“Indeed, cutting emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) today won’t eliminate a climate change-induced pattern favoring more severe storms and extreme weather.” [Michael MacCracken, NJNet.com]
“Indeed, cutting emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) today won’t eliminate a climate change-induced pattern favoring more severe storms and extreme weather.” [Michael MacCracken, NJNet.com]
Well of course this makes sense since Al Gore told us 2005 was the point of no return, then 2008, 2010 …
We are at the point of no return, may as well gas up the atmosphere, there is no turning back.
Here in the UK, an entire town was built of a floodplain in Wales, because the planners believed Al Gore’s global; warming tripe. Three government Ministers of the Environment and the planners who allowed the building on the basis of increased global warming, risk being sued for criminal negligence. It will be interesting to discover who owned the land.
Pay attention to first assumptions.
“climate change-induced pattern favoring more severe storms and extreme weather”? What pattern? AFAIK there’s no evidence supporting the assumed pattern.
The rest is just more garbage piled on top of the first garbage.
“Indeed, cutting emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) today won’t eliminate a climate change-induced pattern favoring more severe storms and extreme weather.” Neither will continued emmissions aggravate that pattern.
Nice. “Climate change” is now a thing, with an ability to induce patterns. That must be useful for something.