At this point the Idiocracy crowd isn't actually disputing if things are getting warmer, they are just trying to play gotcha based off predications made based off climate change.
related To Assess or to Advocate? The IPCC is at risk of losing its credibility https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/to-assess-or-to-advocate excerpt: This week in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia more than 230 people are meeting to scope outthe next assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC, an organization under the World Meteorological Organization and U.N. Environment Program, is important — I often say that if it did not exist it would need to be invented. Scientific assessments help policy makers and the public to better understand what is known, what is unknown, and degrees of agreement or disagreement among experts on various knowledge claims relevant to decision making. Scientific assessments are not once-and-for-all arbiters of truth, but a snapshot in time of what relevant experts think. Over time, knowledge in any assessment is subject to updating, revision, and, sometimes, even overturning. As the IPCC maps out its next assessment report — its seventh — it stands at a critical juncture. The organization’s legitimacy rests in its longstanding mandate to call things straight. However, the IPCC appears to be increasingly moving more towards overt climate advocacy, putting at risk public and policy maker confidence in its work. *** However, there are many signs that the IPCC is departing from its mandate. For instance, at COP-29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, remarks by IPCC chair Jim Skea focused entirely on climate advocacy: I want to focus most of my remarks on the opportunities – and indeed the benefits – of near-term action. But first, a few words on urgency. It is not within the IPCC’s mandate to call for action or to implore urgency. There are plenty of groups who play that role — There is only one IPCC. Skea’s comments, speaking for the IPCC, go much further than simple exhortation, such as when he promotes specific energy technologies: Within energy, by far the largest potential lies with renewable energy, particularly wind and solar . . . Rather than championing specific technologies, a neutral IPCC would instead share with decision makers comprehensive perspectives on energy technology alternatives — including wind and solar, but also, nuclear, geothermal, natural gas, carbon capture, and so on. As THB readers know well, there is a healthy disagreement among relevant experts on technological opportunities for accelerated decarbonization. Skea also calls for countries to express specific policy commitments: Given that methane is a particularly potent greenhouse gas, sign-up to the Global Methane Pledge could bring rapid results in terms of avoided warming in the near-term. Signing up to the Global Methane Pledge may or may not be a good idea, but it is not for the IPCC to play the role of a promotional champion for sign-ups. more at the link
Oh.... so noted conservative think tank (EPI) Roger Pielke Jr wants to create another organization to advocate or is just complaining to complain?
more from Pielke Jr. Weather Attribution Alchemy A new THB series takes a close look at extreme weather event attribution https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/weather-attribution-alchemy
Oof, someone in the comment section called out the author (The Honest Broker aka Roger Pielke Jr) for making a semantic argument:
Montana's top court upholds landmark ruling in youth climate case over greenhouse gas emissions Montana’s Supreme Court has upheld a landmark climate ruling that said the state was violating residents’ constitutional right to a clean environment by permitting oil, gas and coal projects without regard for global warming Montana’s Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a landmark climate ruling that said the state was violating residents’ constitutional right to a clean environment by permitting oil, gas and coal projects without regard for global warming. The justices, in a 6-1 ruling, upheld an August 2023 decision by a state judge that was considered a breakthrough in attempts by young environmentalists and their attorneys to use the courts to leverage action on climate change. The justices found a policy that prevented Montana from considering the effect of greenhouse gases when issuing permits for fossil fuel development is unconstitutional. https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory...holds-landmark-ruling-youth-climate-116920904
Texas is ****ed. That's not a threat or a pollyanna or anything, it's just a fact of the current and soon future. We're not the only state.
"These so-called ‘climate warriors’ are nothing but mindless idiots who can only destroy what others have created." It's pretty amazing how you can be so smart and yet so ****ing stupid at the same time.
My wife consistently tells me, we now have any information we need in the palm our hands with smart phones, and yet we are dumber as a result.
