icarus
June 5, 2019 10:20 pm

Human innovation is pretty much infinite. It has lead to more efficient use of our resources creating more abundance of everything. Malthus and you are wrong about this. When quantum computing comes online innovation will explode.

Hot under the collar
Reply to  Paul Matthews
June 4, 2019 11:23 am

They would be too scared for their careers, resulting in nobody in authority to challenge this ridiculous nonsense, which then becomes the latest group think passed on by ‘scientists’, journalists, politicians, teachers and in social media (especially by young people – what young person would want to be ridiculed by their peers and ostracised on social media).

No wonder young people are growing up so depressed; instead of looking forward to the life ahead of them they are constantly being told they have no future; it’s so bad that many are even contemplating suicide.

It’s similar to medieval religions telling people that floods, droughts, famine, pestilence, illness or disability would befall them and the fault will be their own for sinning, anyone disagreeing would be flogged.

Reply to  Paul Matthews
June 4, 2019 12:32 pm

“3 degrees Celsius (37 degrees F)” ???

I don’t think so.

Bryan A
Reply to  joe
June 4, 2019 2:28 pm

I jusr re-read the article
O M G…what a hoot

must follow the same basic math principles as the Climate Change Scientists’ “Global Climate Models”

Bryan A
Reply to  joe
June 4, 2019 2:32 pm

Looks like they fixed the original article (though not before many “Concerned Citizens” (aka useful idiots) were able to see the “3 degrees Celcius (37 degrees F)” fear mongering statement
blockquote>Assuming we stay on our current trajectory, emissions will lock in a 3 degree Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) global warming, setting off a disastrous chain off events which the report’s authors claim will lead to “a high likelihood of human civilization coming to an end.”

Mayor fo Venus
Reply to  joe
June 5, 2019 8:12 pm

Joe: Someone mis-applied the temperature conversion formula: Calculate the Fahrenheit temperature: Multiply the Celsius Temp by 1.8 and add 32. Result is 37.4.

Reply to  Paul Matthews
June 4, 2019 2:19 pm

I think we would be all dead long before 2050 if the greens and the UN had their way.

Death by starvation and economic collapse because of the lack of oil, fuel and other essential energy sources as well as economic “growth” promised through the so called green economy.



Mark H
Reply to  Roger Surf
June 4, 2019 6:50 pm

They never seem to tell you that the “cure” they are proposing is much worse than the supposed “disease”.

These Club of Rome folks are hell bent (quite likely literally) on destroying modern civilisation with the idea that they will be the new God Kings, ruling over the scurrying remnants of society. If they have their way, it will lead to the death of billions of people. It’s hard to imagine the mind set of someone who would set out to kill on such a scale.

Richard Patton
Reply to  Mark H
June 4, 2019 9:17 pm

It is hard to believe, but even as far back as `95 they were saying that the optimum human population was 200 million. Of course they were going to be part of that 200 million.

David Brewer
Reply to  Richard Patton
June 5, 2019 4:57 am

Soylent green is people, man!

Reply to  Mark H
June 5, 2019 3:24 am

pol pot idi amin spring to mind
the mindset of the CoR are?…… simply pschycopaths

Reply to  ozspeaksup
June 5, 2019 6:18 am

Yes! + Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Hitler are their heroes.

Reply to  Roger Surf
June 5, 2019 6:24 am

I take it that you people are so much in denial about global warming that no amount of scientific evidence will convince you it’s happening. You can just trot towards the cliff edge uttering ‘fake news’ and other idiotic epithets every so often. You are as close to being totally irrational as any group of people on any forum I have come across…:-(

Reply to  Steppenwolf
June 5, 2019 8:09 am

Real reason to scepticism is lack of evidence.

There is no evidence that CO2 is the cause of warming. And it can´t be because CO2 is result of warming. Warm first, then result. You science denier can not change causality.
There is no evidence that CO2 is dangerous. Nature is showing us the opposite. All life on this planet loves CO2. And that is a fact.

You have no evidence at all. If you have, we would know it already.

You are science denier, and because of that you are idiot. If you want to make this planet better place, go to the cliff and try to fly.

And you are calling us irrational! Wake up!

Mayor of Venus
Reply to  Steppenwolf
June 5, 2019 8:22 pm

Steppenwolf: Yes, we luke-warmists are in the 97% who agree global warming IS happening. But it’s not a problem, and most likely net beneficial in the short run. Disaster will not come by 2050, the 21st and a half century. If global warming continues indefinitely, it may indeed become a significant problem in the 24th and a half century. I advocate leaving that problem for future generations to solve.

Reply to  Steppenwolf
June 6, 2019 4:53 pm

you are not walking through a Zoo . . . . . YOU are the exhibit.

Reply to  Steppenwolf
June 8, 2019 8:18 am

“Steppenwolf” (the band) was awesome. “Steppenwolf” (the troll), not so much.

Tony Lusich
Reply to  Roger Surf
June 5, 2019 10:09 am

According to the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Sciences and Exploration Directorate, Earth Sciences Division, GISS Surface Temperature Analysis –
Station Data: Annual Mean Temperatures (C) for
Godthab Nuuk (Greenland )(64.17N, 51.75W)
Station ID:431042500000, this southern most weather station has seen temperatures above zero degrees centigrade once in the last 139 (as far back as records go).

I’d like to see a detailed thermodynamic analysis including latent heat of fusion for the changes they predict along with a quantification of the effects of various proposed tactics to prevent the predicted scenarios.

Tom Halla
June 4, 2019 6:12 am

We all gonna die!!! I’ve been seeing that for the past 50 odd years, and the various disaster scenarios have all failed.
At least preachers like Harold Camping eventually shut up after multiple failures. The audience for the greens seems less critical.

Old England
Reply to  Tom Halla
June 4, 2019 9:51 am

I think it is time that organisations like this were Sued for Damages on behalf of children who live in fear as a direct consequence of the deliberate manipulation and misinformation now constantly being thrown at them.

Perhaps some Australian parents could start crowd-funding to commence an action.

Bryan A
Reply to  Tom Halla
June 4, 2019 2:24 pm

And most likely, in less than 50 more years you probably will reach your personal “best if used by” date.

Al Miller
June 4, 2019 6:40 am

“by Australian think tank”. Not sure what “thinking” is happening with these people, but it’s certainly not about climate. Take your pick from:
“continued Gravy Train of funding”
“Wouldn’t global socialism be great”
“pass more kool aid”

Reply to  Al Miller
June 4, 2019 8:01 am

I think that they really should put windows on the next generation of think tanks.

Reply to  Al Miller
June 4, 2019 8:13 am

It is named “…Climate Breakthrough.” What would you expect them to write?

Reply to  Al Miller
June 4, 2019 8:48 am

Thinking is dangerous.

Every one who has had the misfortune to talk with people in the heart or on the edge of mental disorder, knows that their most sinister quality is a horrible clarity of detail; a connecting of one thing with another in a map more elaborate than a maze. If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment. He is not hampered by a sense of humour or by charity, or by the dumb certainties of experience. He is the more logical for losing certain sane affections. Indeed, the common phrase for insanity is in this respect a misleading one. The madman is not the man who has lost his reason. The madman is the man who has lost everything except his reason. Chesterton

The ancient Egyptians worshiped Horus whose power is observation. A lot of observation and a little logic can produce wonders. A lot of logic and not much observation just produces GIGO.

June 4, 2019 6:42 am

Hysteria is getting a bit boring these days. Fortunately the ACTUAL climate doesn’t take any notice and plugs on regardless.

Doc Chuck
Reply to  Alasdair
June 4, 2019 2:08 pm

‘Actual’. Now there’s a strange concept evidently rattling around without a patron in this “think tank”. Nonetheless let’s see if I’ve got all this straight:

In the broader perspective of an agreeable gradual ascent from the preceding considerably colder climate of several preceding centuries (dubbed the ‘little ice age’), the two significant elevations of global average temperature in the 20th century (within the first half and again toward its conclusion) had notably similar rates of change. However, it turns out that these elevations were likewise agreeably largely confined to colder high latitudes of the northern hemisphere, with little change at all in equatorial and hot subtropical regions of the globe. And furthermore, deconstruction of those averages into the constituent actually measured high and low daily temperatures discloses that it was largely elevations in the lows (rather than the highs) that were transferred into those changed consolidated averages.

Now so far in the present century overall we’ve had a comparative respite from much further temperature elevation, resembling the mid-20th century one that separated those former elevations. All the while atmospheric CO2 has been increasing and has been declared responsible for this ‘frightful’ situation, though in the much longer ice core historic record it has consistently followed and not led indicators of temperature rises.

And now this think tank, as well as the likes of a former barmaid who aspires to the highest office of this land (and as a trained mixologist must have a fine sense of both proportion and change — having made change for many a $20 bill), urge us to upend all that has brought us a historically unheard-of prosperity and personal freedoms to install their favored burdensome remedy to head off a speculative imminent disintegration by adopting an assured one of their own making instead. R I G H T !!

Doc Chuck
Reply to  Alasdair
June 4, 2019 3:52 pm

‘ACTUAL’ Now there’s a term rattling around loosely in that “think tank” without a patron. Nonetheless, let’s see if I’ve got all this straight:

In broad overview, we are rather agreeably gradually ascending from several considerably colder earlier centuries (dubbed the ‘little ice age’) and during the monitored 20th century there was a significant elevation in global average temperature within its first half and again toward its conclusion (both with notably similar rates of increase despite higher atmospheric CO2 levels accompanying the latter). But more specifically both these increases were also rather agreeably localized to the colder latitudes of the northern hemisphere rather than in either equatorial or hot subtropical climes. And what is indeed so much more, deconstructing those average temperatures to their constituent actually measured daily high and low temperatures discloses that it was largely elevation of the nightly lows that transferred to those averages rather than any significant elevation of the daily highs as is so regularly suggested in trembling tones implying soaring heat. Oh my, that’s different.

Now in our current century, there has been a relative respite from average global temperature advance (quite contrary to nearly all computer models claiming to be previewing our future) that resembles the period between the two aforementioned 20th century rises. But all this while the atmospheric CO2 has continued to steadily rise and has been widely credited for any recent temperature rises, despite the thus unexplained recurring halts in the latter, as well as the historical glacial ice core evidence that their chronology is the wrong way around for that causative agency over what is the very opposite — that temperature change has systematically preceded a corresponding CO2 change. Oh, that’s different too! Never mind.

Lately we have been subjected to the likes of this “think tank” report, as well as the authoritative pronouncements of a former barmaid with her own designs on the presidency of our land. But then who wouldn’t give a trained mixologist the benefit of the doubt given she would have such a fine sense of proportions and the making of change (for a $20 bill for a start). And how many distinguished climatologists have pointed out what I have in short above to lend their fellow citizens some perspective among all the assertions that we must immediately embrace some speculative remedy to fend off a coming disintegration by upending our life of personal freedoms and prosperity in exchange for the truly burdensome disintegration of their own making? America wants to know.

Reply to  Alasdair
June 6, 2019 5:16 am

Lmao climate doesn’t take notice and plugs on anyways? Sure if you want to say that Pakistan reaching higher unliveable temperature, Australian animals dying because of the heat and Canada warming 2x faster than other countries in the world as the “climate not taking notice and Plugging on”. Give me a break! can all of you C02 and climate change deniers go to a different planet and destroy that one instead ?

Reply to  Brad
June 8, 2019 8:24 am

Can all you uncritical thinking trolls go back under your bridges and shut the hell up?

Mark Broderick
June 4, 2019 6:42 am

“Assuming we stay on our current trajectory, emissions will lock in a 3 degree Celsius (37 degrees Fahrenheit) global warming” !!
Slight conversion error..?

Reply to  Mark Broderick
June 4, 2019 9:35 am

I was beginning to think I was the only one to spot this howler. It’s patently evident — and this is not the first time I’ve seen this particular mistake in print — that journalists as well, no doubt, as politicians and even some scientists whose discipline does not directly involve temperatures do not have a clue what they are talking about.

The other “beaut” is telling us that today is “twice as warm as yesterday” when the temperature goes from 5° to 10°. When you tell them that only applies in Celsius they don’t understand and think you’re a fool. (Which you are for wasting your time tangling with them!)

James Schrumpf
Reply to  Newminster
June 4, 2019 11:26 am

I think you meant to say “that only applies in Kelvin.”

Reply to  Mark Broderick
June 4, 2019 10:04 am

Oh bummer the literacy. I’ll go, cry now.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Mark Broderick
June 4, 2019 11:46 am

I once corrected a Ufologist (bit of a hobby) who made the same type of error.

She was incredibly gracious and I kinda felt bad, but at least she corrected the error. Or, at least that one…

Unfortunately, as we all know here, warmists aren’t as forgiving when you point this stuff out. Good luck.

June 4, 2019 6:49 am

A 3 degree rise is a 37 Fahrenheit rise? Panic! Panic now!

Reply to  Slacko
June 4, 2019 7:58 am

I typo? More likely that the author merely typed in 3 °C into a conversion app and it spit out 37.4 °F.
Sloppy, but what else can you expect from ignorance and innumeracy?

Reply to  Rocketscientist
June 4, 2019 8:51 am

That was my guess, too. The scary part is thinking about how many of those reading the article take that 3C = 37F as true.

Bryan A
Reply to  H.R.
June 4, 2019 2:35 pm

The original article has been repaired (changed)

Assuming we stay on our current trajectory, emissions will lock in a 3 degree Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) global warming, setting off a disastrous chain off events which the report’s authors claim will lead to “a high likelihood of human civilization coming to an end.”

Reply to  Rocketscientist
June 4, 2019 9:58 am

Ha yes! Of course that’s what they did! Just shows the level of scientific understanding of these people.

Reply to  Rocketscientist
June 4, 2019 10:11 am

Yes, just try reading it on a thermometer instead of trying to “math” it out. Works better.

Reply to  Slacko
June 4, 2019 8:00 am

Everyone knows that to change from Celsius to Fahrenheit you multiply by 1.8 and add 32! So 3C = 5+32 =37F. QED! Climate Science at its best.

Reply to  Slacko
June 4, 2019 8:02 am

I saw that too. 🙂 These crackpots can’t even do basic arithmetic.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Slacko
June 4, 2019 8:03 am

The gross error is that a temperature of 3 C is equal to a temperature of 37.4 F.
But 3 degrees of rise in C is equal to 5.4 degrees of rise in F.

Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  Slacko
June 4, 2019 8:06 am

Yes the idiots put 3°C into a conversion ‘bot and it spit back 37.4°F! That’s if you are talking about outside temperature or the like. But what they meant was 3°C *temperature change* which is 5.4°F. Jeesh, when you don’t get the small things right, how can we trust you got the big things right?

June 4, 2019 6:54 am

The pessimism is so absurd, that I wonder if they realize it is not going to happen?

It was around 1 1/2C- 2C warmer early in the Holocene, yet they don’t even talk about that time frame, as if they know nothing bad happened then.

It is all about money and power, the usual aims of a small number of out of date alpha males.

Reply to  Sunsettommy
June 4, 2019 8:05 am

Have these charlatans considered what they are going to do when it doesn’t happen? Many of these activist journalists, or more accurately described as propagandists, are quite young and have quite a few years where they will need to provide for themselves after their involvement is exposed. I wonder who would employ such a person besides the advertisement industry where truth is regulated?

Reply to  Rocketscientist
June 4, 2019 11:18 am

What will they do in 20 to 30 years when their predictions don’t come true?

Why, they’ll double down of course. After all, it’s worked so far for the Peak Oilers, the Population Bombers, and all other breeds of Malthusians, hasn’t it?


Reply to  Schitzree
June 4, 2019 2:47 pm

Earlier predictions, by Gore et al, haven’t come true, but that hasn’t stopped them. “Shock, horror, evil, disaster” sells newspapers, but “Nothing to see here” doesn’t.

Reply to  Rocketscientist
June 4, 2019 4:21 pm

They will be retired by then on a nice, fat pension. So why would they care?

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Sunsettommy
June 4, 2019 9:53 am

Sunset, yes there is definitely a worry that nothing bad is going to happen. The real worry among the extremists is that the world’s leaders are after all going to do nothing anyway and they want policy, even stupid ineffectual policy (like the Parisite Accord) put in place so they can take credit for nothing bad happening.

They are bankrupt and throwing everything into it because the nothing bad happening is the end of malthusian misanthropy and the opportunity for a néomarxiste globalgov. A “Garden of Eden^тм” prosperity for the peak 9B people, probably even drifting back down to 8B as prosperity and plenty firmly establishes itself.

June 4, 2019 6:55 am

The more the scam falls apart, the more desperate they become.

Gaudenz Mischol
June 4, 2019 7:00 am

Sounds like the Report of the Club of Rome 40 years ago or Paul Ehrlich another 40 years ago or or or or

Should I be afraid? Luckily I have already survived several of those tipping points and crisis

Ken Irwin
June 4, 2019 7:02 am

We simply cannot ditch our carbon based standard of living – Carbon supplies 84% of our energy needs that drives our civilization.
Renewables simply won’t make a dent, decarbonisation of the world economy by 2050 will certainly leave us in the dark, cold, hungry, filthy – back to the sort of lifestyle where half your children died before puberty.
Then yes, civilization as we know it will end – brutally.
Its the loonie greenies and thermogeddonists that truly frighten me.
If they get their way (and they will always demand more and more in any case) we will face a very dismal future indeed.
Extinction rebellion is aiming in the wrong direction.

Robert Wager
June 4, 2019 7:04 am

The glaciers are going to disappear, our kids won’t know what snow is, the oceans are going to be twenty feet higher, etc etc etc. We can add one more to the list

June 4, 2019 7:09 am

I look at UAH monthly chart, then at these hysterical claims. There is no correspondence between reality and the dystopian fantasy.

The chart shows an increase of 0.13 degrees C per decade since 1980. If that continues, 2050 will be around 0.4 degrees C higher.

Reply to  Adam
June 4, 2019 8:41 am

I am really curious if there is a correlation between galactic cosmic rays and climate such that the reduced solar magnetic field leads to enhanced cooling. These next two solar cycles will tell the tale and at least have some falsifiable claim that can be tested.

Reply to  Adam
June 4, 2019 10:02 am

But it doesn’t really. It shows huge variation that if you ignore all the variation shows a “trend”. And that’s before we discuss obviously natural warming such as El Ninos. I look at that chart and think that the idea you can somehow pick out what is man-made CO2 and what is natural from that data is a joke. I don’t think most people would recognsie that chart, becaue that’s not what they are told is happening.

Reply to  Adam
June 4, 2019 10:16 am

I don’t know if it’s true, xenomoly, but these cosmic rays from Outer Space are probably making me sneeze and making my nose run. I’m going to fix myself an aluminum foil hat (much better than tinfoil) and one for each of my cats and wear them until the cosmic rays are all gone away.

June 4, 2019 7:10 am

Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming is the prophecy of a progressive process. However, what is the certainty that climate change is monotonically divergent?

michael hart
June 4, 2019 7:12 am

“According to the report’s central “2050 scenario,” one billion people will be forced to relocate from unlivable conditions while food production will become inadequate to feed the global population.”

It’s the year internet, yet so much ignorance in a sea of freely available information. It was back in ~1978 that The Dead Kennedys wrote “Holiday in Cambodia” to mock these space cadets.

They are wilfully oblivious to just how bad living conditions already are for much of the world’s poor. It is the cheap energy of fossil fuels that provides some hope others might escape their current poverty.

Hamp Simkins
June 4, 2019 7:15 am

While 3 degrees centigrade = 37 degrees farenheit, a 3 degree rise is 5.4 degree rise farenheit.

Rhys Read
Reply to  Hamp Simkins
June 4, 2019 11:26 am

The bigger math error is if CO2 is increasing by 1.5 rpm per year it would take 270 years to double. Therefore they are computing climate sensitivity of about 25 degrees Celsius for a doubling of CO2

Reply to  Rhys Read
June 4, 2019 1:53 pm

1.5 rpm?
I’ve heard that the climate moves in cycles, but I never knew that CO2 did as well.

John Bell
June 4, 2019 7:19 am

It is very trendy to preach gloom and doom these days, very fashionable, very virtue signalling…but the writers use fossil fuels every day.

June 4, 2019 7:24 am

It’s getting ridiculous now !

And serious. How many easily misled people are going to get depression, or worse, due to this continuous propaganda?

Reply to  Hysteria
June 4, 2019 11:27 am

One of these days we are going to get a Climate Jonestown. The only question left is will it be quick, by drinking the Kool-aid in a literal sense, or will it be slow, by the power going out for a week in the middle of winter.


Caligula Jones
Reply to  Schitzree
June 4, 2019 11:35 am

I (unfortunately) have the same thought and posted something similar recently.

While I hope nobody gets hurt, I’d rather one of those old hippies go before one of the deluded teens. At least they might be able to be saved.

If not, this current teen sensation will either become a bitter old woman still clinging to a desperate narrative in a bid for relevancy, an old true believer hippy, or if there is a miracle, a well-adjusted person who can laugh at youthful indiscretion.

June 4, 2019 7:29 am

Out an abundance of caution NY and CA need to be closed down.

Reply to  ResourceGuy
June 4, 2019 8:43 am

Good point. The NY and CA populations can be moved to the Yukon or Siberian tropical paradises, where CAGW will have its most beneficial effect, and there is plenty of room. Move now, before the best real estate is taken.

Mayor of Venus
Reply to  H.R.
June 5, 2019 8:49 pm

H.R.: I would prefer buying an Aleutian island, planting palm trees on the beach, and hiring Trump to build a resort hotel, since all the tropical resorts like Miami and Hawaii will have to be moved to much higher latitudes.

June 4, 2019 7:30 am

Science fiction. Nothing more.

These guys propose no specific mechanism by which all this stuff will happen, even if the three degrees of warming in just 30 years – vastly beyond what any of the false models predict – were to occur.

Hey, if it gets so hot that it becomes “lethal” – ever meet anyone who lives in southern Arizona, south Texas, or anywhere in the Middle East or in Saharan Africa, which have experienced such “lethal” summer temps for millenia? – well, then the answer is, burn more fossil fuels, ramp up the AC, and ride it out … just like people are doing today.

SMH … this is worse than science fiction … it’s climate porn.

Craig from Oz
Reply to  Duane
June 4, 2019 8:38 pm

I think you need to read more Science Fiction, Duane, as I am not sure you can currently tell the difference.

I think you will find after a pleasant amount of study that one is well written, well researched, and able to sustain probing questions related to their core premise, and the other is a Climate Change(tm) report.

June 4, 2019 7:31 am

And next up we have Cooking with Cheryl. I’m sure you won’t want to miss that.

June 4, 2019 7:31 am

A 3 degree Celsius temperature rise relates to approximately a 5 degree Fahrenheit rise not 37 . The confusion seems to be that 3 degrees Celsius is approximately 37 degrees Fahreheit.

June 4, 2019 7:33 am

I don’t get how this is supposed to work. Is it on a certain day in 2050 that civilization comes to an end or is it gradual so some day soon we will actally see civilization beginning to end?

Reply to  Arbeegee
June 4, 2019 8:55 am

I believe the prediction is for April 1st, 2050, Arbeegee.

Reply to  H.R.
June 4, 2019 10:04 am

At 2.17pm.

Reply to  Phoenix44
June 5, 2019 6:26 pm

I suspect 4:20 pm might be more appropriate for this group. These predictions sound like the result of smoking something.

June 4, 2019 7:34 am

So, in order to save human civilization from a climate optimum which largely contrubuted to human development, those ridiculous psychopaths want to destroy it as soon as possible.

June 4, 2019 7:35 am

This is pure insanity.

Bruce Cobb
June 4, 2019 7:37 am

So? Space monsters could end human civilization by 2040. Space monsters win.

June 4, 2019 7:40 am

So let it be written that the final days of newspapers were sour and manic. The Age of High and Mighty Opinion went out with no one caring in the end.

June 4, 2019 7:41 am

The end of the world is nye… nigh. There is a Project prosecuting a disinformation campaign on Youtube to influence elections. The Project claims that “our [unplanned] Posterity” will not know Florida, which will be submerged beneath the waves, joining Atlantis. It seems that Alphabet will sell anyone a platform, with approval?

Robert W Turner
June 4, 2019 7:41 am

I would like to take this moment to call the authors of this paper dumb- just plain dumb.

June 4, 2019 7:49 am

2050? Bugger, I had planned on spending all my money by 2030.
Can I sue AOC.

Rod Evans
June 4, 2019 7:58 am

Yesterday the temperature difference here between the hottest past of the day i.e. 20 deg C and the coldest part of the day last night was 12 deg C.
Should I be concerned as this is more than double what is being billed as the end of civilisation?
So far I am feeling fine, the temp and rain today are cooling things down but I am expecting another day where temp variation is greater than the alarmist fear threshold of 3 deg C.
Maybe humans become more delicate and vulnerable to change, as the Green anxiety overcomes them?

Reply to  Rod Evans
June 4, 2019 8:58 am

Here in Finland it is common to have temp swings of 20c or move in 24h period. Having lived here 20 years now I am seeing later and longer winters. Still no blossom on the trees where I live and winter tyres stayed on til May 12th this year – ” unprecedented!”

Reply to  Ouluman
June 5, 2019 7:21 am

Here in south Finland we have still this “alavilla mailla hallanvaara” so I haven´t change tyres yet. Let´s see, maybe in midsummer.

Mumbles McGuirck
June 4, 2019 8:08 am

has been endorsed by the former chief of Australia’s military.

… after a few pints of Foster’s. Wonder how he felt after watching “On the Beach”?

Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
June 5, 2019 3:32 am

dunno but by chr**T im glad hes an EX, but gives one the shivers if he got that far, had tht much power
and is an utter dipsh*T
as if we dont have enough to worry about with not enough Mil and equipment.

June 4, 2019 8:15 am

I have decide to totally ignore all such warnings until those issuing them become more realistic about the use of nuclear energy. This would allow both sides to have their cake and eat it too.

Shoki Kaneda
June 4, 2019 8:23 am

They are right about one thing; we will all die. If the cause is climate, it will likely be cold.

John Chism
June 4, 2019 8:26 am

Perspective; that the global population of Termites produce twice the volume of CO2 than all of mankind’s contributions from Fossil Fuels and have been doing this for at least 10,000 years after “The Last Ice Age” that created this Holocene Interglacial. Makes “Anthropogenic” Climate Change total nonsense. Humans could completely stop everything they’re doing – including breathing and just die- and the CO2 will keep increasing by 2 or more parts per million every year and the climate is still going to change whether humans exist or don’t. Simply because Carbon Dioxide does not have the effect/affect that scientist have given it. You cannot attribute the Global Warming Event that ended “The Last Ice Age” that had 280 ppm of Carbon Dioxide to causing it to warm, nor can any of the temperature fluctuations of warming and cooling with constantly increasing Carbon Dioxide in this Holocene Interglacial. You cannot have an over 18 years hiatus of temperature, when the Carbon Dioxide increased by 2 ppm each year and have any significant connection between CO2 and temperature.

June 4, 2019 8:27 am

That disaster can they keep kicking down the road must be well beat up by now. I forgot it is a virtual reality can recreated with each prediction.
Virtual: not physically existing as such but made by software to appear to do so.

June 4, 2019 8:34 am

Yesterday it was 4 degrees C hotter than the day before in Central Florida. I guess we are all dead since we passed that magic 3 degrees. I don’t know if I should go out and tell all the plants and animals they are suppose to be dead.
These people are jokes and those of us that know better need to voice our opinions. Easier said than done since we have lost the independent journalism platform.

Reply to  Sciwiz
June 4, 2019 10:06 am

Today is ten degrees colder than it was on Sunday here in London. If the trend continues by next week we will be at absolute zero.

Tom Abbott
June 4, 2019 8:36 am

From the article: “Assuming we stay on our current trajectory, emissions will lock in a 3 degree Celsius (37 degrees Fahrenheit) global warming, setting off a disastrous chain off events which the report’s authors claim will lead to “a high likelihood of human civilization coming to an end.”

I had no idea CAGW would lock in 37 degree F weather!
That would *really* be a disaster! Crops don’t grow very good in weather that cold.

June 4, 2019 8:39 am

If anything ends civilization by 2050, it will be the ceaseless activities of the CTRL-LEFT who may finally succeed in marginalizing men and removing them from the equation.

Nick Werner
June 4, 2019 8:41 am

…’there is a “high likelihood” human civilization will come to an end by 2050 unless action is taken on greenhouse gas emissions.’

That’s about thirty years. When given enough power, socialists have been able to accomplish the same thing in less than half that time.

Jonathan Ranes
Reply to  Nick Werner
June 4, 2019 12:20 pm


Reply to  Nick Werner
June 5, 2019 7:15 am

Todays greensocialists are much weaker than their idols, but they are angrier because they are always hungry. And they don´t have enough muscle to take power. That must be frustrating, as their behaviour indicates.

What if this global warming is just greensocialists farts?

Jeff Dunn
June 4, 2019 8:50 am

Yet no attempt made here to obtain the report, analyse the risk analysis and point out where it goes wrong.

That makes this post and the raft of commentary worthless.

(The LINK was posted for everyone, INCLUDING YOU to read and comment on:The dire paper. Where is YOUR comment on it?) SUNMOD

Reply to  Jeff Dunn
June 4, 2019 10:09 am

When the conclusions of a paper are so absurd as to make it obvious nonsense, why waste an electron on reading why they have written nonsense?

I don’t bother reading papers that claim the Earth is flat, vaccines don’t work or gravity is an illusion either – and they are less stupid than this one.

Andrew Cooke
Reply to  Jeff Dunn
June 4, 2019 11:03 am

Yep, I read it.

Are you actually defending this useless tripe? This is a policy paper, written from a socio-political viewpoint. This is not risk analysis.

A real risk analysis paper would have a Failure Modes Effects and Analysis chart, easily traced and supported data, an exceptional amount of detail and recommended mitigation options based on feasibility and cost.

This piece of trash paper is pure propaganda, filled with talking points and quotes from established thought leaders who engage in proper rightthink. Anyone who would defend this ignorance is quite obviously a brainwashed true believer.

If you want to convince intelligent and critical thinkers, you had better produce better propaganda than this.

Dan Sudlik
June 4, 2019 8:53 am

I read the NY Post online and went back and checked the 6/3 edition and there was no sign of this article. Just did the link and none of that was online. This is strange.

CD in Wisconsin
June 4, 2019 8:58 am

Oh joy, another reprieve! Human civilization has been granted another twenty years until the end (2050 instead of 2030). Allow me this moment to extend my gratitude to the high priests of the climate cult have seen it in their hearts to give us this extension. Praise be!

At the rate we keep getting reprieves, human civilization is going to go on indefinitely. If there is one interesting characteristic about doomsday prophesies, the end-date is never set in stone. The high priests reserve the right to change it on a moment’s notice as they see fit.

June 4, 2019 9:00 am

Pick any year in the future. Write a paper or make a political statement about a climate catastrophe taking place by that date and you get published or receive press. Write a paper or make a political statement contradicting climate catastrophes and you are either ignored or demonized. Controlling what information gets disseminated is more important than the information if you want control. Trump is smart in attacking the media and if it weren’t for the internet we would be living in a much different political world today. Progressives realize this and we’re already seeing online manipulation of information and who gets it. AGW is just one of the information victims but will affect the world profoundly if we don’t take a stand now.

June 4, 2019 9:05 am

I thought maybe the paper was actually sarcasm so I opened it up and conclude that the authors are being serious. It is written in a journal like format with footnotes and graphs and headings.
I see it as a clear example of the necessity for skepticism of any climate related article. This one is so wild it is hard to accept that the authors are serious but I have seen responses to serious and reasonable skeptical papers that sound like the comments here on this one.

Dagfinn Reiersøl
June 4, 2019 9:18 am

I looked at it briefly. They’re using the “hothouse earth” paper, while conveniently neglecting to mention that the time frame is centuries or millennia.

June 4, 2019 9:21 am

“high likelihood”

Looks like they are trying to piggy back onto the terminology the IPCC uses to gain credibility. But that assumes the IPCC even has credibility……

June 4, 2019 9:26 am

Oh it’s all so complicated-

“World population projected to reach 9.7 billion by 2050 | UN …”

Greg Woods
June 4, 2019 9:44 am

Civilization ends in 50 years. Would that be in the afternoon?

June 4, 2019 9:56 am

Ehrlich 1968: civilization will end by 2000.

Why is the apocalypse always conveniently 30 years into the future?

June 4, 2019 9:58 am

Not sure it’s necessary to post each & every ridiculous claim by the news-equivalents of the National Inquirer. If I wanted to, I could do that in the grocery checkout line.

Andy Pattullo
June 4, 2019 9:58 am

This is clearly just a misprint. The intended message was:

“there is a “high likelihood” human civilization will come to an end by 2050 IF PROPOSED ACTIONS ARE taken on greenhouse gas emissions.”

Though readers might think this was meant as an ominous warning it was actually a promise to the deranged folks who think human society is a problem rather than a miraculous success.

Reply to  Andy Pattullo
June 4, 2019 10:19 am

Yes, well, Andy, Old Boy, I have a plan here, as a “just in case the World doesn’t end” thing.

I’m going to throw a yard party that everyone who doesn’t believe the World Is Ending can come to and party till the sun stops shining.

I figure that we can have some real fun until the deadline has passed, and then go home, fat and happy, and count the mopes who were waiting for The End of All Things, and are now disappointed. Should be a real good time, too.

Reply to  Ex-PH2
June 4, 2019 11:17 am

Are you taking reservations?

June 4, 2019 10:01 am

Oh no!

I’ll add this to my list of potentially deadly threats to humankind. It contains now wrath of ancestors, bad sacrifice, war, famine, plague, overpopulation, nuclear accidents, artificial intelligence, aliens, antibiotic resistance, ice age, asteroid impact, and male facial hair in the sink. One of them is scary.

Leo Smith
June 4, 2019 10:04 am

Irrational response to non-existent climate change is a real threat to civilisation.

June 4, 2019 10:10 am

..Or by 2030 if you follow what the mad Greenies want you to do.

Steve Z
June 4, 2019 10:14 am

Surprising that the New York Post would reprint this garbage. They have printed some climate “skeptic” articles in the past. This is more worthy of the New York Daily Snooze.

June 4, 2019 10:14 am

Nick, Loydo, ghalfrunt, where are you? Why aren’t you defending this fine piece of analysis?

Reply to  Fenlander
June 5, 2019 7:57 am

Don’t forget griffy.

Henning Nielsen
June 4, 2019 10:17 am

This is of course silly, but it is important to note that they quote Mr. Schellnhuber himself:

“The Emeritus Director of the Potsdam Institute,
Prof. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, warns that “climate
change is now reaching the end-game, where very
soon humanity must choose between taking
unprecedented action, or accepting that it has been
left too late and bear the consequences.” He says
that if we continue down the present path “there is a
very big risk that we will just end our civilisation. The
human species will survive somehow but we will
destroy almost everything we have built up over the
last two thousand years.”

Including a fair amount of climate science institutions , one may presume. That’s the kind of CAGW that I like.

Reply to  Henning Nielsen
June 5, 2019 7:45 am

There was something very true in Mr. Schellnhubers text.

This: “”climate change is now reaching the end-game””. Vice man.

June 4, 2019 10:31 am

Even Homer is less dumb than those clowns :

Walt D.
June 4, 2019 10:33 am

A boy was walking with his father on Fisherman’s Wharf in San Francisco.
Boy: Hey dad, how come they have all these gift shops selling junk?
Dad: Dunno son – I suppose it’s because people keep buying it.

Same with all the Climate Change junk.

John F. Hultquist
June 4, 2019 10:51 am

For the thousandth time ( winking smiley face):

The proper expression for a change in temperature is as follows:
n Celsius degrees NOT n degrees Celsius;
Example: 3 C° NOT 3°C
One represents “change”, the other is just a temperature.

I encountered a similar issue with maps in a 1950 era textbook when the printer converted all the Degrees of Latitude to Degrees of Fahrenheit so that the Tropic of Cancer was labeled as 74.3°.
A retiring teacher gave me that book, and said to keep it, it was one of a kind.
I have it in a box, somewhere.

James Schrumpf
Reply to  John F. Hultquist
June 4, 2019 11:37 am

I wonder why a publisher would think Latitude was in degrees Celsius rather than Fahrenheit already?

June 4, 2019 11:01 am

I’ve taken the current rates of increases in Hurricanes, Floods, Droughts, Heatwaves, Tornadoes, and Sea Level Rise…and extrapolated out forever into the future…and assuming we’ll be able to rebuild coastal buildings 100 feet further on shore every 300-500 years or so, we will be OK for another 3 billion years when the sun will engulf the planet.

I’m planning to get off the planet before then.

John Robertson
June 4, 2019 11:21 am

Neglecting to read the article I will just agree,human civilization could fall in less than 30 years.
If we continue to tolerate the insipid idiocy of Gang Green.
If we allow these Fools and Bandits to continue to vandalize the foundations of our technologic marvel of a society, they will destroy it.
You cannot cure stupid.
Allowing the incredibly stupid and the utterly gullible to hold positions of responsibility, can and will bring about systemic collapse.
For nothing is more dangerous,than weapons grade stupid,totally certain of their righteousness.

Now,when we have elected representatives who assert that their feelings are more important than cold hard facts, we may well be in end times , of this luxurious civilization.
For this life of luxury we built up over generations runs not on Unicorn Farts and Feel Good Intentions.

June 4, 2019 11:57 am

2050 is the intersection of all Dems climate plans and these supposedly random media ad placements. The con jobs are all lining up.

June 4, 2019 11:57 am

A friend told me about this yesterday – I don’t follow anyone crazy enough to believe this, but she does. It’s so laughable it’s hard to believe anyone who thinks could take it seriously, yet she has friends crying over it.
I’ve come to the conclusion these people enjoy being frightened and angry, because five minutes of thinking would show them heating to this degree in our lifetimes is simply not possible even if we all are driving gas guzzlers.

June 4, 2019 12:57 pm

Celsius (Swedish) original scale was inverse (0° for the boiling and 100° for the freezing points of water ?!) of the scale that is in use at present.
Frenchman Jean Pierre Christin, physicist, mathematician and astronomer, considered this highly illogical and proposed reversing the scale which was accepted, sadly Celsius died within a year.

June 4, 2019 1:14 pm

I nominate this for a science fiction award.

Off to feed my pet unicorns now.

Johann Wundersamer
June 4, 2019 2:16 pm

Assuming we stay on our current trajectory, emissions will lock in a 3 degree Celsius (37 degrees Fahrenheit) global warming, setting off a disastrous chain off events which the report’s authors claim will lead to “a high likelihood of human civilization coming to an end.”

3 degrees Celsius chauffage gives ~ 3 degrees Fahrenheit chauffage!

June 4, 2019 2:56 pm

Human extinction is a bad thing on even-numbered days, and a good thing on odd-numbered days. The planet needs it to happen, but we must prevent it by causing it. Now, convert that to Fahrenheit.

June 4, 2019 2:59 pm

As an Australian I am embarrassed that this report comes from an Australian “think tank”.
What were they thinking (or drinking)?
I note that one of the authors once worked for Shell.
Shell has been using scenarios since the 1970s to explore a range of visions of the future. They include extreme possibilities. For example, search for Shell Scenarios and Shell Sky Scenario.
And good news, their scenarios extend to 2100, so no assumption of Armageddon in 2050.

David Blenkinsop
Reply to  Robber
June 5, 2019 2:49 am

Maybe they were drinking “screech” washed from the inside of oaken rum barrels?
Distill it three times, why, you’d have enough to run one of the Twilight Earth’s last remaining vehicles,
“the Mo-Ped she called Flame” — ?

(too early in the morning, mixing my sci fi horror with a cornball country song reference, sheesh..)

June 4, 2019 3:27 pm

Here’s an accurate prediction of the future. There is a 99 percent chance that I will extinct by 2050

June 4, 2019 4:06 pm

Their temperature converter seems to have gone on the blink…..

June 4, 2019 4:50 pm

I’ll take my chances. BTW, it was 47 F last night. In the outskirts of NYC. In June.
Does a whole dumpster full of horsesh** trump a mere steaming basketfull? I doubt it! It’s all compost.

June 4, 2019 9:19 pm

Two gasses come out of the tailpipe of an automobile: H2O and CO2! the first is a more effective greenhouse gas than the second yet nobody considers that fact! Ban the oceans!

Craig from Oz
June 4, 2019 9:25 pm


Having bothered to click the link and read this little report at two things immediately spring to mind.

First? That is 15minutes one will never get back.

Second is that this is utter bollocks that has been completely media managed by the usual suspects in the Love Media to put forward a message the report itself doesn’t even have the courage to claim.

Straight and foremost this is not a scientific study. This is, as the title openly states, ‘A Scenario Approach’.

They are not formally stating that if world as we know it will end in 2050, they are putting forward a scenario – with a few token references to Xu Y and Ramanathan V to impress the yokels – where the world COULD end in 2050.

Then, having devoted at best 3 pages to discussing this scenario, the 12 page booklet closes with a nice colour picture self promoting ‘Breakthrough Publications Download Discussion Paper Series’.

In other words, THIS IS AN AD!

I am not sure which is worse. The shamelessness of this group to attempt a publicity stunt like this, or the mindless feeding frenzy of the MSM who latched fully onto this ‘report’ in order to provide more proof to support their global cult.

Honestly this is utter garbage as a scientific paper. It is a thought experiment about as sound as using research based on radiation based mutation to ‘prove’ a giant radioactive lizard is going to destroy Tokyo and hence not only must all nuclear research be stopped – think of Tokyo and all the children that live there!!! – but also only Ishirō Honda “has unrivalled experience and capacity in such mobilisation, and can play a unique role in its development and implementation”.*

*(actual word salad from the 2050 paper)

(original creators of Godzilla used for example only. No deeper implications should be assumed.)

Dagfinn Reiersøl
Reply to  Craig from Oz
June 4, 2019 10:58 pm

They don’t even claim that it’s a scientific paper. They call it a policy paper.

Coeur de Lion
June 4, 2019 11:04 pm

Did the bond market tremor?

June 4, 2019 11:25 pm

Oh, yes. We are decidedly doomed.

June 5, 2019 1:34 am

150 posts and not a single one attempting to refute the science, I guess because of ideology., just gnashing and fist shaking.
I bet none of the 150 even read it.

Reply to  Loydo
June 5, 2019 6:58 am

Actually many stated they read at least part of it, came away thinking they wasted their time reading such junk. They are not going to waste time trying to debunk such drivel, as it would beneath them giving it undeserved attention.

Do you root through the garbage can for the bits of food in it?

How can you refute stuff that is a SCENARIO based construct to year 2050?

You must love Pseudoscience so much to fall for it.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Sunsettommy
June 5, 2019 7:52 am

Loydo’s opinions are ideologically-based.

Reply to  Loydo
June 5, 2019 8:21 am

It wasn´t science paper. It was political paper, based on models. Can you understand the difference? Perhaps your ideology is in denial to understand? Or your stupidity is blocking your ability to understand.

You are science denier, so your opinion is not relevant to reality.

[??? .mod]

June 5, 2019 3:20 am

I suspect there is a 97.5% consensus among climate scientists… LOL

Arthur Clapham
June 5, 2019 4:57 am

Whenever these ‘experts’ make these statements TV companies Worldwide should issue a warning, perhaps with a logo of flying pigs!!

June 5, 2019 6:05 am

Broadcasting companies should issue a warning when these ‘experts give their opinions on the climate, I think a Flying Pig logo would be appropriate !!

Pamela Gray
June 5, 2019 6:33 am

This idea is nonsense. At no time in paleographic timelines reconstructed from exposed paleosoil content, does “warmer” equate with flora and fauna devastation on a global basis. Warmth increases life, cold decreases life. Case closed.


Coach Springer
June 5, 2019 7:23 am

By 2050? So you’re saying to go with global socialist government to get the job done quicker?

John Teisen
June 5, 2019 2:14 pm

I know it’s not science but the Bible tells me we will be around for another thousand years at least. Accordingly any reports about us exiting the planet by 2050 should be treated as baloney.

June 6, 2019 6:14 pm

It could have ended 75 years ago but fortunately people stood up to conmen and murders .
The scary global warming fraud pales in comparison to real heroes who gave everything to
defeat evil .
I wonder what those heroes would think of the pussies trying to con the world now .

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights