Global Warming doom sayers

 Last year on this blog I collected a bunch of warnings post – 1997′ s Coyote protocol, all predicting the tipping our climate past the reversal point by 2006, at latest. Since that year came and went without the world doing what these experts knew was best, they’ve revised their absolute certain knowledge and now concede we have a little more time, but by golly, not much! It astonishes me that otherwise intelligent people act like Charlie Brown when Lucy offers her football, yet again. What part about sucker don’t you get?

2006: 10 years or it’s all too late

2007: It’s already too late!

2008: 100 months, and we really,really mean it this time!

Prince Charles, 2009: less than 100 months. Ooh, the clock is ticking! 88 months now, Prince Charlie!

James Hansen, 2009. every single coal powered plant in the world must be shut down by 2029 or we’re doomed. Dr. Hansen, employed at taxpayers’ expense at NAASA, also advocates the jailing of all power plant executives and the use of the Global Warming “crisis” to redistribute our wealth to the Third World, but those are different issues.

7 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

7 responses to “Global Warming doom sayers

  1. Last Liberal Standing

    Rather than debating the global warming issue–a process that could trigger enormous anxiety, perhaps to no advantage, if it is indeed too late–it’s easier to simply call advocates scam artists and believers dupes. By routinely portraying global warming as a hoax and casting aspersions on everyone who espouses the concept, one can let off steam (and hostility) without ever having to face an extremely unpleasant possibility.

  2. pulled up in OG

    Actually, Hansen’s plan for the US is an increasing carbon tax that is paid back out to everyone.

    The less you use, the more you’ll make out.
    Al Gore pays plenty.
    How could you not like that. : )

  3. towny

    Lets get right to the meat and potatos. Carbon credits accomplish nothing. The only way to reduce supposed CO2 emmissions is to decrease the incineration of fossil fuels. Now everybody with half a brain knows that if all coal fired electrical generating plants were shuttered tomorow it would barely make a dent in CO2 production. Commercial buildings and the homeowners chimney are the major source of CO2 output.
    There is a formula that NASA and other warmist think tanks have been pitching around for years. Its as follow: An individual is allowed (rationed)the resources to heat, cool, and electrify 600 sq ft of living space. Every additional person in the domicile is allowed an addition of 100 sq ft. You will be rationed the means to heat, light, and cool your space. You have a 3000 sq ft home? You better have 22 people living there if you expext a full quota. Otherwise you and the family will be huddled in the livingroom-den for the rest of time.
    So if you are really hell bent on saving the planet, you’ll love this plan. Cause the only way to lower Co2 emmisions is to stop creating Co2. And unless there are 500 nuke facilities being built that I dont know about…well.

  4. towny

    And anyway if the federal govt was serious about Co2 emmisions they would mandate that every single boiler in America had to be emmisions tested. An even slightly off home boiler can use 15% or more fuel and dump TONS of excess carbon into the atmosphere.
    An emmisions test is nothing more than clibrating the air fuel ratio to acheive the highest CO2 effeciency.
    You’d think serious state lawmakers would make it a requirement when transfering ownership of real property.

  5. LLS, Chris and other people disagreeing with you IS a debate.

    It’s rough when your 6 network plus the NY Times echo chamber runs smack into reality, isn’t it?

  6. Inagua

    Greg,

    Do you really think LLS has run into reality? I don’t. I think LLS is that type of liberal who lives in an world where emotions and good intentions are the measure of self worth. This insulates him from the requirement to present an argument, cite a specific fact, or analyze a single piece of data. His post are entirely content free and wholly self-congradulatory in their smug and baseless dismissal of facts he can not refute. His inability to write anything factual, interesting, provocative, witty, clever or amusing was no doubt the reason his blog failed. I found it amusing that another liberal here, JHR, complained to Chris and threatened to start a blog. These fools should realise that they are not fit to shine Chris’s shoes when it comes to writing.