We can’t reliably predict the weather in local areas, nor do we understand the mechanisms of global climate–or change. Every doomsday prediction green lunatics have made has failed. Every single one, which goes so far beyond the realm of random probability as to be convincing to rational people: Greenies have no idea what they’re talking about. The best way to “trust the science” where they’re concerned is to believe the opposite of whatever they’re demanding. That would not only actually save the planet but trillions we don’t have.
Let’s quickly review: the Sun, and more precisely, its distance from the Earth, is what makes life possible. Sure, there are other factors, but you get the point. So, of course, greenies reeling from Donald Trump’s drying up their Green New Deal funding have come up with another brilliant plan to “save” the planet:
Author” src=”https://images.americanthinker.com/fb/fbrhofb2sidm3rvn0geb_640.jpg” />
Graphic: X Screenshot
Well, the New Dark Ages are about to get darker. The UK government is poised to approve £50 million in funding for controlled solar geoengineering experiments within weeks, marking a significant step in exploring sunlight reflection methods (SRM) to mitigate global warming.
These initiatives, managed by the Advanced Research and Invention Agency (ARIA), aim to gather real-world data on techniques that could temporarily cool the planet in the questionable effort to reduce the “global temperature“.
Why is it so easy to imagine these people wearing Mao jackets and inhabiting hollowed-out volcano, Bond villain lairs?
Apparently, they’ve forgotten even the UN’s climate panel years ago admitted if Americans gave them everything they wanted, bankrupting the nation, they might—might—be able to reduce the global temperature less than a degree centigrade in a century or so. That’s why they don’t say “global warming” anymore, replacing it with “climate change.” They also dropped global warning hysteria because the globe hasn’t been—ahem—warming for decades now. They don’t like to talk about that.
Lileks.com adds this:
I was somewhat alarmed by this story: “Experiments to dim the SUN in bid to curb global warming will be approved by the UK government within weeks.” (Daily Fail, but they’re quoting a Telegraph story.) Of all the countries to come up with the idea of reducing the amount of sun its residents get, England would seem to be last on the list. Also, this is how the Matrix got started. Also, I think a poll of most of England outside of the government, universities, and tanks of Cogitating Boffins would regard the idea as utter tosh, because Climate Dread is quite low on the list of concerns for most UK residents.
I don’t claim to be a “climate scientist,” but if adherence to the scientific method, the truth and restraining any tendency toward hysterical predictions of 10-12 year in the future doom, and this time we really mean it—trust the science! I’m easily as qualified as most of those claiming that title regardless of their academic qualifications, which seldom have anything to do with “climate science.” Most of them seem about as scientific as Trofim Lysenko, and their plots would certainly produce the same results.
What I do know is that sunlight is, to use a scientific term, “good.” A warmer climate with adequate precipitation and sunlight keeps us healthy—I think that has something to do with Vitamin D and stuff–and gives us more time to grow food. Considering we all need food–that doesn’t include bugs–not just for ourselves but for our livestock and various feathered critters, which we also need if we’re going to have enough protein, a somewhat warmer and longer growing season would seem to be a good thing.
Cutting off the sun—if we had any clue how to do that on a global scale without bankrupting the whole of humanity—would reduce growing seasons and crop yields, which to use another scientific term, would be “bad.” If we did it as much as these “scientists” seem to prefer, we’d be back to the 70’s “global cooling” with its imminent—in 10-12 years—“ice age,” which didn’t doom us but forced a narrative switch to “global warming.” Considering far more people die from cold than heat, that too would be “bad.”
Author” src=”https://images.americanthinker.com/cb/cbeyuf2zpvgm5gywwmpq_640.jpg” />
Graphic: X Screenshot
So, these British “scientists,”—Bill Gates is reportedly pushing this on the other side of the pond, which intensifies the Bond Villain imagery—will doubtless waste billions upon billions to discover we really don’t have a clue how to change global climate. Other climate scientists will spend even more and discover the same, which will cause them all to bury any data that contradicts their good intentions and cause them to demand even more and more money because if we don’t fork it over, we’re doomed in 10-12 years, and this time they really, really mean it.
Always wrong, but never in doubt.
On a different subject, if you are not already a subscriber, you may not know that we’ve implemented something new: A weekly newsletter with unique content from our editors for subscribers only. These essays alone are worth the cost of the subscription.
Mike McDaniel is a USAF veteran, classically trained musician, Japanese and European fencer, life-long athlete, firearm instructor, retired police officer and high school and college English teacher. He is a published author and blogger. His home blog is Stately McDaniel Manor.
This article was originally published at www.americanthinker.com
