If, like me, you love the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH) in New York, here is a question I can guarantee you’ve never asked.
Never once — as you’ve circumnavigated the blue whale or gawped at those marvelous Teddy Roosevelt-style dioramas in the mammal halls or admired the T-Rex’s jagged 6-inch gnashers — have you paused in deep thought and mused to yourself: “Gee. I wonder if the guys who pay for all this stuff are Democrats or Republicans?”
The reason you’ve never had this thought is because you’re not stupid. Or at least, not that stupid.
You understand — because it’s so obvious that even one of the stuffed primates in the Akeley Hall of African Mammals could grasp this basic point — that the collections in the American Museum of Natural History have nothing whatsoever to do with politics. They have to do with science, which is something completely different.
‘Climate change’ just officially ceased being an important issue in U.S. politics.
President Trump didn’t mention it in his State of the Union address. But nor, much to the disgust of environmentalists – did the Democrats in their rebuttals.
A shocked Huffington Post has named and shamed the key Democrats who could have spoken out but didn’t:
In his speech, Rep. Joe Kennedy (D-Mass.) didn’t bring up global warming, sea-level rise or the surge in global greenhouse gas emissions, which threaten to become worse as the Republican White House ramps up fossil fuel production to unprecedented levels.
Even the State of the Union statement issued by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), considered one of the most hawkish Democrats on climate issues, snubbed climate change.
It was left to Bernie Sanders (I-Vt) to keep the faith:
Slowly but surely the Trump administration is draining the climate swamp.
Here’s the latest good news, courtesy of American Geophysical Union’s Eos, in a pieceheadlined “Prestigious Climate-Related Fellowships Rescinded.”
It reports on the reduction (by half) of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) “prestigious” Climate and Global Change Postdoctoral Fellowship Program — or what I would call a madrasa for climate change alarmists.
Since 1992, at a cost of around $2 million per annum, the program has sponsored eight fellows a year in order “to help create the next generation of researchers needed for climate studies.”
The graduates’ list is a veritable Who’s Who of prominent climate alarmists.
Among the program’s alumni is Myles Allen, a man-made climate change specialist at Oxford University; Gavin Schmidt, now head of the notoriously climate alarmist NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies; and Heidi Cullen, who writes alarmist propaganda for the website Climate Central.
Not all alumni, it’s true, go on to shill for the great global warming scam.
For example, one alumnus — Chris Landsea, a meteorologist specializing in hurricanes — took the brave and principled decision of resigning in 2005 from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report. Landsea objected to the way his views were being misrepresented by one of the report’s lead authors, Kevin Trenberth.
Trenberth wanted to promote the idea that “global warming” (as it was then known) would lead to an increase in intense hurricane activity.
Landsea was outraged because this contradicted all available scientific studies, including his own. So he resigned in protest, no doubt costing himself a well-paid career on the climate change gravy train.
But Landsea is almost certainly the exception rather than the rule.
He made gigantic contributions to television, to weather forecasting, and even to the National Weather Service who changed and upgraded many of their methods to accommodate the visionary ideas he had in founding the Weather Channel.
In 1983, Coleman won the American Meteorological Society award for Outstanding Service by a Broadcast Meteorologist. The organization credited Coleman for “his pioneering efforts in establishing a national cable weather channel,” according to the AMS website.
This year marks the 50th anniversary of Paul Ehrlich’s eco-doom bestseller The Population Bomb. Maybe we should all stage a mass die-in to spare the distinguished Stanford biology professor his embarrassment.
Well if Ehrlich is not embarrassed, he should be. His book sold over three million copies – presumably making him a very decent amount of money. It turned him into an academic rock star, helped win him numerous prizes (often with large sums of money attached) and may well have been responsible for winning him the post he still occupies aged 85 as Bing Professor of Population Studies at Stanford University…
…And all for writing a book which is essentially junk. Not just junk but dangerous junk. It’s bad enough that it got its predictions – about a disastrous population collapse due to resource depletion – wrong. But far worse was the damage it did to public and political consciousness, doing much to generate the environmental hysteria we see gripping the world today.
In fact, The Population Bomb did the one thing which science books aren’t supposed to do: it actually made the people who read it more stupid.
You see its malign influence today everywhere from the whispery prognostications of gorilla-hugging Malthusian David Attenborough to all those people who say they agree with me on climate change but then go on to tell me with a knowing, conspiratorial tap of the side of their noses that “Of course, the real elephant in the room is overpopulation.”
No, overpopulation is not the elephant in the room. If it were the elephant in the room it would mean that Paul Ehrlich’s book was right and he thoroughly deserved all that money and that tenure at Stanford – and I wouldn’t be writing this piece, would I?
The study authors, from NOAA’s Marine Mammal and Turtle division in La Jolla, California, analyzed sea turtle populations on beaches at the northern and southern ends of Australia’s Great Barrier Reef.
Because incubation temperature of turtle eggs determines the animal’s sex, a warmer nest results in more females. Increasing temperatures in Queensland’s north, linked to climate change, have led to virtually no male northern green sea turtles being born.
For the study, scientists caught green turtles at the Howick Group of islands where both northern and southern green turtle populations forage in the Great Barrier Reef. Using a combination of endocrinology and genetic tests, researchers identified the turtles’ sex and nesting origin.
Of green turtles from warmer northern nesting beaches, 99.1% of juveniles, 99.8% of subadults, and 86.8% of adults were female. Turtles from the cooler southern reef nesting beaches showed a more moderate female sex bias (65%–69% female).
If global warming continues, the study concludes, then so many turtles may turn female that there will be no males with which to mate. Extinction will then be inevitable.
President Trump has not let the tedious gap between Christmas and New Year go to waste.
As usual, he has been trolling his enemies like a boss:
In the East, it could be the COLDEST New Year’s Eve on record. Perhaps we could use a little bit of that good old Global Warming that our Country, but not other countries, was going to pay TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS to protect against. Bundle up!
Believe it or not, global climate change is very real even if it’s cold outside Trump Tower right now. Just like there is still hunger in the world, even if you just had a Big Mac. https://t.co/VCGyGRWGCJ
In this time of alcohol-fuelled indolence, late nights, late breakfasts, and “oh God, do I really have to go back to work already?” I think it’s important that we remind ourselves who our enemies are and whom we must destroy utterly in 2018.
For me, there is one candidate that stands out above all the others, not because it’s the most physically dangerous or the most savagely cruel or the most monstrously evil, but simply because it is the most ubiquitous and insidiously vile and repellant.
I’m talking, of course, about the Green Blob.
Over the last year, I’ve written quite a bit about how the entire global warming industry is basically a junk-science-fuelled scam and the biggest financial and scientific scandal in the history of the world.
Some of you may think I’m exaggerating. So in order to stiffen up your sinews, summon up your blood, and gird your loins for the fight in 2018, let me parse for you a recent newspaper editorial which sums up pretty much everything that is wrong with this scam.
It comes from my favorite financial magazine — Moneyweek — and is a summary of an editorial which appeared in the Financial Times.
Read the paragraph, if you can stomach it, then I’ll explain why it drove me to apoplexy when I read it in the bath over Christmas — and why you should be just as annoyed and disgusted as I am:
Environmentalists have discovered the two new things most likely to turn the planet into a molten orb of glowing red climate death.
By awful coincidence, they happen to be the same two things that men enjoy doing perhaps more than anything in the world (at least when their wives or girlfriends aren’t looking.)
a) making vast sums of money out of exceedingly risky and speculative cryptocurrency trading when all the experts are saying it’s like 17th century Dutch Tulipmania, only with rocket boosters and sprinkled with essence of Enron, Sub-Prime Mortgages and the South Sea Bubble.
b) looking at screen pictures of purty, naked ladies and re-enacting the scene in South Park where the internet is banned and Randy breaks into the trailer housing the very last computer console still connected to Pornhub…
Yep. They’re not joking. Bitcoin and porn are the two latest things which, experts tell us, are causing “global warming”.
First, porn. According to this groundbreaking investigation in The Atlantic, pornography is causing even more danger to the planet than it did in the days when it simply involved cutting down forests to make glossy paper for dirty magazines.