Delingpole: Climate Alarmists Finally Admit ‘We Were Wrong About Global Warming’

Breitbart ^ | sept. 19, 2017 | JAMES DELINGPOLE

[McCarthysGhost]

These fools are worried about a few molecules of CO2 meanwhile we are headed for a nuclear war. What are the environmental effects of global thermal nuclear war?

[bitt]

exactly -
and muh russia, statues, (no) free speech, sucking up to illegal aliens, hurricanes, earthquakes, Financial data breaches, Iran and NKorea, Awan brothers selling govt secrets..

NOTHING is as important as protecting Mother Earth, unless it is the freedom to kill babies in the womb..

[SunkenCiv]

Since global warming was never based on science, this isn't a surprising conclusion. Thanks bitt.

[WVNan]

Sorry I bombed your thread. The big Freepathon ad captured me. I turned myself in.

[Eleutheria5]

Dang! Now cotton and flax’ cultivation area will stay the same, and there’ll be no jobs for stupid people building dikes in coastal regions.

[CincyRichieRich]

Trump and others should tweet this or it won’t see light of day.

[trebb]

Wait a minute - just the other day, there was a story/tale/fable that the slowdown in globull warming was at an end....

[dp0622]

She’s gonna destroy the planet!!! :)

lol

ALL this talk of global warming for 30 years and she’ll destroy everything in a month long tour :)

[EBH]

The Paris Agreement has opened debate on whether limiting warming to 1.5 °C is compatible with current emission pledges and warming of about 0.9 °C from the mid-nineteenth century to the present decade. We show that limiting cumulative post-2015 CO2 emissions to about 200 GtC would limit post-2015 warming to less than 0.6 °C in 66% of Earth system model members of the CMIP5 ensemble with no mitigation of other climate drivers, increasing to 240 GtC with ambitious non-CO2 mitigation. We combine a simple climate–carbon-cycle model with estimated ranges for key climate system properties from the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. Assuming emissions peak and decline to below current levels by 2030, and continue thereafter on a much steeper decline, which would be historically unprecedented but consistent with a standard ambitious mitigation scenario (RCP2.6), results in a likely range of peak warming of 1.2–2.0 °C above the mid-nineteenth century. If CO2 emissions are continuously adjusted over time to limit 2100 warming to 1.5 °C, with ambitious non-CO2 mitigation, net future cumulative CO2 emissions are unlikely to prove less than 250 GtC and unlikely greater than 540 GtC. Hence, limiting warming to 1.5 °C is not yet a geophysical impossibility, but is likely to require delivery on strengthened pledges for 2030 followed by challengingly deep and rapid mitigation. Strengthening near-term emissions reductions would hedge against a high climate response or subsequent reduction rates proving economically, technically or politically unfeasible. http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo3031.html?foxtrotcallback=true

[EBH]

Correct, but the problem is as pointed out in the article, they are just going to write a more restrained GW accord, not scrap the whole darn matter!

[pas]

Mann is already on it to get that extra .5.

[EBH]

Nope. They are not going to give up the potential dollars on this matter...

There is simply too much money at risk globally to scrap this nonsense.

[servantboy777]

It's not about climate change, global warming, climate deviation...it's about CONTROL.

Controlling what you drive, what type of fuel, how much you consume, type of light bulb...washing machine...stove...on and on and on.

The art of separating citizens from their hard earned $$$. The more money they suck out of YOU, the more money they are able to suck from YOU....thereby increasing their power...over YOU.

Liberals and big gubbamint republicans on full display.

[jmaroneps37]

algore and “Matt Damon Matt Damon” hardest hit.

[Nextrush]

It was never about “climate change” it was a way to create a system where big business would get “carbon credits” while small business and individuals would pay higher taxes on their utility bills because of the evil of carbon emissions.

Implementation of “climate change policy” in Canada will skyrocket utility bills there in the coming years.

Smoking cigarettes has been demonized for decades to justify higher taxes.

Recently we have had the demonization of “sugary drinks” to justify taxes to fund big city governments.

Carbon emissions get demonized here to create new taxes to fund big government welfare states around the world.

And the little people have to pay the tax while the business community (Cheap Labor Express types) get tax breaks called “carbon credits”.

[NewJerseyJoe]

P4L

[Religion and Politics]

They are one or two revisions away from claiming underestimated effects of control by the measures taken in the last 20 years.

[Chgogal]

The useful idiots of the world just gobble this stupidity up and pay the taxes happily.

[justa-hairyape]

Pretty bad when their fudged science even has errors. They do not even make for good liars.

[justa-hairyape]

Always assume the stastist is wrong. The odds of you being correct in that assumption, increase every day the Earth continues to rotate. Why are they wrong ? The issue is never the issue. The cause is the issue. Therefore CO2, a live giving gas, becomes a pollutant for the cause.