Sunday, May 5, 2019

The Climate Cult Strikes Again

A malicious story regarding President Trump's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations was distributed by McClatchy's Washington Bureau and appeared in my local paper yesterday. The lede is below:

President Donald Trump’s nominee for U.S. ambassador to the United Nations is raising concern among senators important to her confirmation and diplomats in New York over her skeptical views on climate change.
Kelly Craft, currently serving as Trump’s ambassador to Canada, drew the attention of foreign dignitaries in 2017 when she said “both sides of the science” had merit in the climate debate. But at the U.N. – where climate science is no longer subject to disagreement, where the threat tops the organization’s concerns and has the rare effect of unifying member states – her appointment underscores Trump’s dismissal of the perils of a warming Earth and his administration’s general contempt for the U.N. itself.
There is so much wrong with the above it is hard to know where to begin. But, let's dig in:
  • Why is global warming elevated above every other issue for an ambassadorial post? I thought the ability to convey the diplomatic positions of the United States plus the ability to get along with people were the most important values. At least, that is what Mr. Phillips taught us in 8th grade civics. Maybe we should go return to those values. 
  • "Skeptical views." There is nothing in the story (available in its entirety at the brown link above) that indicates she is skeptical that humans affect the climate. Nothing. 
  • "Both sides had merit." This is controversial? Perhaps it is to the left-leaning McClatchy operation in Washington, but it isn't to any serious scientist. Isn't it both suspicious and odd that global warming is the only study area where "the science is settled"?
  • "Her appointment underscores Trump's dismissal of the perils of a warming earth and his administration's general contempt for the U.N. itself." Is this an editorial or a news story? The way the McClatchy piece is phrased, it likely originated from Senate Democrats (e.g., a press release) or one of their Big Climate allies.  
  • The full story indicates she owns stock in fossil fuel companies which is her supposed conflict of interest. I own stock in fossil fuel companies. So do, I suppose, most Americans who have a mutual fund in their IRA, 401K or other investments. So do some of the most prominent members of Big Climate. Big deal!
  • To try to illustrate those climate 'perils,' the story is accompanied by a video showing a tornado developing. 
Only one problem with regard to the climate/tornado 'peril:' Strong tornadoes (the types that kill people) are becoming less frequent!
While the graph ends in 2017, the downward trend
continued through 2018
This story is a perfect example of why the mainstream media is viewed with derision. Unfortunately, at least where global warming is concerned, I have little to no hope the MSM will clean up its act. 

No comments:

Post a Comment