The public can't be allowed to see that the Southern Hemisphere is record cold this year
I didn't see the story on the nightly news, or in Democrat talking points, that the Southern Hemisphere just had a six-month record cold period. That would be as inconvenient as the over-thirty-year cooling period, where a disastrous ice age was predicted, which proved that there is no correlation between temperatures and CO2, fossil fuels, and the number of people on the planet.
The public can't be allowed to see that.
The average temperature at the Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station between April and September, a frigid minus-78 degrees (minus-61 Celsius), was the coldest on record, dating back to 1957. This was 4.5 degrees lower than the most recent 30-year average at this remote station, which is operated by United States Antarctic Program and administered by the National Science Foundation.
How many times have we been warned that the ice in the Arctic would soon be gone? It is not true!
The summer melt season has come to a modest end. The summer of 2021 was relatively cool compared to the most recent years and September extent was the highest since 2014.
This Wednesday, we were treated to another piece of garbage disguised as a news piece in Yahoo News, about rapidly rising sea levels. They paint a fictional picture of what cities would look like if the made-up forecasts come true.
The space center in Houston surrounded by a moat; the famous beach in Santa Monica, Calif., completely submerged; a former sports stadium in Washington, D.C., turned into a bathtub — these are just some of the startling images of the future in America's largest cities without action to limit climate change, according to new research by Climate Central, a research and communications nonprofit.
Because of greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels, average global temperatures have already risen 1.2° Celsius (2.2° Fahrenheit) above the preindustrial era, but as glaciers and polar ice caps melt, there is a decades-long lag for sea level rise. So a team of researchers from Climate Central projected how much the waters will rise if the world reaches only 1.5°C of warming, which is the goal world leaders set forth in the 2015 Paris climate agreement.
This post is like the previous predictions in the Washington Post in 1922 and the forecasts by the U.N. in 1989 and again in 2019. They are essentially made-up predictions that the compliant media regurgitate, with no questions and no research, as if they were factual instead of just predictions. No matter how bad each previous prediction has been, each new one is presented as if it were factual instead of just being pulled out of computer models full of assumptions and guesses.
Each forecast is more dire than the previous false forecasts, and they all predict that the coastal cities will soon be gone and that the oceans are rapidly dying. They are all meant to misinform the public, especially the children, to get them to submit to big-government leftist policies.
Anyone who dares disagree and tells the truth that the climate has always changed cyclically and naturally is falsely labeled as a climate change denier to intentionally mislead the public that we are anti-science.
A newspaper article warning that climate change was melting Arctic ice and disrupting wildlife was published nearly a century ago.
A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.
Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of "eco-refugees," threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.
He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.
In 2008, ABC ran a special saying how bad the Earth would be by 2015. They just made this up to scare the public. But Chris Cuomo sure believed it.
This story was as accurate as Al Gore's movie, which he got an Oscar for.
Appearing on Good Morning America in 2008, Bob Woodruff hyped Earth 2100, a special that pushed apocalyptic predictions of the then-futuristic 2015.
The segment included supposedly prophetic videos, such as a teenager declaring, "It's June 8th, 2015. One carton of milk is $12.99." (On the actual June 8, 2015, a gallon of milk cost, on average, $3.39.) Another clip featured this prediction for the current year: "Gas reached over $9 a gallon." (In reality, gas costs an average of $2.75.)
On June 12, 2008, correspondent Bob Woodruff revealed that the program "puts participants in the future and asks them to report back about what it is like to live in this future world. The first stop is the year 2015."
As one expert warns that in 2015 the sea level will rise quickly, a visual shows New York City being engulfed by water.
The video montage includes another unidentified person predicting that "flames cover hundreds of miles."
Then-GMA co-anchor Chris Cuomo appeared frightened by this future world. He wondered, "I think we're familiar with some of these issues, but, boy, 2015? That's seven years from now. Could it really be that bad?"
A 2004 climate apocalypse movie saw the Earth as frozen.
I was in Ithaca, N.Y. a few days ago and saw some of the beautiful waterfalls that have been around for 12,000 years since the ice melted. The ice melted naturally, as it always has, without humans and fossil fuels causing the melting.
Another scientific fact is that N.Y. was under a sea a long time ago. It is a lie to say we are having unprecedented sea level rises.
It is a true shame that children are fed climate predictions as factual and are not shown that the climate has always changed cyclically and naturally.
Why aren't they told that an over 500-year little ice age ended in the 1800s, and a little warming would be normal after an ice age ends?
In Portland, Maine, I saw a city bus bragging that it was run with clean natural gas. Before natural gas, the solution was food-based ethanol to save the planet.
When Pelosi went on Meet the Press in 2008, she wanted to move to natural gas, which she claimed isn't a fossil fuel. And we are told she believes in science. Should we trust her to set our energy policies?
I'm, I'm, I'm investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels. … These investments in wind, in solar and biofuels and focus on natural gas, these are the real alternatives.
This month, California determined that it would help save the planet by outlawing gas leaf-blowers and lawnmowers. People who believe this law will change the climate should have their heads examined to see if their brains have been removed.
Here are a couple of questions for the true believers in the green agenda:
- If GM and Ford sell big gas combustion trucks and then buy a carbon credit to enrich Tesla, does that reduce the carbon footprint of the trucks, or are they just trading paper to pretend to comply with California laws? When Tesla sells its carbon credits, does that increase its carbon footprint?
- Does it reduce John Kerry's carbon footprint on his jet, cars, multiple mansions, and yacht when he goes to a climate summit to pretend he cares, plants a tree, and buys a Tesla to pretend he cares or is the carbon footprint of the carbon-emitters exactly the same?
To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.