Raw Emotion, Not Science, on Display at People’s Climate March
Let's Play Climatologist For A Day!
… and the worst are full of passionate intensity.
Madness. Last week came March for Science spokesmodel Bill Nye and his perversions passing for “science.” Now comes shifty George Soros with his tens of millions injected into the populace to stir up heated feelings of “science.”
We resist, they say. We build, they claim. We rise, they threaten.
These declarations are from the homepage of the People’s Climate March, as brave and as forthright as any communist slogan.
Did they say climate march? Not quite. Instead, a mob gathered for, in their words, “climate, jobs, and justice.” Jobs? Justice?
What happened, you might ask, to global warming? Forgotten. Well, it’s impolite to mention it because, of course, it has gone missing. The planet’s top scientists, having spent billions in the search, are more than a little embarrassed about not being able to find it. It’s gauche to mention it, so let’s leave them in peace and maybe, at long last, and after spending a few billion more, they’ll surprise us all.
Let’s instead talk about these marchers. Why do they say they “rise”? Well, they want to “immediately stop attacks on immigrants, communities of color, indigenous and tribal people and lands and workers.”
Global warming has been attacking immigrants?
They want to “ensure public funds and investments create good paying jobs that provide a family-sustaining wage and benefits and preserve workers’ rights, including the right to unionize.”
Global warming is preventing people from unionizing?
They want to “fund investments in our communities, people and environment to transition to a new clean and renewable energy economy that works for all, not an economy that feeds the machinery of war.”
Global warming feeds the machinery of war?
“We needed a mass mobilization to stand up against Trump’s attacks on our climate and communities and fight for a new economy that works for people and planet.”
Donald Trump has attacked the climate?
To much of the left, this is what science has become, friends. Tens of thousands (they say) of ordinary folk, largely or even completely ignorant of the real science of climatology, yet convinced by decades of slick propaganda that the sky is falling, take to the streets and demand … better jobs? Fewer “attacks” on immigrants?
Why? Why are they there? A goodly proportion of the agitated could not tell you why the sky is blue. I’d bet a significant fraction wouldn’t know whether the sun orbits around the earth or whether it’s other way around. Fewer than 5% could describe the Coriolis force. And I would wager that nearly none, maybe even zero, could discourse about the limitations and error potential of cloud parameterization schemes.
What’s that? What’s a “cloud parameterization?” they ask. Friends, if you do not know, let me politely suggest you keep your trap shut about the magnitude of global warming. This and hundreds of other arcane items make up the complexities of climate models — you know, the ones that have consistently failed to predict the actual climate. If you can’t understand the models and their enormous and well observed limitations, you can’t understand the climate. Certainly not well enough to tramp up and down the streets demanding something be done about it.
Or has scientific truth really become that which garners the most votes? Or engenders the loudest screeches?
The (imperfect) empirical formula appears to be this: the less one knows about the physics of fluid flow on a rotating sphere, the more one worries about global warming. Oops! I mean “climate change.”
This was a march. Therefore, there were the usual barrage of asinine signs, some of them pagan, some raunchy. Idiotic signs have become so ritualized, “news” organizations have taken to rating them, as they do commercials after the Superbowl.
Incidentally, what do “attacks on immigrants” have to do with global warming? Denier! Why was non-scientist actor Leo DiCaprio holding a sign which read “Climate change is real” when nobody doubts that? Denier! Why was a little girl, no older than four and therefore unable to understand even what day of the week it was, holding a sign that said “Don’t burn my future”? Denier!
Why — Denier! Denier! Denier!
Ah. I get it. Science.
Planned Parenthood is implying the climate “crisis” will slow the rate of this killing. If there is a better argument for global warming, I don’t know it.
The most appalling announcement came from Planned “We Can Get Baby Hearts For You Cheap” Parenthood. They tweeted, “The climate crisis’ negative impact on the environment could have devastating effects on people’s reproductive health. #ClimateMarch.”
“Reproductive health” is an evil euphemism for killing the lives inside would-be mothers. And here PP is implying the climate “crisis” will slow the rate of this killing.
If there is a better argument for global warming, I don’t know it.