Comedian Steve Harvey once said that the proper way to deal with unhinged people is to let them keep talking and hang themselves with their own words, and that’s exactly what happened with the eco-fanatics at Bloomberg News.
Bloomberg News, which is essentially the liberal media’s poster child for climate change agitprop, published another one of its eco-destructo items with a telling headline November 10, “Trillions Hinge on a Future That Eludes Climate Models.”
What does this mean? The piece’s SEO headline was more explicit: “Global Warming Defies Efforts to Predict Its Effects.”
The translation is simply that for all the crystal ball doom porn that gets spewed out into the ether about climate change, the media and their favorite eco-Armageddon prophets in academia know jack squat about the issue in practice.
Of course, Bloomberg News reporters Eric Roston, Laura Millan and Julia Janicki didn’t realize the severity of their collective Freudian slip, since they proceeded to proclaim disaster anyway:
The unpredictability about how global warming affects regional weather is a vexing and increasingly important challenge for governments, banks and insurers trying to accurately prepare for and respond to disasters that can cost hundreds of billions of dollars in losses each year.
The crazy part is that the reporters even mentioned the “record-breaking El Niño,” which provides a reasonable explanation for current weather patterns. But they shoe-horned the climate change boondoggle into the narrative anyway by kvetching that El Niño was “amplifying the effects of climate change, supercharging droughts, torrential rain, heat waves and wildfires against an already elevated temperature baseline.”
Reminder: The reporters just admitted that “global warming” was supposedly outsmarting their own models, but simultaneously argued like they still understood what in the Sam Hill was going on and started attacking fossil fuels, again:
As greenhouse-gas emissions from burning fossil fuels continue to rise, damaging weather extremes are expected to become more frequent and severe. Scientists have accurately forecast rising global temperatures from those emissions, but what the models can’t predict with precision is when or where they will strike.
This is like saying a homeowner can predict the average temperature of the kitchen but has no idea which burner on the stove is about to catch fire or when.
The implication is that know-nothing climate activists can just continue to kick the proverbial can down the road ad inifinitum and never have their extremist babblings about end-of-the-world events falsified in real time. A perfect example is when an international team of climate researchers recently “abandoned” the ridiculous RCP8.5, one of the most dire climate change scenarios that’s been passed around through the academic ether over the years like a virus.
But that didn’t stop publications like The New York Times and Bloomberg News from regurgitating it like it was anything other than cartoonish. In an August 2020 piece, Bloomberg News parroted how RCP8.5 defenders were adamant that the “scenario has tracked actual emissions over the past 15 years much better than other less aggressive scenarios.” Go figure!
