If you picked the last one you were right. If you picked any of the others, you're not smart enough to read the rest of this piece, just go away, since nothing rational will work for you.
If Californians had done all the things these green nitwits demanded of them, in no way would it have mattered if it hadn't rained or snowed. These reservoirs simply didn't, and wouldn't have filled up unless they had "record rain that came cyclically and naturally". It really is that simple!
Up until then California was suffering from a long term drought, and we absolutely know that drought wasn't caused by "oil, coal, CO2, cars, methane, or any of the other things “climate experts” blame for causing droughts, flooding, too much snow, too little snow and whatever else with which they want to scare the public." How do we know that? First, this isn't the first drought to hit California, both short term and long term droughts: 1841, 1864, 1924, 1928–1935, 1947–1950, 1959–1960, 1976–1977, 1986–1992, 2006–2010, 2011–2017, and 2020–2022. It's cyclical, and...watch out now....here it comes......all natural. Now that's really got to be a mouth foamer for climatistas and their allies.
I think some more history is in order. Hellman notes at one time the Sahara desert, thousands of years ago, was very wet, and then it was struck by a drought. A big drought. An unending drought. And guess what? There wasn't a car in sight! They hadn't discovered oil yet and there's virtually no geological evidence North Africa has coal. A lot of limestone under all that sand, but for all practical purposes, no coal. So, their drought wasn't caused by oil, coal, CO2, cars, methane, or anything mankind was doing, nor was California's drought. It was...again....all natural!
He goes on to note the same nitwits who claim they can predict the climate fifty or a hundreds years out, and arrogantly claim they can control that future climate by adopting all these nutty green initiatives, are the same people who:
Apparently lack the ability to properly regulate banks…and then blame Trump for the problem. Can’t control or tell the truth about the crisis at the borders…and then blame Trump for the problem. Can’t tell the truth or control the “spread” of COVID. Why would anyone trust the so-called “experts” at the CDC and the WHO who spread so much misinformation about COVID and destroyed so many businesses and people with their government edicts?
Told so many lies about Obamacare, including the “you can keep your doctor” and “keep your plan” shticks, premiums would go down substantially fib, and that it would lower the deficit. And most of the media still says how great it is. Can’t educate children — no matter how much money they throw at it — to read or do math at grade level.
And these are the brilliant minds onto which we're going to bestow tyrannical power? Does it really sound like we should give these misanthropic monsters, under the false pretenses of anthropogenic climate change, or pandemic scare mongering, the power to control the very things necessary to maintain a technologically advanced society? Should we allow them to decide how long we should live? How well we should live? What we should eat? How many children we should have? How they're raised, virtually overturning parental rights in every aspect of human endeavor?
Or should they be ignored since they sound like spoiled brats who are irrational, misanthropic and morally defective misfits who shouldn't be trusted to tell us if day is light and night is dark? They already can't tell us what a woman is.
Truth is the sublime convergence of history and reality. Everything we're told has a historical foundation and context, and everything we're told should bear some resemblance to what we see going on in reality. These two criteria are absolute, and these "experts" fail at both miserably, and have done so over and over again. Hellman then asks this historically important question: Does it sound remotely intelligent to believe these people?
Okay, let's take a vote. I vote no!
No comments:
Post a Comment