Dear Climate Alarmists, Welcome to Your Worst Nightmare

Guest essay by Chris Talgo originally published at TownHall

For most of my adult life, climate alarmists have ruled the day as they have methodically and successfully injected their relentless fearmongering and bogus science throughout academia, the mainstream media, Hollywood, and just about every other major, powerful cultural institution. While this has paid giant dividends in recent years, it has also fueled a backlash that we are finally starting to see bubble to the surface.

Let’s begin by briefly recapping how the climate alarmists were able to hypnotize so many people into believing that climate change was an existential crisis—which it is not—in the first place.

At the end of the twentieth century and into the dawn of the twenty-first century, we began to see more and more calls for international bodies to address what they initially deemed “global warming.” In 1992, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was born, which was intended to combat “dangerous human interference with the climate system.”

Since then, the United Nations and several other influential international organizations have pounded the climate change message while weaving a spiderweb of agreements, treaties, and protocols to mitigate the so-called climate crisis.

While these powerful global institutions were ringing the alarm bell that the future of the planet was in immediate jeopardy due to humanity’s use of fossil fuels, a network of grifters emerged who were more than ready to capitalize on the alarmist narrative.

From former Vice President Al Gore to scores of scientists, it became clear that if one jumped on the climate alarmist bandwagon in these early days, there was money to be made and government grants to be gotten.

Not much later, we began to witness high-ranking political officials from both sides of the aisle succumb to the climate alarmist narrative. For instance, way back in 2001, then-President George W. Bush was touting his administration’s climate change agenda.

Then came the cultural deluge as K-12 educators, professors, actors and actresses, TV and radio personalities, social media influencers, and even uneducated child activists from Sweden persistently peddled the climate alarmist narrative.

However, what goes up must come down.

After more than two decades of unyielding climate alarmism, climate realism is slowly starting to take hold.

How do I know this? Because ordinary, hard-working Americans are no longer buying into climate alarmism hook, line, and sinker.

According to multiple polls, climate change is no longer a top concern for the vast majority of Americans.

Americans are finally starting to understand the truth about climate change while simultaneously becoming aware that climate alarmists have ulterior motives at hand, many of which are in direct opposition to the fundamental best interests of everyday Americans.

Thanks to courageous truth seekers like my colleagues at The Heartland Institute and many allied organizations, Americans are more able than ever to receive accurate information dispelling common myths and lies pushed by climate alarmists. As anyone can read at ClimateRealism.com, the seas are not rising and weather events like hurricanes, heatwaves, droughts, etc. are not becoming more frequent nor deadlier. In fact, in many cases, the exact opposite is occurring.

Another huge factor that helped Americans realize the dubiousness of the climate alarmist narrative is that their solutions make no sense, do not address the so-called problems, and all too often end with less liberty and more government. Apparently, Americans are beginning to understand that climate justice, for instance, is mostly about wealth redistribution and has little to do with a cleaner environment.

A few weeks ago, Americans went to the polls and clearly rejected the climate alarmist nonsense that has been hoisted upon the nation over the past four years. Without a doubt, the Biden-Harris administration has been the most zealous when it comes to climate alarmism. From nixing the Keystone XL Pipeline to mandating electric vehicles to deciding the type of appliances Americans can purchase, the Biden-Harris administration has been all-in on climate alarmism.

But this is not what the American people want. To be clear, nearly all Americans want to protect the environment and desire clean air and water.

They just don’t want their lives upended and their bank accounts drained under the guise of saving the planet. They want reliable and affordable electricity. They want cheap gasoline. And, they want the U.S. government to take full advantage of the abundant energy reserves right under our feet. This is at least partly why President-elect Donald Trump won the White House and the GOP took control of the U.S. Senate.

Now that Trump is back in the Oval Office, we can expect U.S. energy dominance, not climate alarmism, to rule the day. That is welcome news for hard-working Americans, albeit a total nightmare for climate alarmists and the cottage industry it has spawned.

Chris Talgo (ctalgo@heartland.orgis editorial director at The Heartland Institute.

4.8 32 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

105 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Stephen Wilde
November 27, 2024 6:07 pm

All very true but in U.K.nobody is listening.
i often have online comments deleted when expressing scepticism.

Scarecrow Repair
Reply to  Stephen Wilde
November 27, 2024 6:29 pm

Take heart. That they feel the need to delete comments means they fear them, and someone has to read them to delete them, whether that is manually or by humans reading them to program algorithms.

observa
Reply to  Stephen Wilde
November 27, 2024 9:20 pm

The Pravdas are getting worried they’re losing control of the narrative-
‘LOL WUT’: Joe Rogan responds to ABC boss Kim Williams’ ‘clueless’ tirade, calling the popular podcaster ‘deeply repulsive’ | Sky News Australia
The glaringly obvious gaslighting of Americans with Sleepy Joe and gigglepot has struck a nerve around the Western world and the wokesters are feeling it.

Reply to  observa
November 28, 2024 4:03 am

Rogan says he had 100 million views of his talk with Trump. The MSM is horrified.

observa
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 28, 2024 6:12 am

Relevance Deprivation Syndrome is strong in Kimmy and if left untreated could lead to a serious bout of Trump Derangement Syndrome. Complete rest and retirement convalescence in Tuvalu to contemplate sea levels is recommended.

observa
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 28, 2024 9:21 am

Aunty Pravda is copping heaps amidst growing calls to flog them off and make them sing for their supper-
ABC Chairman is ‘out of touch’
Chairman Kim may be the straw that breaks the camel’s back

Reply to  Stephen Wilde
November 27, 2024 11:41 pm

I read the comments on YouTube videos about Climate Change and on several other news websites, and I am greatly heartened by the widespread skepticism and even contempt towards the whole scam.

Robertvd
Reply to  Stephen Wilde
November 28, 2024 3:39 am

Same happens to me. NotMyTube gave me even a warning to shut me down.

Reply to  Stephen Wilde
November 28, 2024 4:00 am

The UK is now a doddering old fool- slow to new ideas. Time for a rebirth.

Robertvd
Reply to  Stephen Wilde
November 28, 2024 4:05 am

It has never been about climate. All they want is control. Direct Taxation = Control. Smart Meters = Control. EVs and most new ICEs cars = Control. Smart Phones = Control. Pay p Mile with number plate cameras = Control. Digital ‘Money’ = Control. etc etc Now tell me you live in a Free country.

John Hultquist
November 27, 2024 6:52 pm

But this is not what the American people want.”
Please note that slightly under 50% of those voting did so for Trump. 74,632,295 (give or take a few) voted for Harris and 3 million votes went elsewhere.
So, there is a too general attribution to the American people in this essay. 

Reply to  John Hultquist
November 27, 2024 7:22 pm

Trump Derangement Syndrome is real. There is a large contingent to whom “anything except Trump” is their driving mantra. That meant voting for Harris, irrespective of her expected policy, was the only possible choice.

Those 3 million who picked someone not of the two main candidates were probably mostly not TDS victims. They were expressing their genuine opposition to what has been going on, without expecting whomever they voted for to express that opinion, to have any slightest chance of winning. They were just non-violent protesters. There really are rational options that are quite different than either major party is likely to ever acknowledge as existing.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  John Hultquist
November 27, 2024 7:38 pm

No one voted for Kamala. As with 2020, they voted against Trump.

John Hultquist
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
November 27, 2024 8:05 pm

The best named candidate was Rachele Fruit, Socialist Workers Party’s nominee who got 4,114 votes. Being in the Great Left Coast State of Washington, my vote was going to be immaterial. I thought of voting for Rachele but did not.

Reply to  John Hultquist
November 27, 2024 11:12 pm

I vote for Republicans in the People’s Republic of Washington State. It’s a losing effort, but not completely losing as voting for a third candidate. I also voted yes on all four initiatives, but only one passed. At least I get to keep my gas stove and furnace for the time being. I think when they pass an income tax, I shall leave the state.

John Hultquist
Reply to  Jim Masterson
November 28, 2024 9:25 am

Me too. Question is where to?

rckkrgrd
Reply to  John Hultquist
November 28, 2024 12:00 pm

Alberta would be the place to be if it wasn’t in Canada..

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  John Hultquist
November 28, 2024 2:13 pm

50 miles west of Neah Bay.

bobpjones
Reply to  John Hultquist
November 27, 2024 11:05 pm

You’re not the son of John Major are you?

Reply to  John Hultquist
November 28, 2024 4:50 am

“74,632,295 (give or take a few) voted for Harris”

I am very concerned for the future when 74,632,295 clueless people have the right to vote in an election that will decide the future of me and my family.

That’s too close for comfort.

Conservatives have a lot of work to do convincing some of these clueless people to come back into the Real World.

Voting for Radical Democrats is detrimental to the futures of all of us. We can’t give them control over our lives. We’ve seen how bad that can be from the last four years.

Luckily for the U.S., a majority of voters this time had enough sense to vote for the person who will get us out of this mess created by the radical Democrats.

Trump has a lot on his plate. And the Radical Democrats are putting as many roadblocks in his path as they can manage before he gets sworn in as 47.

Radical Democrats pose a serious threat to the freedoms of all of us. Those Harris voters need to wake up to the real threats that are in their future. It’s not Trump or Republicans.

John Hultquist
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 28, 2024 9:33 am

 a majority of voters
He garnered a majority of Electoral College votes but not a majority of all votes. There were 3,000,000 radicals of many types that we can be thankful for that did not vote for Harris.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  John Hultquist
November 29, 2024 9:26 am

He had a majority until the after election mail in ballots were received and counted.

cc
Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
December 1, 2024 4:29 pm

The Steal failed this time

Rational Keith
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 29, 2024 6:15 am

So work to educate voters, as I do.

But NOT in TheMouthX’s shallow beliefs, he is an erratic control freak.

Individual freedom supported by defense against initiation of force has proven itself to be the best for human life. That system recognizes human ability, Marxism and Mercantilism do not. Ayn Rand put a moral foundation under ethics of defending against initiation of force by explaining that action is required for life, that action has to be what the individual entity decides.
(Humans depend on mind, trees are genetically programmed to seek light and water by growing toward both.)

Reply to  John Hultquist
November 28, 2024 6:24 am

It’s like those Kansas Chiefs victories this season, innit?. Win by 1 is still a win.

BUT KEEP COUNTING votes and I’m sure we’ll find Harris won the popular vote. Just keep counting until she does.

Richard M
Reply to  John Hultquist
November 28, 2024 8:54 am

There are still a large number of Americans who get their views from the legacy media. Fortunately, not enough to beat Trump. When you look at policies, the ones Trump supported tend to get a 65% (or better) rating.

That tells us around 15% of voters are so infected with TDS they will vote against their own favored policies. I’d say just as many voted for Trump while disliking him. Trump still has work to do to win these people over. It would be nice if he stayed away from confrontations during his first year but that is doubtful.

Keeping those favored policies first and foremost in front of the public will help Trump gain support. He has Congress to back him up (if they fall in line). Looking forward to the next 6 months.

Reply to  Richard M
November 29, 2024 7:16 am

Success is what will help Trump and Republicans and the Nation.

Republicans need to get their act together right off the bat. No more squabbling until we get some of our major problems solved.

Trump is heading in the right direction and you should trust his instincts. Get on board.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Richard M
November 29, 2024 9:27 am

Trump will not win those people over until he learns to control his mouth and social media posts.

Reply to  John Hultquist
November 28, 2024 9:05 am

Coping much? Trump got 12-14 million more votes (not going to bother wasting my time to look it up) than he did in 2016. Harris go 6-7 million LESS votes (depending on who’s counting) than Biden did in 2020. Oh, also nice strawman. In the U.S. the popular vote doesn’t matter. It’s the electoral college votes that count. care to post those numbers?

John Hultquist
Reply to  Phil R
November 28, 2024 9:38 am

The 3,000,000 million voters that went down ballot scare me. Had there been just Harris vs Trump on the ballots I wonder would they have voted and who for? How about taking a crack at that question.

Reply to  John Hultquist
November 28, 2024 3:43 pm

Don’t know if you will see this, but thanks for the reply. I think I get your point but t\he first thing that comes to my mind is demographics/distribution. it’s not just 3 million voters, but where they were located. Rember, Hitlery got something like 3-4 million more votes than Trump in 2016, but they were mostly in left-wing strongholds, like California and New York.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  John Hultquist
November 29, 2024 9:20 am

Are they still counting mail in ballots in California. California faced (or is facing) a lawsuit for accepting mail in ballots a week after the election and waived the post mark requirement.

Pennsylvania is in court due to an election official counting illegal ballots.

Those aside, it is the opinion polling that determined “what the American people want.” It was clear in nearly every poll that climate was at the bottom of the priority lists.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  John Hultquist
November 29, 2024 9:24 am

There are many reasons to not like Trump. He is flawed.
There are many reasons to not like Harris. She is flawed.

The difference? With Trump you know what to expect. Not so with Harris.
One reason to vote for Trump? He could not be bought. WYSIWYG
One reason to vote for Harris? She is not Trump. Her “values have not changed.”

Therein lies the simplest explanation of the election.

Dave Burton
November 27, 2024 7:17 pm

Nightmare indeed: ironically, good news is upsetting to most climate alarmists.

If they were really worried about future catastrophes due to climate change, and dire threats to future generations, then wouldn’t you think they’d be pleased by good news? But they never are.

The best scientific evidence compellingly shows that manmade climate change is modest and benign, that it’s no threat to future generations (of either humans or polar bears), and that CO2 emissions are actually beneficial, rather than harmful.

But good news rarely cheers up climate alarmists. Instead, it angers them.

They’d rather keep believing that their grandchildren are doomed than consider the evidence that their pessimism was misplaced. Emotional investment in doom and gloom is what drives them, not an actual concern for future generations.

They are unwell.

Reply to  Dave Burton
November 27, 2024 7:37 pm

Again:

     1. More rain is not a problem.
     2. Warmer weather is not a problem.
     3. More arable land is not a problem.
     4. Longer growing seasons is not a problem.
     5. CO2 greening of the earth is not a problem.
     6. There isn’t any Climate Crisis.

And this from another post on WUWT:

     1. Sea level rise did not accelerate as Hansen asserted.
     2. Arctic summer sea ice did not disappear as Wadhams and Gore asserted.
     3. Glacier National Park glaciers did not disappear as USNPS asserted.
     4. UK children still know snow, opposite what Viner asserted.
     5. Ocean isn’t boiling as Guterres asserted.
     6. Planet is greening.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Steve Case
November 27, 2024 8:16 pm

The problem with your comments like this, Steve, is that CC theory predicts more and less of all those things. In other words, exactly what has always been happening regardless of the existence of humans.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Steve Case
November 28, 2024 1:18 am

change “is not a problem”
to “is good news”

Robertvd
Reply to  Dave Burton
November 28, 2024 3:48 am

Luckily most of them don’t want kids.

November 27, 2024 7:31 pm

The long-term climate of the Earth is a 2.5 million-year ice age named the Quaternary(Glaciation) and it won’t end until all natural ice melts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_glaciation
https://www.britannica.com/science/Quaternary

Reply to  scvblwxq
November 27, 2024 8:05 pm

This current ice age is just a very short (so far) excursion to a colder world in the string of five major ice ages so far discovered. All the former ones, if I remember correctly, are evidenced to have lasted much longer that this one has so far.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  AndyHce
November 27, 2024 8:36 pm

Ice ages? Or Glacials?

Reply to  Jeff Alberts
November 27, 2024 9:20 pm

Or interglacials.

Robertvd
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
November 28, 2024 3:52 am

Canadians and most Europeans are so lucky we live in an interglacial. Who wants to live under a mile of ice?

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  scvblwxq
November 27, 2024 8:26 pm

Is there unnatural ice of any significance?

Reply to  Jeff Alberts
November 27, 2024 11:59 pm

In my whisky…

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  scvblwxq
November 28, 2024 3:20 am

Our current interglacial – the Holocene is now about 11,500 years old, and interglacials only last about 10 – 20k years. So, the Holocene could last several thousand years more. Or not.

rckkrgrd
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 28, 2024 12:08 pm

 Or not.”
Right on point. There is nothing to gain from wringing your hands over a future that cannot be predicted with certainty.

Reply to  scvblwxq
November 28, 2024 4:09 am

Just curious and too lazy to look it up- but before the Quaternary, was there ANY ice in Antarctica? Just guessing, I’d say there must have been some.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 28, 2024 5:02 am

Yes. You have to go back about 60 mya before there was no ice.

Rud Istvan
November 27, 2024 8:06 pm

Just my opinion. The incompetent Biden administration helped ‘break the back’ of the climate alarmist religion. It did so several ways.

  1. The 46 disaster ushered in the 47 EV and popular vote landslide. 47 has a mandate to among many other things go after climate alarm. For example DOGE will find all US climate modeling useless and slash funding and manpower to zero.
  2. Under Biden, BOEM broke federal endangered species law to permit offshore wind, which then proved a financial disaster.
  3. Under Biden, the inflation Reduction Act promoted the green new deal, and sparked disastrous inflation.
  4. Under Biden, US relost newly gained energy independence.
Richard Greene
Reply to  Rud Istvan
November 28, 2024 1:27 am

your 1, 3 and 4 are false

1
Trump got 50% of the popular vote. That is not a landslide.

3
US inflation 9.2% year over year June 2022
IRA signed August 2022
US inflation 2.6% year over year in October 2024

4
The US was last energy indepenent in the 1940s

Under Biden in 2023, the US set records for both oil and natural gas production.

Reply to  Richard Greene
November 28, 2024 4:14 am

Biden allowed record production strictly to win this election. Just before he took office he promised he was going to end ffs- that was his plan.

Reply to  Richard Greene
November 28, 2024 5:00 am

“Trump got 50% of the popular vote. That is not a landslide.”

Does anyone have an electoral map by counties across the U.S. for the presidential election? Red counties for Trump and Blue counties for Harris.

I think an electoral map like that will show just how widespread Trump’s support really is. Trump picked up a lot of support in traditional Democrat strongholds like California and in the Northeast.

I saw such a map on television, but can’t find one on the internet yet.

Again, all 77 counties in Oklahoma voted for Trump. Just like they did in 2016, and 2020.

James Pellerin
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 28, 2024 7:59 am

Look on the Fox News website. The results on a county by county basis are still posted there. The vast majority of counties were red in color.

Reply to  James Pellerin
November 28, 2024 1:31 pm

But counties don’t vote – people do. Unfortunately, a large number of people live in concentrated population centers, and tend to vote for the “free stuff” party, while another group, who appear more rational, live in the sparsely-populated country side.

The red-blue county map shows this, and shows the wider-spread desire for a return to more rationality, away from progressive / dmeocrat-socialist / liberal policies.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Richard Greene
November 28, 2024 5:46 am

Under Biden in 2023, the US set records for both oil and natural gas production.”

If true, it’s only because he was thinking about re-election, and nothing else. If he was doing for the people, he would have done it as soon as he entered office, not two years later.

But let’s not talk about the Keystone pipeline, and oil and gas leases being blocked…

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Richard Greene
November 28, 2024 5:48 am

So you pick one insignificant part of #1 and declare the whole statement false. Must be a climate scientist.

Reply to  Richard Greene
November 28, 2024 6:42 am

1
The popular vote isn’t real.

3
You don’t understand inflation or you’re terribly disingenuous. I’m not sure which it is but this is why you’re always down voted. Well, OK, misleading numbers plus a hostile online personality.

4
Under Biden, the administration did everything it could to reduce US oil & gas production. We begged Venezuela for oil. We begged OPEC for oil. Whatever oil & gas the US produced was despite the Biden admin efforts, not because of it.

Reply to  Richard Greene
November 28, 2024 5:15 pm

What is the name of this country? United States. Can you grasp what that means? Total popular votes in a Presidential election is as meaningless as total runs scored in a World Series. The majority of voters in 31 states want Trump to be President. That is 62% of the states, a landslide.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  jtom
November 29, 2024 9:40 am

The Constitutional Republic of these United States.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Richard Greene
November 29, 2024 9:38 am

Electoral votes: Huge majority, some can claim a landslide.
Popular vote: Harris got many millions fewer votes than Biden in 2020. Huge shift, some can claim a landslide.

What is missing is a fair, impartial, and accurate definition of a political election landslide.

While the year over year inflation from October 2023 to 2024 is reasonable, that is not the metric to apply. The 4 year aggregate inflation is what is painful.

Setting production records is not the same as energy independence. What the Biden administration did to curtail production means it could have been far greater. The production does not necessarily equate to domestic consumption, not does it to the contrary. Your argument is flawed.

Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
November 29, 2024 9:41 am

Huge shift, some can claim a landslide.

The biggest shift is that every state moved rightward in this election. At a county level, all but a handful of counties nationwide moved right. I find that far more significant than the raw numbers.

not you
Reply to  Rud Istvan
November 28, 2024 4:22 pm

it’s not incompetence, the got exactly the result that they wanted

there is no such thing as ‘unintended consequences”, there is only cause and effect, and action/reaction

Chris Hanley
November 27, 2024 8:34 pm

Since then, the United Nations and several other influential international organizations have pounded the climate change message

That message viz. human-caused CO2 emissions are causing dangerous GHG-caused global warming is having absolutely no significant effect and is unlikely to, ever.

the seas are not rising

False.

Reply to  Chris Hanley
November 27, 2024 11:48 pm

Why are you posting satellite data? Tide gauge data go back much further in time and show SL rise predates the rise in CO2.

Reply to  Chris Hanley
November 28, 2024 4:15 am

Rising but the rise is not accelerating.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 29, 2024 9:43 am

Oceans rise and oceans fall on a geological time scale.

Bob
November 27, 2024 8:40 pm

Very nice Chris.

Keitho
Editor
November 27, 2024 9:02 pm

When “scientists “ decided that chopping down North American deciduous forests and shipping them to Yorkshire to be burned in a power station would save the climate they were really taking the piss. After that who could take the “consensus “ seriously?

Happy Thanksgiving to all.

Reply to  Keitho
November 27, 2024 10:04 pm

Thank you and let me echo that sentiment. Happy Thanksgiving to all.

….. and, while I’m here, let me point out that indeed, Yorkshire folk do have a peculiar sense of humour. I oughta know.

Yooper
Reply to  philincalifornia
November 28, 2024 4:55 am

They also make a really nice pudding….

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Yooper
November 28, 2024 7:56 am

The secret’s in the butter.

observa
November 27, 2024 9:10 pm

An interesting SLAPP in the face although ultimately taxpayers are on the hook for their deception-
Lawyers for Tiwi Island group that tried to block gas project ordered to pay $9 million to Santos

Richard Greene
November 28, 2024 1:13 am

The author of this article is incompetent

He presents one personal conclusion after another with zero data to back up his claims

In fact, climate and energy was a minor issue in the last election. Kamaliar lied about her positions and sounded almost like Trump.

Gallup says: “Global Warming Attitudes Frozen Since 2016”, which contradicts the author

Global Warming Attitudes Frozen Since 2016

comment image

Reply to  Richard Greene
November 28, 2024 4:19 am

It was an essay – not a dissertation that required proof of every point. And it certainly was significant in the election. The people in “fly over country” were the ones being screwed the most by the attempt to stop ff. Of course it was a very important concern.

Reply to  Richard Greene
November 28, 2024 5:18 am

I think going to the grocery store and being shocked at the high prices every time is the first reason for Trump being elected, and the immigration/crime problem is number two. And the memory of better times during the first Trump admnistration also had an effect. And that was enough.

And it didn’t hurt that Kamala was incoherent as a candidate.

The Democrats couldn’t have picked a worse candidate than Kamala.

Kamala will fade into history. She will not be a force in the Democrat Party going forward. She has no ability to inspire others.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 28, 2024 7:42 am

The next Dukakis.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 29, 2024 9:45 am

That Harris claimed grocery stores were “price gouging” possibly eroded her low credibility to an even lower level.

Reply to  Richard Greene
November 28, 2024 6:45 am

The price of energy, particularly gasoline, was a big factor in Trump’s reelection.

Reply to  Richard Greene
November 28, 2024 7:41 am

Fake Data.

aussiecol
Reply to  Richard Greene
November 28, 2024 1:35 pm

”The author of this article is incompetent…”

Have you ever wondered why you get down voted so much??
Maybe if you were less subjective, people may be less objective.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  aussiecol
November 29, 2024 9:46 am

Do not forget his predilection for insults.

atticman
November 28, 2024 1:17 am

I love the AI-generated pic. at the head of this post, particularly the car in the left foreground. Has anyone else noticed that its rear door has two handles, one back and one front?

Reply to  atticman
November 28, 2024 2:53 am

If you are right-handed, you use the right handle. If you are left-handed, you use the left handle.

atticman
Reply to  Harold Pierce
November 28, 2024 5:58 am

Neat!

Reply to  atticman
November 28, 2024 5:42 am

I doubt the I in AI is correct 😀

atticman
Reply to  Krishna Gans
November 28, 2024 5:58 am

I always thought it stood for “ignorance”.

Reply to  atticman
November 28, 2024 1:37 pm

Careful, some USG agency will require that design feature for safety sake, or to save the Earth from Climate Change (TM).

Reply to  atticman
November 28, 2024 2:11 pm

People in AI-generated images often have six fingers and no thumbs. Weird.

Corrigenda
November 28, 2024 1:37 am

Not only that but many will recall that we have also had an earlier warning in similar vein about an imminent new ice age. Of course that too was wrong – and only based on the same ridiculous modelling that was never properly tested – but did its proponents ever apologise to the world for this? Was the scientific community alerted?

Remember that if any suggested scientific hypothesis fails to agree with experiment or with observation then it is WRONG. Not nearly right or one that might be right later.

Reply to  Corrigenda
November 28, 2024 5:32 am

Yes, I remeber that. I remember seeing “The Ice Age Cometh” on Science News Magazine and all the numerous articles in it and Scientific American magazine claiming a new ice age might be at hand since the temperatures in the late 1970’s were as cool as the 1910’s, and some people were afraid the temperatures were going lower.

And, oh yeah, humans were supposed to be causing this dangerous cooling because humans were burning coal and putting a lot of SO2 in the atmosphere which was supposedly causing the cooling.

Yes, the scientists kept claiming that humans were causing cooling but they never provided any evidence substantiating their claims, and as it turned out, they were wrong, obviously so, as the temperatures started warming in the early 1980’s.

So the climate alarmists switched over to claiming humans were creating CO2 and this was causing the atmosphere to warm, but just like with Human-caused Global Cooling, this new Human-caused Global Warming had no evidence to support the claims.

And they still don’t have any evidence even these many decades later. All they have is speculation, assumptions, and unsubstantiated assertions.

When the climate starts cooling again, expect the climate alarmists to fall back on their previous claims of human-caused cooling.

atticman
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 28, 2024 6:01 am

And now they’re saying that it’s because we’ve STOPPED burning coal and producing SO2 on the same scale that the planet is warming… These (not so) clever sods have an answer to everything (and none of them make sense!).

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 28, 2024 7:46 am

The BBC broadcast a two hour TV programme ‘The Weather Machine’ on 12th October 1974, a co -production with WNET (New York), Sveridge Radio (Stockholm), KRO, Hilversum (Holland), OECA (Toronto) andZDF (Mainz).

They also published a book entitled ‘The Weather Machine and the threat of ice’ by the former editor of New Scientist and respected science writer Nigel Calder.

The last chapter of the book is entitled ‘The Threat of Ice’

“The countries at risk from ice are shown in the next column. And if the climatologists are correct, who now think that cold conditions in the north are likely to be linked with a drier climate in the tropics, there is also a long list of countries in danger of worsening drought”

countries “in danger of obliteration (complete or almost complete by ice sheets)”

Canada,Greenland, Iceland, Irish Republic, UK, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan and New Zealand.

“In danger of extensive glaciation”

USA, USSR, Mexico, Argentina, Chile, Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Austria, Afghanistan, China and Australia

“in danger of severe drought during the onset of an ice age” a further 38 countries.

Vlad the Impaler
Reply to  Dave Andrews
November 28, 2024 2:30 pm

I can prove none of this, but as an undergrad in 1974 in Geology, I heard all of these ‘warnings’ about a ‘new ice age’, and wondered if there was any precedent. I went to my local University library, and found

Flint, R. F. (1971); Glacial and Quaternary Geology

At the time, likely one of the most extensive reviews of the past two million years of Earth history. About three hours of research convinced me that the hype about Earth entering an incipient “ice age” were unfounded., and all that was happening was a natural climate variation.

Just as with the intervening years since then. This is all just natural variation, and has nothing to do with anything humans might (or might NOT) be doing. Anything that carbon dioxide might, or might not, be doing, is completely swamped by other factors. Please, everyone, note the above quote from TAR, the Earth climate system is a coupled, non-linear, dynamic system. Such a system is barely influenced by a single variable, especially one in such infinitesimal concentration. Maybe carbon dioxide has some effect, maybe it does not, but it is hardly a main “controller” of anything climate.

I note that in the Hirnantian, carbon dioxide levels were well over ten times what they are today, but the Earth experienced a two-to-three-million year glacial event. And temperatures were WARMER in the Silurian, immediately afterwards, with LOWER levels of carbon dioxide.

To me, that’s game-changing proof that carbon dioxide has, for all practical purposes, nothing to do with global climate, or global temperatures, or any ‘climate change’. If you disagree, then you have the problem, not me.

Regards to all,

Vlad

Reply to  Vlad the Impaler
November 29, 2024 7:37 am

Excellent comments. I agree with all of it.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Vlad the Impaler
November 29, 2024 9:51 am

Please note I agree.
One item missing is the change in continental alignments due to plate tectonics. Not completely insignificant and one of those pesky other factors.

Vlad the Impaler
Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
November 29, 2024 1:32 pm

Tom, Sparta:

Thanks. All correct. We can guess (‘educated’ guesses) at oceanic circulation patterns in the Late Ordovician, but the fact remains that there was a “lot” of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (compared to today), and the Earth experienced a significant glacial event. There’s a message there, for those able to discern it.

VtI

Reply to  Dave Andrews
November 29, 2024 7:58 am

Yes, the Human-caused Global Cooling narrative got very scary. Just like the CO2 narrative today.

But there has never been any proof presented showing humans were causing any cooling with their SO2 production, and likewise, there has never been any proof humans are causing any warming with their CO2 production.

The climate scientist Stephen Schneider promoted Human-caused Global Cooling during the 1970’s, and then when the temperatures started rising in the 1980’s, he switched over to promoting Human-caused Global Warming.

Neither he, nor anyone else has proven a connection between humans and the cooling, or the warming. Not then, not now.

https://www.masterresource.org/global-cooling-climate-change/stephen-schneider-and-global-cooling-an-exchange/

When the Human-caused Global Cooling claims first surfaced, I didn’t automatically reject them. I figured the scientists were basing their claims on some kind of evidence or proof, and was looking forward to discovering the mechanism for how humans could cause the Earth’s atmosphere to cool into an Ice Age.

As time went along, I realized that those making these claims really didn’t have any firm evidence for what they were claiming, they were just speculating, and assuming and making unsubstantiated assertions.

That revelation caused me to lose a little faith in climate scientists, at least, the ones making these claims.

Then in the 1980’s, here comes Human-caused Global Warming.

I was not very receptive to these claims, and you can understand why. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. So I was skeptical from the start about Human-caused Global Warming. I saw the exact same pattern that I had seen with Human-caused Global Cooling. There was nothing but speculation, assumptions, and unsubstantiated assertions, all over again.

It got to the point where I would get angry when I would see a new issue of Scence News or Scientific American or the National Geographic, and I ended up cancelling all those subscriptions around 1984, specifically because of the way they handled the Human-caused Global Warming narrative by presenting speculation and assumptions as representing facts.

To this day, all the Climate Alarmist have to present is speculation, assumptions, and unsubstantialted assertions. It’s been this way for decades.

Bruce Cobb
November 28, 2024 3:47 am

Well, we can only hope. The Climate Hydra is a many-headed, powerful beast.

November 28, 2024 5:20 am

“Climate alarmism” is a moral panic turned into a mass mania similar to historic mass manias described in Charles Mackay’s 1841 book, “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds.”

There have been several other mass manias in my lifetime, and I’m only 74. Nuclear winter, cancer epidemics, mass starvation, and others have gripped the popular imagination from time to time. The climate panic has been the longest-lasting, but is likely to subside like other mass manias.

People in the grip of panic seldom bother to do simple arithmetic. The fear muddies thought. Typical questions I’ve asked on WUWT and other blogs is: Why is 3° to 5°F of warming the likely precursor of doomsday? That temperature spread is less than the annual mean difference between Nashville, TN and Columbus, OH. Are people dying like flies in Nashville? Are climate refugees streaming north?

The mean temperature spread between Minneapolis and Miami, or Moscow and Mumbai is four or five times larger that the climate alarmists’ worst-case scenarios. Are Floridians flocking to Minnesota? Indians flocking to Russia? Do alarmists care to consider those numbers?

Moreover, carbon dioxide has not been shown to be the climate control knob. Yet CO2 gets almost all the attention, as if other factors aren’t worth considering. Why is that?

The alarmists’ answer to these questions is always “No.” Insults and name-calling are more likely. Alas, the adrenaline rush of fear and panic is more compelling than arithmetic for vast swaths of suffering humanity.

November 28, 2024 1:56 pm

The US recently changed from a pessimistic, guilt ridden, fearful, embarrassed, uncritical society bent on committing social and economic suicide into an optimistic, forward thinking, courageous, proud, critical thinking, fare minded and creative society that will lead the world to a better future. All it took was an election.

Reply to  Andy Pattullo
November 28, 2024 2:15 pm

By voting Trump back into power, the American people have done the entire World a huge favour. I suddenly feel much less pessimistic about our future.

Rational Keith
November 28, 2024 5:43 pm

And Canadians are fed up with ‘carbon taxes:
– federal government’s polls in the swamp,

  • a person kicked out of a right wing party for challenging climate alarmism came very close to winning the recent election in BC. The right wing party that was normally strong had to fold as donations became scarce and it had difficulty getting enough candidates

Do beware of polls on climate: ask if people are concerned they’ll say yes, ask if they would pay more to reduce warming and they’ll say NO.

GeorgeInSanDiego
November 28, 2024 6:37 pm

Cottage industry? Mansion industry, more like.

Sparta Nova 4
November 29, 2024 9:16 am

“Apparently, Americans are beginning to understand that climate justice, for instance, is mostly about wealth redistribution and has little to do with a cleaner environment.”

Going back through the past 50 years or so, looking at statements made by IPCC and UN officials, those messages were ignored in favor of alarmism. Those officials clearly stated that this program was not about the environment, but rather about redistribution of wealth, forming a One World Order, and pushing socialistic command economics on us, the “deplorables.”

Verified by MonsterInsights