Katherine Hayhoe believes that the world started in the mid-1970s, and the WMO believes that it ended in 2010
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Angry And Protesting
- Bad Weather Caused By Racism
- “what the science shows”
- Causes Of Earthquakes
- Precision Taxation
- On the Cover Of The Rolling Stone
- Demise Of The Great Barrier Reef
- Net Zero In China
- Make America Healthy Again
- Nobel Prophecy Update
- Grok Defending Climategate
- It Is Big Oil’s Fault
- Creative Marketing
- No Emergency Or Injunction
- The Perfect Car
- “usually the case”
- Same Old Democrats
- Record Arctic Ice Growth
- Climate Change, Income Inequality And Racism
- The New Kind Of Green
- The Origins Of Modern Climate Science
- If An Academic Said It, It Must Be True
- Record Snow Cover
- Stopping Climate Misinformation
- Arctic Ice Free In Two Years
Recent Comments
- Tel on Angry And Protesting
- Bob G on Angry And Protesting
- william on Bad Weather Caused By Racism
- Allan Shelton on Precision Taxation
- arn on Angry And Protesting
- arn on Angry And Protesting
- Russell Cook on Angry And Protesting
- Allan Shelton on Causes Of Earthquakes
- Allan Shelton on Causes Of Earthquakes
- william on Bad Weather Caused By Racism
They might want to confer with the Mayans, and get back to us.
Their warmest decade ever was cooling!
How many of those countries kept good records before the launch of satelites? Why don’t these alarmists admit the role satelites played and how we’ve only kept real accurate records since 1980, when we were at a peak low? That’s why most of the records fell thereafter, because the records prior were incomplete or non-existent. We then entered the warming phase of the late 80s and 90s and, voila, records were broken. Then we entered the “pause” because the warming end of the cycle ended. It’s not so hard to figure out. But what is it about “climate scientists” that they’re always looking for man-made causes for weather? They never see the natural cyclical nature of the climate. So their analysis is wrong, because they observe things in a very narrow way. They resort to a doom and gloom apocalypse because they want to scare the people into handing them their money. But it only works for a short time. People become more sophisticated about such things and begin tuning out from further grave predictions. That’s what is happening now, so their predictions become more extreme hoping for the same effect. The whole is becoming completely ridiculous now.
Global warming/climate change is now a solely liberal ideology.
Why did they stop at 2010? Will they repeat their claim for this decade? Unlikely, as the world is heading for cooling and we can all look back and mock them just like Viner. 🙂