"CNN End of Snow: “Climate change is threatening winter sports’ very existence”
Summary:
No "end of snow" prediction was made. Instead, a well detailed article on how a lack of snow was hurting winter sports was written.
The author, Eric Worrell, lied openly about what CNN supposedly said, by adding his own fake headline and attributing it to CNN.
PC gleefully repeated the lie, and she has no regrets about doing so. She does what her masters and what Satan commands.
Most deniers here support the lie as well, because deniers tend to be fundamentally dishonest.
Enjoy Hell, PC. Given your allegiance to Satan, the Lord of Lies, I don't see how you can't avoid it. Unless you repent soon. That would require apologizing to all of the people you've lied about.
Summary???
Sure thing, you dunce:
For more than 50 years Climate Alarmists in the scientific community and environmental movement have not gotten even one prediction correct, but they do have a perfect record of getting 41 predictions wrong.
LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS THE CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT WRONG
Here is
the source for numbers 1-27. As you will see, the individual sources are not crackpots, but scientific studies and media reports on “expert” predictions. The sources for numbers 28-41 are linked individually.
- 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
- 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
- 1970: Ice Age By 2000
- 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
- 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
- 1972: New Ice Age By 2070
- 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
- 1974: Another Ice Age?
- 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life
- 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
- 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes
- 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend
- 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s
- 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
- 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)
- 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
- 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)
- 2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is
- 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
- 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
- 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018
- 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013
- 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World
- 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’
- 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014
- 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015
- 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’
- 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
- 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources
- 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years
- 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
- 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s
- 1980: Peak Oil In 2000
- 1996: Peak Oil in 2020
- 2002: Peak Oil in 2010
- 2006: Super Hurricanes!
- 2005: Manhattan Underwater by 2015
- 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
- 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
- 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
- 1970s: Killer Bees!
Sorry, Experts… Sorry, Scientific Consensus… Only a fool comes running for the 42nd cry of wolf.
Mark Simone
Here is the source for numbers 1-27. As you will see, the individual sources are not crackpots, but scientific studies and media reports on “expert” predictions.
With all due respect ... not a single citation for numbers 1-27 is anything close to a "scientific study" ... Washington Post, The Guardian, AP are fine media companies, but they do regularly publish crackpotism ... you need to be looking in refereed journals and you're going to come up thin; CCC is political, not scientific ...
I did bother to look at #36 "Super Hurricanes" ... Breitbart is now a reliable science news outlet? ... shame on you PC, you know enough not to read Breitbart without handfuls of salt ... using them as a scientific citation for anything that has to do with
global cooling global warming climate change is just wrong ...
I've seen that dodge before.
Nothing wrong with Breitbart.....it is far more reliable than the NYTimes.
Short of outright
banning free speech.....certainly on the Left's agenda.....there are several attempts their Janissaries use with metronomic regularity, to disqualify and delegitimize.
First step in their playbook of 'delegitimization' is to
refuse to accept any statements of fact, or even strongly supported opinion, unless they come from a Leftist source....the NYTimes, HuffPost, the DNC, MSNBC or the like.
Frequently a post on the message board includes either a link, quote, or reference to Breitbart, World Net Daily, or Rupert Murdoch, or Ann Coulter, or some other right-thinker, and rather than admit that the item is dispositive for the thread or question under discussion, often the Leftist,totalitarians, with the alternate view:
a. refuse to address the issue, because the citation is on the opposite side.
b. resort to an emoticon of laughter, or some sort of sign of disrespect, or the use of ‘lol.’
c. feel that some sort of “there you go again” response, rather than an actual refutation.
d. Attack the referred item with an Ad Hominem jab, pointing to an imagined physical or mental defect, or alter the name in some absurd manner.
In short....anything but an actual response.
What we have here is the kind of
defense against opposing ideas that is indolent at best, and intellectually cowardly at worst.
As an example, FrontPage, the online Internet magazine has received more than one billion ‘hits.’ It has interviewed leading intellectuals, politicians and human rights activists such as Bat Ye’or, Vladimir Bukovsky, Christopher Hitchens, Khaleel Mohammed, Daniel Pipes, Natan Sharanky and Andrew Sullivan. It has therefore had both left, liberal voices (Stanley Aronowitz, Susan Estrich, Michael Lerner) and right-wing voices (Tammy Bruce, Ann Coulter, James Woolsey).
To dismiss a source or author because they promulgate an alternative or even a hated perspective, without consideration of the truth of their premise lacks integrity.
