Climate change proponents refuse to answer questions about the failure of their projections
Jack Hellner:
These people don't want to debate, because they don't want to explain all the times in the past they have been wrong. They don't want to explain which of their assumptions were invalid.
...From Al Gore and other Climate change proponents have come predictions that the Arctic would be ice free by now. Some Greenies have gotten stuck in the ice trying to prove that thesis. The Polar Bear population is increasing despite concern that they would become extinct. They predicted that melting sea ice would result in much of the coast being underwater.
It is too bad that journalists won't question John Kerry and other fear-mongers, but here are a few easy ones for them:
- How come the ice is still in the Arctic after 150 years of exponential growth in fossil fuel use, since we were told it would be gone by now?
- What caused the ice to melt after the Ice Age, since humans and fossil fuels couldn't have caused it?
- We have been warned that because humans and fossil fuels cause warming, we would have snowless winters. Why were the predictions so wrong, and why should we believe the doom and gloom about the future since previous predictions have been 100% wrong?
- Scientific studies have shown that droughts were much longer in the past, prior to when humans and fossil fuels could have caused them, so why do climate change alarmists continually lie that we cause longer and more severe droughts? Isn't that a daily assault on the truth?
There are thousands of questions, and it is sad that no one asks the alarmists. It is obvious that the climate has always changed and always will change naturally, and it is arrogant to believe that politicians and bureaucrats can control temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity forever. They just want the money to control our lives.
...
These people don't want to debate, because they don't want to explain all the times in the past they have been wrong. They don't want to explain which of their assumptions were invalid.
Comments
Post a Comment