Here Are The Scenes From DC’s Climate Protest

From The Daily Caller

Shelby Talcott Reporter

September 23, 2019 10:55 AM ET

Climate change activists protested on the streets of Washington, D.C., Monday, aiming to shut down the city in an effort to push the government to take action on the climate crisis.

Activists blocked key intersections throughout the nation’s capital Monday morning, causing “gridlocked” traffic across D.C., Sam Sweeney, a reporter for WJLA, tweeted. Police began arresting protesters Monday morning, and the demonstrations are expected to continue throughout the day.

Advertisements

236 thoughts on “Here Are The Scenes From DC’s Climate Protest

  1. And why are they dressed up as polar bears when polar bears are actually doing better now than over the last 30 years or so?

      • Peer-reviewed science does not agree with your prejudiced feelings about polar bears. The current “rebound” in polar bears is due to the moratorium on hunting. The long term outlook is decline as their food source is not appearing in the spring (the only time they feed naturally) as it used to before the massive loss of Arctic ice over the past five decades as solar as declined too.

        Arctic volume melt: http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/piomas/

        • What’s taking out their food supply? Overfishing?

          We should propose a global property-and-quota-rights scheme in fishing, because the present scheme is a huge tragedy of the commons. If that means handing over most of the fishing rights to poor countries, I can live with that.

          • Yes, he did. If removing a moratorium on hunting increases the numbers, then it had to be the hunting that was reducing the numbers.

            Even better is why is hunting being allowed at all?

        • Rob, have a look at the video link above. It shows how the IPCC reported exceptionally low ice cover in the 20s when the polar bears were doing fine. Polar bears have existing for millions of years, they have seen off many changes in arctic ice.

          • Hunting polar bears is now highly restricted.

            Polar bears thrive with patchy spring sea ice. The worst case event is thick spring sea ice.

            There will always be spring sea ice. Even in the ridiculous predicted ice free scenarios, there is still spring ice. For spring ice to disappear, the arctic would have to warm up by about 50°C (WAG).

        • The fact that Rob actually believes that only papers that have been pal reviewed quality as science is just more evidence that he has no idea what science is.

          Rob, do you even know what polar bears eat and why the presence or lack of sea ice makes little difference in their ability to catch them?

          • My petty, creepy cyberstalker with Stockholm syndrome strikes to waste recycled cyber bits on BS. It is besotted with me after so many spankings that it has endured from me. Poor MarkW is under-educated and does not know how peer-review works. He pretends there is science that succeeds outside of science – that is where he and his charlatans run around their science denial bubble where they think their junk science is meaningful.

          • I read that but all my brain heard was blah, blah, blah….

            You have called everyone a name. You have not provided or proved any of your positions or point.

            I have not called you anything but “Rob” but you may be that Esrt Van Doren fellow. Your style of attack reminds me of a series post a few weeks ago about anti-meat campaign.

          • Haven’t a clue what you are waffling on about. Well maybe you should look markie’s cyberstalking of me – he is besotted. He’s Pavlovian.

            Show one comment where I have given science that is not backed up by evidence. Please proceed. My prediction is that it will stay silent or return and deflect with some more immature and puerile spew or Gish Gallop.

          • Rob say’s “Show one comment where I have given science that is not backed up by evidence”.
            I haven’t seen one comment where you have given science. You have just been making claims without documenting the source and then hurling insults at anybody attempting that refutes the claim. That behavior is stifling any productive debate and making you sound like an simpleton.

          • OMG a video by the biggest charlatan in climate science denial bubble. Please get a scientifically literate person to help you. If you like videos to watch how potholer54 shreds the moron Heller or is t his pseudonym Steve Goddard today?

        • Rob,

          Nice pivot, from polar bears to PIOMAS. The problem with your pivot, however, is three-fold. First, sea-ice “volume” is most difficult to determine, which leads to considerable variance between various attempts to graph the volume. PIOMAS tends to show less ice than DMI, for example.

          Second, all graphs show the volume quadruple by April, when the bears eat the helpless baby seals laying on the “baby ice.” For example, Hudson Bay is all open water now, but will be completely ice covered by April. The bears in Hudson Bay will get fat.

          Third, there is evidence that what causes both bears and seals to starve is not too little sea-ice, but too much sea-ice, which keeps them from getting in and out of the water.

          I suggest you visit the “Polar Bear Science” site of the zoologist Susan Crockford, or, if you are lazy, just check out her Youtube video.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=jQRle6pgBCY

          It would be a real pity if Susan could only be heard if she put her hair in pigtails and railed raw emotion before the U.N.

      • “Inuit lives must be protected over polar bears, Nunavut community says

        Residents rattled by deadly attacks as territory works toward new bear management plan.”

        Government officials must do a better job of controlling the polar bear population along the west coast of Hudson Bay, according to residents left scared and angered by a pair of recent and deadly attacks.

        Two Nunavut men were killed by polar bears this summer — in the communities of Arviat and Naujaat. They were the first such deaths in the territory in 18 years, and many say they could have been prevented if the communities were allowed to kill the bears like they were 10 years ago, before protections were put in place.

        “Like any other protected animals, they grow in numbers fast,” says Alex Ishalook, deputy mayor of Arviat, the southernmost Nunavut community on the coast.

        :

        Nunavut hunter calls for changes to polar bear rules after fatal summer attacks
        Nunavut hunter killed by polar bear and cub

        Man killed by polar bear ‘died a hero,’ cousin says

        The community was once allowed to kill 20 polar bears each year. That dropped to zero about 10 years ago when the territorial government changed the hunting regulations. The restrictions soon became a problem, Ishalook says.

        The hamlet hired polar bear monitors in 2010 to patrol the area and fend off bears, and it set up a hotline for residents to report bear activity.

        ‘So many bears’: Draft plan says Nunavut polar bear numbers unsafe

        If a bear comes into town, people in all corners of the community of 2,500 pick up the phone, he said.

        _________________________________________

        https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/polar-bear-management-arviat-1.4904164

        _________________________________________

        Recently, political organization of indigenous peoples has led to international recognition and clarification of human and political rights concerning indigenous populations. Rights to land and natural resources are an important part of the culture and survival of indigenous peoples in the Arctic.

        https://www.arcticcentre.org/EN/arcticregion/Arctic-Indigenous-Peoples/Demography

        https://www.arcticcentre.org/EN/arcticregion/Arctic-Indigenous-Peoples

  2. It is difficult to tell from that brief video, but the protest seems to be dominated by wealthy white folks.

    I might have been inclined to give the protesters a tiny bit of sympathy if just one of them assisted the elderly person with the walker trying to cross the street in front of their banner. But they were more interested in screaming and yelling their mindless chants than helping someone less fortunate.

      • I am wealthy white person and I am not out there acting like an idiot. Nor do I get upset when I see other successful humans regardless of their skin color or any other differences.

        I find your comment to be misguided, immoral, unethical, and sad that you see the world through skin color. But please continue to self identify; do not let me stand in your way.

        • I am wealthy white person and I am not out there acting like an idiot.

          Since you do not find fault with their “idiotic” actions ….. are we to assume that you are an older wealthy white person who no long engages in such silly antics ……. and you damn sure don’t want to be photographed or videoed doing the things that you use to do?

          Anyone that condones such idiotic actions is just as guilty as the perpetrators are.

          The “3 R’s” that were once associated with the public schools, …. “Readin, Rightin and Rithmatitk”, …. have been replaced with …. the new “3 R’s” of “Rioting, Rebelling and Resisting”.

          • @SCC

            If you spent time reading my other comments in the thread you would know the answer to that question.

            No 4EDouglas used a broad brush to describe that only wealthy white people are doing this while at the same keeping people of color on the bottom. Wealthy people, regardless of skin color, have more important things to do in life.

            Making a supposition that a group is that monolithic and monotonic is myopic at best. It is a radical racial comment that needed push back; thought that was clear in my rebuttal.

            But to be clear no I do not support them or their cause.

            I support their to right to protest. Anyone that would deny them their idiotic rant is getting in the way of progress. This group is heading for a high speed crash into oblivion. Let them self identify and do not get in their way.

            I support my right to point and laugh at them.

            I support my right to push back on racially motivated comments.

          • He didn’t say that only white people do such things, he said all white people do such things.
            Just as bad, just a different form of racism.

          • If you spent time reading my other comments in the thread you would know the answer to that question.

            JEHILL, ….. don’t be talking more “trash”. I asked you a question, which was, ….. “ are we to assume that you are an older wealthy white person ” ……. and you ignored it.

            So just as I figured, …..you are young, ….. under 35, …… and not wealthy enough to move out of your parent’s home …… and you embrace the lunacy of the “climate protesting movement”.

            “DUH”, those adolescent minded “protestors” aren’t smart enough to protest something more attuned to their limited intelligence, …… like halting the excessive rains in Texas and Louisiana, …… preventing the destructive Spring flooding of the Mississippi …… or putting a damper on the dastardly “hot” drought conditions in Death Valley.

            Those 3 items are sure as ell a lot easier for those “dummies” to try fixin ….. than their silliness at trying to “fix the climate”.

          • @SCC

            Hey man I am on your side; not sure why you are coming down me and ignoring the racist comment by 4EDouglas.

            I am nearly 50 and I am a bleached polar bear kind of white; not pretty. Been in the US Army as a paratrooper and haven’t been home since. Lost my mother to cancer at the age 22 after an 11 year fight. Been to 49 of the 50 states; lived in 11 states, been to Calgary a few times and London for work and Holiday; I minded the gap while I was in London; I moved with the Army and Corporate sponsored moves most of those 11 times; organizations paid me to move; I am on the cusp of another company sponsored move.

            Have not been a liberal since the age of three.

            Stated I did not agree with the idiotic climate protesters. Not sure what more I can add to this other than to say protesting the climate seems like an oxymoronic thing to do; as the only way to escape this planet’s climate is to be on different planet but you will still be in a climate.

            I am not going to include my LinkedIn profile here but I did include it on the comment submissions form

          • JEHILL – September 24, 2019 at 12:46 pm

            Hey man I am on your side; not sure why you are coming down me and ignoring the racist comment by 4EDouglas.

            I am nearly 50 and I am a bleached polar bear kind of white;

            “DUH”, you are not on my side …… and the ONLY thing ‘racist’ about 4EDouglas’s comment is what you and all the other liberal racist and/or partisan Democrats conjure up in your mind to justify your incivility toward anyone that doesn’t kowtow to your “will n’ pleasure”.

            In other words, anyone or anything that disagrees with you or yours ……. ya’ll immediately accuse them of being “a racist”.

            What 4EDouglas stated was an undeniable truth about the “accusations and charges” being voiced by the liberal left Democrats, to wit:

            It is always wealthy white people.

            their greatest fear is healthy happy prosperous dark skinned people.

            And JEHILL, you being a “nearly 50 year old bleached polar bear kind of white” doesn’t negate your ‘racist’ guilt any more than it does the ‘racist’ guilt of the “white-like-you” WEALTHY Democrat POTUS candidates, or any of the other irate “mouthy” democrats that are afflicted with the “Trump Derangement Syndrome”.

            Congressional Democrats have wasted the past 3 years, shirking their “elected” duties in favor of trying to prosecute Trump on “trumped-up” charges and accusations. They are literally obsessed with destroying Trump and regaining control of the ….. DC Swamp of dastardly deeds, graft and corruption.

          • @SCC
            I am absolutely none of those item you are ascribing to me.

            You have misread both mine and 4EDouglas’ comments.

            Nothing I say will change your view of me. I reject everything you are saying about me.

            I wish nothing but the best for you.

      • If we didn’t want wealthy dark skinned people we would be supporting the policies of Democrats, and confining them to inner-city ghettos with no education and uncontrolled recreational drugs.

  3. “This is more important than their jobs”.

    Nice to know he’s made that decision for others. There’s the real “privilege” I keep hearing about.

    • Even if that job help secures our country from attack that allows this protester to actually protest. They have the foresight of rear view mirrors.

    • Yeah, this new generation really seems to display a lot of entitled privilege – it’s THEIR planet – it’s THEIR future – NOT anybody else who still happens to live here, and still will be for a while yet.
      But apparently, they’re all teenagers now (or college-graduates – even worse, these days), and of course know everything – and they’re ready to take their rightful place as rulers. It’s an arrogance that’s absolute.

      I’ll tell you this – if they actually get what they wanted ‘their’ future will be a lot bleaker – real-world bleak, as opposed to virtual reality projected a century or two in the future.

      • That guy in the polar bear suit sure doesn’t look like any millennial or gen-z’er. Looks more like a guy a little too young to have been able to protest the Viet Nam war, and now sees his chance to Make A Difference.

        Why can’t more people follow Voltaire’s advice to “cultivate one’s own garden”?

        • That guy’s probably one of their teachers.

          But to your point – that’s exactly what I mean when I say it’s always the same people in every generation – who just can’t stand to allow other people to live their lives in ways they don’t approve.

          Add that to the forced-compliance to the latest end-of-the-world fear – C02 instead of 2012, or 1999, or Y2K, or the Population Bomb, or the Flying Saucer, or etc…

          • To be fair, the Y2K thing didn’t try to change other people’s lives. It just made lots of money for underemployed Cobol programmers.

        • They are too bound up with trying to poke their nose elsewhere.
          Maybe they should:
          Clean their own room
          Cultivate their OWN garden
          Not put their rubbish over their neighbour-s fence.

      • My petty, creepy cyberstalker with Stockholm syndrome strikes to waste recycled cyber bits on BS. It is besotted with me after so many spankings that it has endured from me! Why are you so jealous and envious.

        • Well, he’s mastered the exclamation point, but seems confused about the question mark.
          I think he’s chanting a spell of some sort, watch out for atmospheric mayhem if he invokes the latent omnipotence of the 0.04%.

  4. The Daily Caller founded by white supremacist Tucker Carlson with fossil fuel money to provide disinformation and fake news is now a reference source for the infamous WUWT? Your low standards are falling to rock bottom. Shame on you!

      • I don’t embellish or regurgitate fake news as you seem to enjoy. Or perhaps there are more things you know about Carlson than me? I presume you are not advocating DC as a reference source and jest.

        • But you do apparently lie….fabricate; peddle in fake news yourself; classical case of physiological projection; with an unhealthy dose of cognitive dissonance.

          Proof? Links?

          Most of us here obtain our information and knowledge from multiple sources; remember we are the skeptics;

          • You are no skeptic. A skeptic is well versed in the topic at the expert level. You are a rookie right-wing conservative science denier who bleats an appeal to authority seeking some illusive credibility. So to lying, I wouldn’t go there if I were you as that is now your platform as evidenced by the behavior of your fat, lazy, orange coward clown leader in the WH.

          • I did not vote for Trump. I did not vote for Hillary either.

            I had a blank line and voted for myself.

            You obviously have not read any my comments. I challenge everyone and all authority – remember I am skeptical of anybody self-proclaimed “expert” status.

            As far as being a science denier:
            My background is Electrical Engineering and Chemistry.
            I have been a Cyclotron Engineer, Radio-Chemist, Analytical Instrumentation Engineer and, a Paratrooper in the 82nd Airborne Division, three summer internships at Oak Ridge National Lab, passed the Navy Nuclear entrance exam just to name a few things. How about you?

            The climate is changing; planet Earth is warming up; but planet Earth has done this before; so so what big deal.

          • Thank you for affirming you are neither an expert or a climate scientist. Your comments bare that out strongly.

            The climate is changing; planet Earth is warming up; but planet Earth has done this before; so so what big deal.

            Nonsense! CWP is unprecedented at 200x where natural variation would have the planets mean temperature and at least 35x the rate of the last four warming cycles as Earth exited glacial to interglacial.

          • @Rob

            The study of climate is multi-disciplinary endeavor. Thermodynamics, Chemistry, Geology, Physics, etc.

            Talk about appealing to authority. Pot calling kettle black, much? Again, with psychological projections and cognitive dissonance.

            During my time as an instrumentation engineer I was a 3rd party technical advisor to one of NOAA’s oceanic laboratories. One of their main analytical instruments was a TOC analyzer. They called me when they needed technical and engineering support. I also supported all of the environmental academics in this particular geographic region across all the disciples of planetary science.

            Those numbers are from cherry picked timelines. Not that it would matter to me. It does not change that the system is dynamic and chaotic. It is not static and the boundaries and variability are wide.

            Are you suggesting that biological activities/ lifeforms have never made a compositional atmospheric or geological change to planet Earth?

            Technical question for you:

            When you see a forested area with lots of Lichen on the trees; what would this indicate as to the state of the environment? No using Google either.

          • Trump maybe a lot of things you hate but Lazy ain’t one of them.

            As I stated I did not vote for him but I am happy that Hillary lost.

          • “You are no skeptic. A skeptic is well versed in the topic at the expert level.”

            Rob, for the past 50 years….who is responsible for all the increase in atmospheric CO2?

          • Rob

            Are you suggesting that XR protesters are somehow “well versed in the topic at the expert level“?

            It would appear you are are a rookie “left-wing socialist science denier who bleats an appeal to authority seeking some illusive credibility.

            The difference is we sceptics are inclined to keep our own counsel. We examine the science critically rather than bursting onto a blog and hurling inane, puerile insults at people.

            Please sit in the corner for a while and consider your conduct before returning to engage in an adult discussion.

            You are permitted to suck your thumb whilst in said corner.

          • You are no skeptic but a strong science denier – see my previous comments for my reasoning and your confirmation that you are not a skeptic.

          • There you go again Rob, demonstrating your utter contempt for actual science.
            Study up on the issues of resolution and why you can’t compare rates for proxies vs. instrument records.

          • My petty, creepy cyberstalker with Stockholm syndrome strikes to waste recycled cyber bits on BS. It is besotted with me after so many spankings that it has endured from me! What is it with you uneducated buffoons that you feel compelled to follow your intellectual superiors after we have given you thorough schooling in the very basics of math and science? Those are emotionally appealing talking points, too bad they are not based in reality or have any scientific context and is meaningless and misleading. Definitely not from a scientifically literate brain. Very creepy!!

          • Among the many facts that Rob works so hard to avoid knowing, is the fact that the oceans outgas CO2 as they warm.

          • My petty, creepy cyberstalker with Stockholm syndrome strikes to waste recycled cyber bits on BS. It is besotted with me after so many spankings that it has endured from me!

            MarkW shows that it is clueless about partial pressure – if what he asserts is true then our oceans should be undergoing alkalinization instead of acidification. pH has dropped 30% since the beginning of the 20th century and continues to fall. Can’t BS data Markie.

          • no Rod pH has not dropped 30%…..some scientist you are

            pH has dropped from 8.2 to 8.1…. a drop of 0.1….that represents a 30% increase in acidity

            …and 8.1 is still solid in the normal range….no measurements have shown it’s still falling

          • Alkalinity and pH are different things. Before you question other’s expertise, you should halfway know about the subject.

          • My petty, creepy cyberstalker with Stockholm syndrome strikes to waste recycled cyber bits on BS.

            You probably shouldn’t repeat that line over and over again when you don’t know what half of it means.

            The Stockholm syndrome bit isn’t even remotely rational. That’s when a hostage starts identifying with and rationalizing for their kidnapper.

            As for Cyberstalker, Mark is the regular here. YOU are the ignorant troll with nothing interesting to say.

            Even the thing about recycled cyber bits more accurately describes you and your copy/pasted arguments repeated ad nosium.

            All in all, a weak taunt regurgitated too often by a fool.

            ~¿~

          • MarkW and you are classic examples of why you science deniers have no traction and are an embarrassment to yourselves and your nation but you are either too stubborn or arrogant to know better. Shame on you.

          • For the 2nd time:
            The planet is slightly warmer again, so what?

            Data seems to indicate that humans have added some CO2 to atmosphere; data tenuously suggests there may be increased temperatures trends; that data as of yet does not correlate that the two are related. Again so what?

          • The planet is slightly warmer again, so what?

            Run away rookie ignorance. You peaked in middle school, didn’t you? You personify ignorance, mountain dew, big trucks and chew.

            Data seems (sic) to indicate that humans have added some CO2 to atmosphere; data tenuously suggests (sic) there may be increased temperatures trends; that data as of yet does (sic) not correlate that the two are related.

            The data and science are unequivocal. AGW is a rare, solid scientific theory, 123 years old with consensus. Every current researcher worldwide who publishes in the recognized peer-review journals subscribes to the theory i.e. 100%.

            Scientific bodies, professional organizations, institutes, societies, etc worldwide that reject the IPCC findings = ZERO! Defendant Chevron 3/21/2018 Federal Court SFC:

            “The best science was presented by plaintive … from Chevron’s perspective, there’s no debate about climate science. First, because Chevron accepts what this scientific body and includes scientists and others, but what the IPCC has reached consensus on in terms of science on climate change.” All other defendants concurred.” People of State of California v. BP p.l.c. http://climatecasechart.com/case/people-state-california-v-bp-plc-oakland/ Defendants: Exxon Mobile, Royal Dutch Shell, Chevron, BP, ConocoPhilips +10 DOES

          • Oh please, why the prevarication and embellishment? Is it cathartic to lie like the fat, lazy, orange lying coward clown in the WH?

          • Trump may be a lot of things but Lazy ain’t one of them.

            He seems to in fact run circles around the leftist leaning media and climate alarmists.

          • He exemplifies lazy. Works an 8 hour day with six for personal time to watch Fox and learn what he needs to parrot or tweet. He has been most successful to be the first president to score the #1 last spot on the list compiled by presidential historians. This has never been attained by a sitting president let alone those out of office. The bottom spot was usually a tie between four of five from the 19th and early 20th century. He thinks he is worthy of a Nobel prize – what’s he going to do when Greta gets one and he’s on his way to prison?

        • Rob > “MarkW shows that it is clueless about partial pressure – if what he asserts is true then our oceans should be undergoing alkalinization instead of acidification. pH has dropped 30% since the beginning of the 20th century and continues to fall. Can’t BS data Markie.”

          ….Rob, you just blew it…..no scientist would have said that….it’s not even possible

          • What? Your comment makes no sense. Please let everyone know when the English translation of your post becomes available.

          • Oh please it is actually closer to 35%.

            Acidification of the oceans: Range of ocean pH is 7.5 – 8.5, with a current mean of about 8.069 and heading to 7.824 when pre-industrial CO₂ doubles (560ppmv). Between 1751 and 1996 surface ocean pH is estimated to have decreased from approximately 8.25 to 8.14 representing an increase of almost 35% in H+ ion concentration in the world’s oceans. DOI:10.1029/2004JD005220 and SCOR (International Council for Science Scientific Committee on Ocean Research).

    • An extinct rebel here to support their loser group? Not forgetting that Soros is a major support.

      Blindingly wrong on every point.
      Clearly identifying yourself as either paid trollop or a spineless couch potato who watches CNN and loves the New York Time.
      • Uninformed.
      • Utter lack of knowledge in spite of education.
      Yet, proud to go on websites and display your ignorance.

      • Prove Tucker Carlson is a white supremacist; i.e. definitive evidence not sloppy claims from AOC.
      • Tucker Carlson adheres to telling and showing the truth.
      • The Daily Caller is not a fake news source; or you can prove your claim by posting evidence; again, not silly claims.

      WUWT maintains, even counting your silly comment, an extremely high standard of excellence.

      • It is obvious why you admire the privileged white supremacist Tucker. His approach to facts and evidence is very similar to your techniques in distorting reality.

        WUWT maintains, even counting your silly comment, an extremely high standard of excellence.

        You are caught in a lie. Lie smarter. A lie makes you look weak, desperate, and disreputable. Why do you bother to write a lie so easy to Gôôgle and verify? A more competent liar will make a fabrication that’s harder to debunk. Humans with a spine would produce verifiable evidence for their assertions, not prejudiced feelings. I’ve examined invertebrates with more spine than you!

          • “Rob September 23, 2019 at 1:39 pm

            I have all the hard sciences at undergrad level with majors in geography, paleontology, Earth science, and economic geology and graduated with a BSc before I turned 20.”

            If true, you would be recognised, somewhere, for that achievement. And rightly so. Could you show your achievements, it would support your rather, arrogant and deriding, position.

          • Worry about yourself. My life is of no concern to you. I didn’t set out to do geology and used it initially as a filler course. Well, they dropped a surprise quiz after a month and I scored the highest marks ever for which they held an ad hocaward ceremony and presented me with my first noncurricular book on Earth Science signed by the head of the department who was a very famous Geomorphologist and Paleontologist. I was hooked at 16 years.

          • @Rob,

            Cool story bro….

            That really does sound like a “registered professional scientist” of 50 decades….

          • With Earth science (It was called planetary science when I did it in the UK) I beat you by 8 years. But who’s counting?

        • Rob, stop using fossil fuels every day you flaming HYPOCRITE!!
          Because your imagined climate change, and stop helping out Exxon.

          • I use minimal fossil fuels and supply power to my local electricity Co-op from solar. I leave the lightest practical carbon footprint that I can. Climate change due to humans is not imagined – it is well documented. You need to keep up. Perhaps I have the advantage of being an active professional scientist for over 50 decades and still active and current in my retirement. I love my grandchildren probably you have none with your hardon for habitat and biosphere destruction?

          • professional scientist for over 50 decades

            But cannot do simple math:

            50 decades * 10 years = 500 years old. It is sad to think that someone who lived without fossil would ever want to go back. Or you just cannot do math.

            You do realize that whatever machine you are using to grace us with your existence was physically made using fossilized raw materials left/deposited by ancient biology in geological formations.

          • Typo’s are greater among the smarter minds as shown by numerous published research papers. Typos are the sign of a very smart mind that recognizes all formats of the same spelling. Copy editors/proof readers are average IQ and cheap. You even do it for free. There’s Grammarly software too!

          • Than why have you missed all of mine.

            For the record that’s a mathematical mental error not a grammar, typo, or syntax error 😉

            Just sayin’

          • Rob, when someone says they are a “professional scientist,” they are neither. An actual scientist calls themselves by their field: a physicist; a geologist; an engineer.

            But you’re an obvious troll, only here to spew nonsense and try to roil the waters. I’ll give you a chance, however.

            What analysis of what data have you done to convince yourself that the danger from anthropogenic global warming, leading to catastrophic climate change, is real?

            Quoting other’s work is not acceptable. Using the “97%” meme is unacceptable. For example, I have the temperature records from NOAA’s GHCN Daily Temperature records loaded into a database at home. I’ve created my own 5 deg X 5 deg world grid to experiment with weighted averaging.

            You?

          • I know my own career very well after five decades and also a registered professional scientist in the US and internationally where such was required. I am old enough to have been trained in several fields which were all in their infancy when I was a post-graduate student and are specialist fields in their own right today. I have all the hard sciences at undergrad level with majors in geography, paleontology, Earth science, and economic geology and graduated with a BSc before I turned 20. I have post-graduate in engineering geology, ground-water hydrology, soil and rock mechanics, hydraulic engineering and hydrology, climatology, and environmental engineering. I have worked on every inhabitable continent. I have authored or co-authored hundred’s of scientific reports and the odd peer-reviewed paper. I have also contributed to several seminal books on applied Earth and Climate science. I have taught as guest lecturer at several universities at under and postgraduate level and more conferences, symposia and professional meetings than I care to recall.

          • Rob, given your tendency to find reason to insult others over the slightest fault, your attempts excuse your own typos is really funny.

          • A career spanning “50 decades” and “hundred’s of scientific reports.”

            This guy tells bigger whoppers and makes more errors than Mikey Fraudpants.

          • @Rob “I leave the lightest practical carbon footprint that I can. ”

            What a cop out. But it’s entirely typical how you nuts rationalize your hypocritical lifestyle.

        • As usual, when asked to defend his claims, he merely regurgitates his claims along with new insults.

          Rob is the ultimate denier, he not only denies science, but he denies reality as well.

          • Ro

            (Presumably Rob, which also suggests he’s changing his identity on here and missed a letter in his panic to respond).

            Is that the best puerile insult you can muster?

            Scientist my backside…….you wouldn’t know science if it jumped up and bit you on the backside! LOL

    • @Rob: Do you know what White Supermacist means? When people such as you, Rob, can only use ad hominem attacks, which are devoid of ration, you know who won the argument. It is not you.

    • Rob has just proven that the cranial/sphincter junction is not only possible but is in full practice by himself and a multitude of others just like him. If Rob, and others like him, believe there is a climate cataclysm in progress and that mankind is the cause, they should put up, or shut up, and do the right thing; end themselves.

      Personally, I do not think there is a problem with the climate of the Earth and, because that’s my position, I’m NOT being a hypocrite by doing nothing about it. Rob and company, on the other hand, are hypocrites by default because they haven’t offed themselves for the betterment of the environment. Nothing less will do.

      So, how about it, Rob? You willing to give the ultimate sacrifice to save the planet? Because, from where I stand, you’re a giant hypocrite with absolutely NO credibility if you’re not down for the struggle and willing to give up everything for the cause. After all, that’s what this climate cataclysm movement is all about but, then, that’s only for other people, right Rob? It’s up to others to give up everything and die in squalor to save the planet.

      There’s no sarcasm intended in the above, I am dead serious. I’m tired of these self righteous A$$ Clowns who have no idea of the consequences of what they’re advocating for. They are advocating for the obliteration of Western Civilization and industrialization all together and going back to a state of being as hunter gatherers which means that 99.9% of the worlds population would have to go bye-bye. Well, my message to Rob and company is YOU FIRST.

      Regards

      Max

    • It’s all good. We stand outside of leftist framings and laugh at them. It’s hard to tell which is funnier: their faux morality or your sarcasm.

        • Rob your cognitive reasoning is non existent. You also show a lack of common sense. Hit the books for a while then come back and show us what you have learned. Bring “FACTS” this time not your present supposition.

          • Common sense is useless that’s why you think the earth is flat, the sun rises and sets, etc. I don’t think you know what facts are and science works by evaluating evidence and analyzing data.

            Fact: a statement or assertion of verified information about something that is the case or has happened.

            What you believe or don’t is entirely up to you; it’s not a religion but science. The statements in a scientific study are not canonical. It can be criticized, e.g., assumptions, data collection or methodology. Or someone has better and newer data as evidence that points to different conclusions. Any scientific study can be subject to revision, that’s how we progress and advance! However, if your only basis do dismiss a study is your disbelief of the results from the study then this is just argument from incredulity. Which is a logical fallacy, but not a valid argument in science? Then you have nothing.

        • Rob, I have to tell you, at the beginning, over twenty years ago, I was intrigued with this subject. I obtained a BSci in physics, and an M.S. in astrophysics back in the ‘70s.

          I had thought the climate was too complex to model, and was fascinated that research had advanced sufficiently for them to have credible models that were accepted as being accurate for predictions of decades in the future.

          I was disappointed that little details of the models were available, what was available was extremely simplistic, there were no observational data that supported them, and nothing but the future could verify or disprove them; there were no ways to test them.

          I found two sites that discussed the subject. One presented ideas with supporting data. Commenters discussed the pros and cons, strengths and weaknesses of the concepts. Everyone learned a little from each other, and any disagreements were respectful, though sometimes passionate.

          The second site, which supposedly showed the science of global warming, presented little science. Every weather event was offered as proof of impending catastrophe. Most of the topics were predictions of doom that was certain to happen. In the comment section, if anyone questioned the conclusion, or even asked a valid scientific question (What are the margins of error on these forecasts? How can we verify these conclusions?) he was answered with scorn, derision, and insults. Guess which site I stayed with, the one with intellectual discourse on the subject, or the one with nothing but vile rants at any questioning of their overly-simplistic science?

          In short, Rob, people like YOU convinced me that the catastrophic climate change movement contains little science but a lot of hatred. Your comments have done nothing to show me that anything has changed over the years.

          • I was disappointed that little details of the models were available, what was available was extremely simplistic, there were no observational data that supported them, and nothing but the future could verify or disprove them; there were no ways to test them.

            If your research was as thorough as you imply, you should be turning up different results. Have any links from a scientist or scientifically literate person who knows what they’re doing?

            In order for your criticisms to matter, you need to demonstrate that the models are missing meaningful physics for the purpose the model has been designed for (as opposed to some other purpose you would like the model to be designed for). With GCMs there is nothing to be uncertain of. You run a model, and that is what is simulated. Uncertainty is about what would happen if you had done things differently. With a model that is easy. You just do things differently and see. Run it again. That is what we do. Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5)

            Climate models project forced trends but only simulate stochastic variability. By inference no-one should expect them to accurately project global temperatures over short periods that are dominated by stochastic and unforced variability. Decades of data show that models reliably produce accurate projections of long-term trends for specified emission scenarios. The models are certainly accurate enough to inform and formulate policy decisions. So-called climate skeptics have yet to construct a model that explains the observed warming. The only explanation of the warming that is consistent with the temperature record over the last hundred years is warming due to the release of greenhouse gases. The claim that climate models systematically overestimate the response to radiative forcing from increasing greenhouse gas concentrations is unfounded [2015: doi:10.1038/nature14117]. If science-deniers are so certain that another force is responsible for the warming then why can’t they construct a model to demonstrate that?

          • Gee, Rob, if you are a scientist or scientifically literate person who knows what he is doing, why aren’t you providing me with the links I have been searching for? I can’t demonstrate that the models are missing meaningful physics for the purpose the model has been designed for if I can’t see their assumptions, methodology, programming, and input data.

            Decades of data show the models do not reliably produce accurate projections of the magnitude of long-term trend for specified emission scenarios. Actual data prove that. Nothing else is required. That means the models are far too inaccurate to inform and formulate policy decisions. There is a lot of difference between 0.9 degrees warming per century and 9.0 degrees.

            If you feel that greenhouse gases are the only explanation for current warming, please tell me what mechanism was responsible for the warming from 1910 to 1940. We do not know that which we do not know. The support of a concept by the process of elimination is the weakest evidence of all science.

            No, Ron, it is not up to us to provide a better model to dismiss existing models as wrong. Models stand on their on merits, without regard to anthing else. When a model fails to correspond to reality, it is wrong. No futher effort is required. No competent scientist would say otherwise.

            The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.

            As usual, you are very verbose with nothing to support what you say.

          • Decades of data show the models do not reliably produce accurate projections of the magnitude of long-term trend for specified emission scenarios.

            Utter nonsense. You make all the assertions and demand links and citations from me. Well, that is not how science or debate works. The burden of proof is on you.

            The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.

            You are conflating weather for climate. An oft-made rookie error. Climate is just simply the mean of the weather over a baseline of a minimum of 30 years. Scientifically literate folk know this? What is your handicap?

            I don’t have time to waste on scientifically inept folk and junk science so please don’t waste any more of my time with your silliness./ Once you are able to step it up several notches I am sure we can have very fruitful discussions.

    • Rob is no doubt a paid troll. Go for it Rob. Pull out the troll textbook and use every suggestion in it.

      Just curious, what do you actually get paid for this? Is it really worth it?

    • Once again, when faced with an utter lack of facts, Rob decides that the way forward is just to make up insults about anyone who happens to be more conservative than he is.

      Notice that once again Rob doesn’t offer any proof of his slurs, and if he follows pattern, asking him to back up his slanders will result in him spewing even more insults. He may even get so upset that he is forced to break out his thesaurus.

    • “People demonstrating their constitutional rights and…”

      Or potentially affecting national security, being a public safety nuisance, or economic terrorism….

  5. Lame. Just….. lame.
    Once again I hear Barbara Streisand cooing:
    Send in the Clowns…. There have to be Clowns. Don’t bother, they’re here!

  6. The overwhelming feeling I have following the climate alarmists demos is just how pathetic they seem. The children can be forgiven because they have not been taught the truth. The grown up children, note I avoid calling the adults, because they have clearly not reached that stage of maturity, are just pathetic.
    The numbers involved also speaks for itself. The climate alarmists are losing the debate because they have no scientific basis for their nonsense position.

    • “The climate alarmists are losing the debate because they have no scientific basis for their nonsense position.”

      That’s what it boils down to.

      When the alarmists are challenged and asked to “put up or shut up” about scientific verificatin of CAGW they don’t have anything to put up so they have to shut up. They fail this challenge and they know it and they know they are losing the debate.

    • I saw 3 young girls looking very dejected during the strike, they had cardboard placards, but were not bothering to wave them, I guess they had either been largely ignored by people going about their business, or had somehow failed to meet up with the adult “gurus” behind the strike.

  7. Protesting in costumes is silly, pointless. The cult of CAGW are 100% incorrect and they are so mad ….

    Anger is weird… strange… not logical… and dangerous.

    Angry pointless wordless is pathetic.

    It is sad to see anger in a young child. Look at her face. That is not right.

    ‘You have stolen my dreams’: Thunberg at UN … – YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com › watch

    We need to start an intelligent conversion with the Left wing that goes some where.

    • …well obviously her “dreams” were not to be famous, travel the world, yachts, and be the center of attention

    • The Left seems to be lacking the necessary cognitive abilities for engaging in intelligent conversation. All they seem to know is hate.

  8. I’m thinking that there are too many government regulations. Why, you might ask?

    Because the people who just wanted to get to work would have just ploughed ahead, asserting their right to freedom of travel, except there would be paperwork! Hours and hours of @#%! paperwork.

    So they just sit there in their cars and stew about the delay because at least there is no paperwork.

    The protesters should consider themselves lucky that they weren’t blocking anyone who actually likes paperwork.

  9. I was just watching bbc news, and I saw a poster made to look like the sun with “solar power” written on it 😐 Do these people not know the massive destruction need to mine the materials and materials needed for tons upon tons of batteries, which also need tons of plastic insulation… I’m truly shocked at the lack of education of these climate people. Also when has the world ever had perfect sunny days for years on end?

  10. Fear for them if you’ve ever driven or ridden in DC.

    BTW how many protests are taking place in east DC…at night….near the liquor stores?

    • ResourceGuy: “BTW how many protests are taking place in east DC…at night….near the liquor stores?”

      Good point, RG. None of the protesters seem to have the courage of their convictions.

      OTOH, most of the people they had tied up in traffic were probably oxygen-wasting paper pushers whose job it is to make life miserable for the gainfully employed, tax paying citizens. They can’t do that sitting in traffic. So I guess we should be grateful for the small blessings that came out of the protests.

  11. The addition of Solar Particle Forcing is glorious and the fact is the timing couldn’t be better. Please, I hope more of these useful idiots come out to the public so they can have their stupidity held over them for years to come when the CO2 Cult is finally upended.

  12. What’s the going daily rate for paid climate street protesting? It needs to double for hazard pay in DC streets.

  13. In the video, it looks like most of the pedestrians ignored the protesters, and most of the motorists honked for them to get out of the way. They only succeeded in making nuisances of themselves.

    The protesters were the only ones wearing masks, while everyone else found the air to be perfectly breathable.

    The protesters should take their protests to China, the most polluted country in the world, where many residents do wear masks. Except that Xi would probably take them to jail, never to be seen again.

  14. From the video, most of the pedestrians ignored the protesters, and most motorists honked at them to get out of the way. The protesters did succeed in making nuisances of themselves.

    They should take their gig to China, the most polluted country in the world, where lots of residents routinely wear gas masks. Except that some might disappear into Xi’s jails.

  15. The USA has reduced CO2 emissions. China and India continue increasing CO2 emissions. Why aren’t they protesting there?

  16. The revealing thing, as always, is that no-one can say exactly

    — what it is they want to have done, and

    — what effect doing it will have on global emissions and temperatures.

    And this is because the aim of these demonstrations is not to get any action at all, and certainly not to get any action on emissions.

    The aim of these demonstations is to use the issue to radicalize. And that is all.

    If you want to combat this nonsense, just ask the two key questions.

    1) What specifically do you want done by who?

    2) And what effects will your proposed actions have on global emissions and climate in (say) 2050. Or whatever year you want.

    • I am afraid their answers would at least include:
      1. Stop all oil and gas production, including drilling and fracking, and ban the use of coal.
      2, The effect it will have is to save the climate.

      They know not the consequences of 1, nor the absurdity of 2.

      • Yes, but go on and ask the whole question: Ask WHO?

        Who is supposed to stop the production and use of oil and gas and coal? And what effect will their action have on global emissions?

        You will find a curious movement as you ask this question, and the way to get to it is to ask who ‘we’ is.

        We are facing a climate crisis, emergency or whatever. In this context, we is the whole planet, the entire population of the planet.

        We therefore must stop producing and using oil, gas, coal. In this context, we will turn out to be only the country the demonstrators are active in. It could be the US or the UK.

        But what those paying attention will notice is that it is no longer all countries and everyone on the planet. You will find that China and India and Russia are no longer mentioned as having to stop using.

        In some logically inexplicable way you will find that the initial demand that its necessary for all fossil fuel use anywhere on the planet to stop almost immediately has turned into the demand that the West stop all fossil fuel use immediately while the rest of the world carries on and increases its use.

        So what started out as a demand that the world reduce its emissions from 37 billion tons a year to zero now becomes the demand that the West reduce its emissions from 10 or so billion tons to zero, while the rest of the world raises its emissions from 20 billion or so to 45 or so.

        So this is not in fact a demand for a reduction in global emissions or a demand to stop, globally, actions which will lower global emissions. And it cannot be argued for in order to defend civilization or stop global warming. Its directed to objectives which cannot reduce global emissions.

        Now ask yourself and your interlocutor why.

        It is my opinion that alarmist social media on this issue is mainly driven by paid astroturfers. I don’t have specific evidence. It is however the only conclusion that the logic of their demands can lead one to. What other motive could there be for demanding action at the same time so locally damaging and so globally ineffective? What else could be the justification for demanding that global emissions stop, but the largest emitters carry on emitting?

        Even the Guardian is starting to notice this – with its little one sentence aside to the effect that in the Pacific region, China has none of these climate demonstrations going on. Yes, curious, that…

  17. Anything that can piss off lots of entrenched deep state bureaucrats is ok with me.

    The stupid Climate Activists don’t seem to know who their fellow travelers are in the Climate Crisis Crusade for the destruction of Western Civilization. Almost nobody Inside the Beltway is likely to be sympathetic to evil capitalists or to be supporters of the Constitution.

    • Not exactly, but close in practical terms. They don’t care about capitalists, communists, vegans, whatever – they care about power. Specifically, how much personal and organizational power they can wield. If it pays well, that’s a bonus.

      The Constitution was specifically designed to handcuff their acquisition of power – so they hate it. Populist politicians from Andrew Jackson to Donald Trump are also scorned, but occasional resets are necessary.

  18. Erm, boring, but going back to Rob and ice and polar bears- yesterday’s equinox had the Arctic ice turnaround at just over 4 million sq kilometres as every year since 2007 save 2013. Polar bear population is c 35,000 some say more. Read “Arctic Dreams” for how Darwin has fixed up the polar bear against Rob and the BBC. But why the Black Nose? Counterintuitive.

  19. We are reaching ‘peak hysteria’.

    It’s on our streets, in our media and swamping our politics. Is the public convinced? I don’t think so, or at least, without peak hysteria they wouldn’t be as convinced.

    The whole thing can only go on for so long before people get utterly bored with it all. Frankly, you’re average man in the street doesn’t see any difference in the climate from 20 years ago and doesn’t really give a hoot about African nations that have refused to move into the 21st Century.

    We are all getting sick of having crying, emaciated children with flies around their faces projected into our living rooms nightly, because nothing we have done in generations seems to have solved any of their problems.

    Where has our money gone? All those donations we have contributed over the years?

    Well, we all know the answer to that – straight into the pockets of corrupt African politicians and warlords. Decades of financial contributions from western children, and Africans are still eating bush meat, from where the Ebola virus emerged. And who steeped in to clean up the Ebola mess? The UN of course, having failed for around 70 years to make any meaningful impact on African poverty they celebrate their success in controlling a disease that should never have existed.

    The world is waking up thanks to the internet. The climate scam can’t continue for much longer, particularly as NASA is now tentatively telling us there appears to be a cooling trend.

    When that particular snowball (pardon the pun) begins rolling, there will be an awful lot of people with an awful lot of egg on their face and I sincerely hope I’m around to see it.

    The problem is, of course, in order for sceptics to prove they are correct, we must wish for precisely what we don’t want, and what will be bad for the world, a cooling trend.

    • Sadly, I think the writing is on the wall and cooling is what we should expect. Its horrible, but thanks to scum running things we’ve frittered away a lot of the resources we SHOULD have been expending to prepare for the shift to colder conditions. But, that would require honesty on the part of the power-mad elitists that found a way to game the system (literally, the people Ayn Rand called the Looters & Moochers, the rich and powerful who used government power to increase their wealth instead of competing in the Free Market).

      But hey, what do I know, I don’t have a scientific field PhD from some prestigious University where I could forever keep the grant-money gravy train going as long as I scientifically illiterate spewed “Scientism” nonsense to the deluded mass of low-IQ idiots.

      • You suffer from a low self-esteem. These days all you need to be successful is to be an autistic fresh big mouth, making a career in truancy. It is an equal opportunity movement.

    • “We are reaching ‘peak hysteria’.”

      The word “hysteria” has interesting origins. May have something to do with why many of these “doom speakers” are female. Severn at Rio in 1992, AOC, Greta in 2019 etc etc…

      Far from it. They are just getting started. I have seen their demands;

      Shutdown debate. Almost all comments I have read want “denier” comments deleted and the emails used blocked, like at The Conversation. These people want restrictions on energy, fuel, food, private transport to name a few. A country, rich in oil, is currently experiencing that: Venezuela. This is exactly what these people believe is good for humanity and the planet.

      It is mass delusion on a global scale. The bigger these things are, typically, the bigger the fall will be.

  20. All these demonstrating alarmists are hypocrits unless they “Take the Pledge” and immediately swear off the personal use of fossil fuels.

    If they don’t, then don’t come crying to me, because I’ll know they are not serious about the world ending in 12 years.

    If you are going to “talk the talk” then you need to “walk the walk”. Otherwise you are a hypocrit.

  21. “Circus dementiae”, a festival, posing, virtue signalling, a marketing gimmick, but “the product” is to make us all poorer and the investors richer.
    Climate change Litigation Poor product, nobody wants to buy, so they try to force it through legislation.
    And, of course silly stunts, that look quite ridiculous.

  22. “Perhaps I have the advantage of being an active professional scientist for over 50 decades and still active and current in my retirement. ”
    You’ve been an active professional scientist for over 500 yrs? Lol…written with all of the precision that an average liefty (new word alert; that wasn’t a typo) can muster. Next, I imagine that you’ll be concentrating on “smoothing” some historical temperature records.
    Hop to it, Rob! There are still a lot of liefties who need still further enstupidification, so as to even more perfectly fulfill their proper role (spreading fear, ignorance, and chaos) in society, and you’re JUST the man for the job!

  23. What’s that? . . . about 50-100 people? That is simply embarrassing. We have nothing to worry about — with public support running that high (…ahhhh– low?) neither the President or Congress is going to do anything more than virtue signalling.

    Our generation fielded 10,000 in LA and San Francisco — maybe more in Sacramento — protesting the war in Viet Nam.

    How many of you were there? I covered all three for radio news….motorcycle helmet, Sony battery-powered portable reel-to-reel tape recorder…empty pockets — Press Pass taped to helmet, both sides.

    • And made of polypropylene most likely. Idiots like Rob and the XR numbskulls maybe don’t realize that polypropylene is a plastic, polymer of propylene that was produced from petroleum/natural gas.

  24. “Yes, he did. If removing a moratorium on hunting increases the numbers, then it had to be the hunting that was reducing the numbers.”
    What Rob actually said, James Schrumph, is that PUTTING the hunting moratorium (NOT removing it) on bears was what increased their numbers.

    • What Donald should have done is walked up to her, smiled, and called a couple of child protective service agents over, then introduced them.

  25. Poor Greta appears very distraught about the lack of progress on saving the world from CO2. It wasn’t pretty watching her speak before the UN. She seems to have bought into every catastrophic event the alarmists have come up with lately. No doubt, she is convinced the world is crumbling around her.

    It’s really child abuse. It’s pyschological warfare on children and it looks like it is damaging at least some of them mentally. Children do not have the ability to judge many situations adequately due to lack of experience, and adults are taking advantage of them in the case of human-caused climate change.

    It’s criminal. People ought to raise hell about it.

  26. The protesters set a trash dumpster on fire. The fire dept had to come out and put it out.

    The planet is choking and burning so lets help by lighting fires?

  27. I really do not understand why they do this (blocking roads, gluing themselves to roads etc). What do they think that kind of thing will achieve? They will succeed in making lots of enemies, but I can’t see any upside for them. They are basically a very negative cult with negative thoughts and actions. They would be useful if they went around picking up litter, clearing beaches, clearing rivers and streams of debris and vegetation. Why don’t they get together and plant lots of trees? All they do is inconvenience other people and shout a lot. Apparently they are going to have a big ‘mess up London’ activity starting on 7th October. I hope the authorities crack down hard on them, they caused untold misery and disruption in April when they did it before.

    • There also seems to be a disconnect or discontinuity in their thought processes.

      We are carbon based life forms. We need carbon based molecules to live; fossil fuels and materials are ancient biology. They seem to desire that the planet’s own biology cannot or should not interact with itself when clearly it was biological processes coupled with geological and atmospheric conditions to gave the planet fossilized resources.

      Perhaps I am wrong; it seems to me that the order of events:
      Oceans formed – no coral reefs existed
      Biology formed
      Biology evolved
      Biology dies
      Rinse and repeat 2-4 over the next billion years
      Coral reefs form….
      Biology left the oceans
      Rinse and repeat 2-4 over the next billion years
      Fossil fuels formed….

      Somewhere in the midst of that biology scrubbed out methane and CO2; added O2

      Yet these same people would gleefully go to say Mars and willfully try to terraform it regardless if there was life there or not.

      • It is junk science gibberish like this comment that gives science gainsayers and contrarians zero credibility. you are your own worst enemies and we can laugh at your feeble attempts. You were blessed with the brainpower to be a scientist. Tough luck.

          • Why seek my advice about your shortcomings and failures? I have no clue as to why you are under-educated, inexperienced, and scientifically illiterate.

          • Rob

            It’s not my tiny mind that’s in question here. It’s yours.

            Go and find a blog up to your intellectual standard to troll, your local kindergarten probably has one.

        • @Rob

          Again where exactly I am wrong? It is bit picture stuff and my timeline of events is rather simplistic (does not need to be complicated or convoluted) but what exactly is missing; perhaps the obligatory some super-continents formed and broke up. I mean, you have lived for 50 decades.

          So glucose is not a carbohydrate? HDL, LDL, ATP are not carbon based?

          https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/why_oceans.html — I have links to backup each of my steps

          • The difference between us is that I am confident and you are arrogant. I long accepted my typo of 50 decades but you can’t let go and that is a prime reason that you will never be a scientist or scientifically literate. Your arrogance stems from ignorance, under education, aliteracy and an aversion to learning and knowledge. My confidence is from genuine knowledge, postgraduate science education, decades of science and engineering practice and an openness to consider multiple viewpoints on any given issue and then settling on that which has the evidence to withstand the rigors of the scientific method.

          • And you still have not pointed out where and how I am wrong in my thoughts and conjecture in this specific situation.

          • This is all far above your paygrade. Stick to your skillset of being a paratrooper. I am sure you are good at your profession even though the US has the most bloated and unsuccessful military in the history of the planet. Bet you hate socialism too yet you are/were employed by the largest socialist organization in the world.

          • Nice one that actually made me laugh but only because it was predictable, typical.

            Yes all militaries are totalitarian in their command structures.
            My MOS’es in the military were 98J/98G.

            You still have not proved my conjectures wrong. Please provide links.

          • Rob

            “My confidence is from genuine knowledge, postgraduate science education, decades of science and engineering practice and an openness to consider multiple viewpoints on any given issue and then settling on that which has the evidence to withstand the rigors of the scientific method.”

            Bollox. You haven’t a scientific credential to your name.

        • @Rob,
          [blockquote]
          “Why seek my advice about your shortcomings and failures? I have no clue as to why you are under-educated, inexperienced, and scientifically illiterate.”

          “It is junk science gibberish like this comment that gives science gainsayers and contrarians zero credibility. you are your own worst enemies and we can laugh at your feeble attempts. You were blessed with the brainpower to be a scientist.”[/blockquote]

          But yet when I ask him to correct me: — more to the point correct Berkeley he seems to STFU.

          “The atmosphere and biosphere are inextricably linked: changes in living things impact the atmosphere, and the atmosphere, in turn, affects life’s ecology and evolution”

          https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/170503_cyanobacteria

          But hey you live for 50 decades so you just gotta know more then anybody…

  28. I think we rational people can keep quite calm. There’s no crisis. This hysteria affects only a few privileged people in the lefty West. Billions have never heard of Thunberg and are busy building coal fired power stations to hoist themselves out of poverty. CO2 will continue to rise until nobody believes the futile ‘Paris Agreement’. There will be decreasing credibility in ‘extreme’ weather events. The future is visible in BPs authoritative energy production and consumption stats each year. It’s a bright future!!!

Comments are closed.