.....that climatologists associated with the IPCC and elsewhere have completely forgotten basic scientific concepts, take a look at this description of recent work by the IPCC and its German affiliate, WBGU. Apparently, they're saying that in the next eleven years, the United States "needs" to cut its carbon emissions by up to 100%.
Based on climate models that have yet to actually come up with a reasonable match to historical data, along with monitoring stations that have a high tendency to be installed by air conditioner vents and parking lots, they're more or less saying that the entire world needs to be dead by 2050. People are not, after all, "carbon-free."
And of course, even if you were to drop a cyanide bomb over the whole world, that wouldn't stop the corpses from rotting, and it certainly wouldn't stop the 95% or so of carbon emissions from non human sources.
Peer review is so dead. H/T SayAnythingBlog
Hot Gear Friday: The Swiss Army Guitar
-
The word “iconic” is overused these days. I try to avoid it. It’ll be hard
in this next bit. If you are not a guitar player, and someone says
“electric gui...
4 hours ago
2 comments:
The survival of humanity requires that we all be dead.
Well, it's a good way to make sure no one takes them seriously.
You know, if they really believe this, why aren't they putting their energy into ameliorating the effects of climate change, instead of trying to impose a way of preventing the change that can't actually be imposed and wouldn't work even if it could be (even by their own reckoning)?
Sadly, I think most Democrats do take them seriously.....
....and the sources I've read (e.g. IEEE journals) indicate that they (probably at least partially rightly) hesitate to work to nudge things the other way because they don't know what the side effects are.
Now if only they could get a clue and ask themselves what the side effects of the policy proposals they ARE making might be....
Post a Comment