Sunday, July 21, 2013


American Thinker- Adapt to What?
My question to the climate adaptionists is as follows: adapt to what? Climates are always changing: always have, always will. There are many climate cycles on global, regional, and local scales -- undoubtedly a number of which we haven't yet discovered. Our current climate prediction capacities are woefully inferior on a global scale, and at the regional/local level, they are a scientific joke. Since effectively all adaptation projects being discussed are at the regional/local levels, what climate are we proposing to adapt to?

One suspects that the adaptionists have no idea beyond the vague claims of a future climate that involves more drought, less drought, more floods, less floods, more precipitation, less precipitation, hotter, colder, more extreme versions of all of these options, and -- undoubtedly -- they'll all occur for the same region. No matter what happens to the weather or climate, someone will blame some event or pattern on climate change. So should we adapt for every possible contingency in every possible locality? Good luck funding that. And if we shouldn't, what possibilities should we adapt to?
Twitter / BigJoeBastardi: The "Perfect Storm" of moisture ...
The "Perfect Storm" of moisture and temperatures for much of US Breadbasket leads to Bumper Crop of Corn! A little extra c02 helps too!
Twitter / BigJoeBastardi: Roads in much of midwest farm ...
Roads in much of midwest farm country are canyons through the cornfields as corn reaches skyward, defying doom and gloom forecasts
Twitter / BigJoeBastardi: What are the odds we hear that ...
What are the odds we hear that the perfect growing season in areas forecasted dry and hot again are yet another sign of extreme weather?
Twitter / BigJoeBastardi: Models and CO2 are not the ...
Models and CO2 are not the drivers of weather/climate. Newer models based on solar activity now forecasting cooling. Why arent those used?

No comments: