Climate Change and Global Warming, is it as bad as the media says?

I am going to start this blog off with an apology. It has not been long ago that I made the comment that I would not engage in political writing anymore. This blog will mention politicians and policy, but I will do my very best not to make comments that favor either side. Forgive me, but I feel that this must be written.

This morning, I was at a laundry service washing clothes and the Today show was playing in the background. After a short commercial break, they had a report of how climate change was adversely effecting the lives of 5,000 people in Antarctica. One of the locals was interviewed and he said that the ice was taking longer to reform from the usual melting. The brave, heroic reporter wanted to give an idea of how slushy the unformed ice was and stepped out on the thin layer of ice. As you can imagine, it didn’t hold him. He gave a shout, then he stepped back on to solid ground. I feel like an idiot writing about this. Supposedly, this is hard-hitting journalism.

I just finished reading an article about climate change on Axios. According to Gavin Schmidt of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, located in New York, “All time-limited frames are bull!@#$. Nothing special happens when the carbon budget runs out or we pass whatever temperature target you care about. Instead the  costs of emissions steadily rise.” The IPCC report that is severely misrepresented in the Green New Deal, found that emissions worsen after 1.5 degrees Celsius.

So where did the 12 years until complete annihilation come from? In the report, it stated that if we cut net carbon-emissions by 45% by 2030 and we reach net zero by 2050, we might get to preindustrial levels. Nowhere does it say that mankind is doomed if we don’t. According to the Axios article, there is a diverse array of choices that we can use to combat climate change (I still don’t believe in it. Feel free to call me a denier).

Andrea Dutton, a paleoclimate researcher at the University of Florida made this remark: “The media latched on to the 12 years presumably because they thought that it helped to get across the message of how quickly we are approaching this and how urgently we need action. Unfortunately, this has led to a complete mischaracterization of what the report said.”

Therefore, it seems to this guy that the world will continue to spin as it always has. The world will not end in 12 years until God says that it should. Thank you all for allowing me to get this off of my chest. Now, I will take a break and try to get over this sinus pain. Take care.

Freeman out.

Climate scientist refute 12-year deadline to curb global warming ( It was written by Andrew Freedman.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.