Time to end the new green scheme

Diogenes

Nemo me impune lacessit
Pulling the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Agreement isn’t enough to fight climate change hysteria.

The next Democrat President would just rejoin the accord. It gets us nowhere.

There needs to be a serious audit of the quality of “climate science” coming out of several intergovernmental agencies including the EPA and especially NASA, if not a complete shutdown of their climate research divisions and withdrawal from the UNFCCC.

There needs to be serious investigation into the ethics of the IPCC, and potentially a climate report done by top scientists assembled by the current administration to provide a level-headed assessment of the issue that is separate from the National Climate Assessment (NCA).

Any and all atmospheric and climate-related research should be delegated to NOAA and USGS (both of which are organizations I love). There are too many duplicity efforts that are a giant waste of taxpayer funds.

Sure, NASA does have satellites, which gives them an interest in meteorology, but they can provide the tools for other scientists to use.

The data doesn’t need to be analyzed by them.

I don’t mind if they fund climate research through giving grants to NOAA scientists or universities, but I am not convinced we need teams of researchers at NASA working on climate-related issues given there are scientists at NOAA, universities and in the private sector who can easily do those tasks.

NASA was established by the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 that President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed into law. Their focus is supposed to be space exploration, aeronautics and aerospace engineering.

Climate doesn’t fall under that umbrella. We haven’t had a manned mission to the moon since 1972.

Why? They haven’t attempted to go to Mars? Why?

You can be mad at me all you want, but we can find numerous examples of this in other areas of science and policy. Too many people working on the same thing. That bloats our bureaucracy, leads to less government efficiency and it plants the seeds for unethical behavior. If it is a lot more concentrated, it can be monitored.

Just my opinion. :thup:
 
What should the 34 x felon shut down next to make the Kooky Klimate Kult kry?

Put your suggestions ITT.
 
The Climatista Creed: 'The climate is changing and humanity has something to do with it' is supposed to induce severe guilt feelings and an urge for repentance in us all.

But it doesn't even pass my 'So What?' test.

Yours?
 
Climate change alarmism is being erased from FEMA's website.


GjRm1lwWoAAE7lh


Their page on “𝐂𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞” has been retitled “𝐅𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬”, and the body text rewritten.The Biden-era website read, “𝑪𝒍𝒊𝒎𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒆 𝒊𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒅𝒆𝒇𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒄𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒊𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒆. 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑒 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡, 𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑑𝑓𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝒎𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝒔𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒆 𝑐𝑜𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑠, 𝑠𝑒𝑎-𝑙𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙 𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑖𝑛𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔, 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒆𝒒𝒖𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒄𝒍𝒊𝒎𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒆 𝒂𝒓𝒆 𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒂𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅 𝒖𝒔.”

https://web.archive.org/web/20241223225240/https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/risk-management/climate-resilience…


The current webpage more accurately assesses the current situation, “𝑫𝒊𝒔𝒂𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒊𝒅𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒔 𝒂𝒓𝒆 𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒅𝒖𝒆 𝒕𝒐 𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒔𝒆𝒅 𝒉𝒖𝒎𝒂𝒏 𝒗𝒖𝒍𝒏𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒃𝒊𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒚, 𝒆𝒙𝒑𝒐𝒔𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒂 𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒄𝒍𝒊𝒎𝒂𝒕𝒆. 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑒 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡, 𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑑𝑓𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑠, 𝑠𝑒𝑎-𝑙𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙 𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑖𝑛𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔, 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒆𝒒𝒖𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆𝒔 𝒂𝒓𝒆 𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒂𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅 𝒖𝒔. 𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑠𝑒 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑠 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝒇𝒖𝒓𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓 𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒅 𝒃𝒚 𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒔𝒆𝒅 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒖𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒑𝒐𝒑𝒖𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒎𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒕𝒐 𝒗𝒖𝒍𝒏𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆 𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒔.”


https://fema.gov/emergency-managers/risk-management/future-conditions…


GjRnPOgWYAAdkD9


Hope to see more junk science that is on government websites get tossed in the trash.
 
GjWFqGhXYAAFA7N




SWISS VOTERS REJECT STRICT EMISSIONS CUTS OVER ECONOMIC FEARS



Swiss voters overwhelmingly rejected the Environmental Responsibility Initiative, with only 26% supporting stricter emissions limits.

The plan aimed to slash so-called "greenhouse gas emissions" to 10% of 2018 levels within a decade, but concerns over jobs, prosperity, and business competitiveness led to its defeat. Voters saw the proposed measures as too extreme and damaging to the economy.
 
Back
Top