Climate Change That Cried Wolf

Do we still teach the story of the little boy who cried wolf? If so, it doesn’t seem to be taking.

To review the story as I recall it; this little puke kid named “Peter,” keeps telling the town of sheep herders that there’s a wolf coming to kill their sheep. He does this because he’s a needy little snot nosed brat who demands attention…and the town quickly tires of his antics and stops reacting to the cries of wolf. Finally, one day, Peter actually sees a wolf, and when he cries out, no one responds and the wolf eats all of the sheep. Then, the wolf rapes the village women while the men watch helplessly because they weren’t prepared for the wolf’s arrival, and, as a final insult, the wolf huffs and puffs and blows all of the houses down before having an inter-species gang bang with the town pigs.

As the moral of the story says; At last Peter learned his lesson, that if you always tell lies, people will eventually stop believing you; and then when you’re telling the truth for a change, when you really need them to believe you, they won’t.

Well, that moral is being forgotten by a vast majority of Americans, let alone the world.

The environmental wolf criers are back…and this time they’ve unleashed a doozy:

A United Nations-issued report on climate change predicts increased wildfires, drought and massive die off of coral reefs by 2030. The report says in order to prevent these natural disasters, “global net human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide” must be reduced by about 45 percent from the point levels were in 2010 by 2030, and levels would have to be “net zero” by around the year 2050.

Yup…we have 12 years to save our very existence. I suppose in the age of reboots, sequels, and remakes it is very in vogue to roll out an old and tired script and pass it off as new. Sorry, folks, but Peter has cried wolf too many times in my lifetime…I just can’t believe so many of my fellow villagers keep believing this crap. Seriously, at what point do you sit back and say, “again? Again, with the environmental based end-of-the-world?” Twice in the last year conspiracy theorist David Meade has predicted the end of the world caused by the planet Nibiru (He was wrong, BTW), and in both instances he was either ignored or a laughing stock. Nothing should be different now. The United Nations is nothing more than Earth’s Star Wars bar scene, filled with despots, murderers, and tyrants, yet they cite the almighty “science,” and we as a collective people fold like a lawn chair. Again.

  • In January, 2006 Former Vice-president Al Gore declared that unless we took “drastic measures” to reduce greenhouse gasses, the world would reach a “point of no return” in a mere ten years. He called it a “true planetary emergency.” Well, the ten years passed without any drastic measures taken, and we’re still here.


  • In 2009, world leaders met in Copenhagen, Denmark and the head of Canada’s Green Party wrote that there were only “hours” left to stop global warming. “We have hours to act to avert a slow-motion tsunami that could destroy civilization as we know it,” Elizabeth May, leader of the Greens in Canada, wrote in 2009. That was 9 years ago and we’re all still breathing through lungs, not gills.


  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center head James Hansen warned in 2009 that President Obama only “has four years to save Earth.”


  • 2009 was a bad year for global warming predictions. That year United Kingdom Prime Minister Gordon Brown warned there were only “50 days to save the world from global warming!” According to Brown there was “no plan B.” Brown has been booted out of office since then, and I believe more than 51 days have passed since 2009 and we’re still here.


  • Prince Charles said in July 2009 that there would be “irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it in 96 months.” Very specific. It’s been 111 months since then so somehow the world apparently staved off an utter catastrophe. Again.


  • The U.N.’s top climate scientist said in 2007 we only had four years to save the world. Rajendra Pachauri, the former head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said in 2007 that if “there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late.” “What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment,” he said. Well, it’s 2018 and no new U.N. climate treaty has been presented. The only thing that’s changed since then is that Pachauri was forced to resign amid accusations he sexually harassed multiple female coworkers.


  • In the late 1980s the U.N. was already claiming the world had only a decade to solve global warming or face the consequences. On June 30, 1989 a “senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.” That prediction didn’t come true 18 years ago, and the U.N. is sounding the same alarm today.


  • In 2005, the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) warned that imminent sea-level rises, increased hurricanes, and desertification caused by “man-made global warming” would lead to massive population disruptions. The 2005 UNEP predictions claimed that, by 2010, some 50 million “climate refugees” would be frantically fleeing from those regions of the globe. However, not only did the areas in question fail to produce a single “climate refugee,” by 2010, population levels for those regions were actually still soaring.


  • The United States Pentagon commissioned a report on “climate change” that also offered some alarming visions of the future under “global warming.” The 2003 document, entitled “An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security,” was widely cited by global-warming theorists and bureaucrats, as evidence that humanity was facing certain doom. It also served as the foundation for the claim that alleged man-made “climate change” was actually a “national security concern.” However, the Pentagon report turned out to be just as ridiculous as the UN “climate refugees” forecasts. By now, according to the report for a 10-year time period, the world should be a post-apocalyptic disaster zone. Among other outlandish scenarios envisioned in the report over the preceding decade: California flooded with inland seas, parts of the Netherlands “unlivable,” polar ice all but gone in the summers, and surging temperatures. Mass increases in hurricanes, tornadoes, and other natural disasters were supposed to be wreaking havoc across the globe, too. All of that would supposedly spark resource wars and all sorts of other horrors. But none of it actually happened.


  • For well over a decade now, climate alarmists have been claiming that snow would soon become a thing of the past. In March 2000, for example, “senior research scientist” David Viner, told the U.K. Independent that within “a few years,” snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event” in Britain. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he was quoted as claiming. The very next year, snowfall across the United Kingdom increased by more than 50 percent. By December of 2009, London saw its heaviest levels of snowfall in two decades. In 2010, the coldest U.K. winter since records began a century ago blanketed the islands with snow.


  • After the outlandish predictions of snowless winters failed to materialize, the UN’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) dramatically changed its tune on snowfall. Global-warming alarmists rushed to blame the record cold and heavy snow experienced in recent years on — you guessed it! — global warming. Less snow: global warming. More snow: global warming. Get it? Good. The same phenomenon took place in the United States during the winter of 2013. As record cold and snowfall was pummeling much of North America, warming theorists contradicted all of their previous forecasts and claimed that global warming was somehow to blame. Among them: White House Science “Czar” John Holdren. “A growing body of evidence suggests that the kind of extreme cold being experienced by much of the United States as we speak is a pattern we can expect to see with increasing frequency, as global warming continues,” he claimed. That assertion, of course, is exactly the opposite of what the UN “settled science” IPCC predicted in its 2001 global-warming report, which claimed that the planet would see “warmer winters and fewer cold spells, because of climate change.” Ironically, perhaps, Holdren warned decades ago that human CO2 emissions would lead to a billion deaths due to global warming-fueled global cooling — yes, cooling, which he said would lead to a new ice age by 2020.


  • Americans who lived through the 1960s and ’70’s remember the dire global-cooling predictions that were hyped and given great credibility by Newsweek, Time, Life, National Geographic, and numerous other mainstream media outlets. According to the man-made global-cooling theories of the time, billions of people should be dead by now owing to cooling-linked crop failures and starvation. “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but 11 degrees colder by the year 2000,” claimed ecology professor Kenneth E.F. Watt at the University of California in 1970. “This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.” Of course, 2000 came and went, and the world did not get 11 degrees colder. No ice age arrived, either.


That is, quite literally just the (pun intended), tip of the iceberg. In just my very brief, though not exhaustive (that would be bad for the environment) research, I have accumulated 12 cries of wolf. And not even a metaphorical prairie dog has arrived. Grow up. This has become beyond embarrassing.

more posts in: