Tuesday, that brilliant climate scientist John Kerry was at it again. He penned an op-ed in the Washington Post saying President Trump should disband his "Climate Denial Panel."

The thing about global warming alarmists is that they can't stand debate. Anyone who disagrees with their theory that humans cause global warming or climate change is called a denier and told to shut up. Not one of us who question the theory that humans, fossil fuels, and CO2 cause warming (or climate change, if you will) has ever said the climate is constant and has never changed, so calling us "deniers" is a bald-faced lie.

Since she believes what journalists and others have taught her, she and others have come up with what can best be described as an abjectly ignorant Green New Deal that would absolutely destroy our economy. Russia would certainly be happy to have politicians destroy America. They would love to have people like Kerry, Hillary, Pelosi, Schumer, and Ocasio-Cortez in charge instead of Trump.

It is no wonder that twenty-nine-year-old Ocasio-Cortez believes this garbage, since she has been indoctrinated with it her entire life. She actually tells young people that maybe they shouldn't have children because she believes the nonsense she has been told.

There are thousands of questions, and it is sad that no one asks the alarmists. It is obvious that the climate has always changed and always will change naturally, and it is arrogant to believe that politicians and bureaucrats can control temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity forever. They just want the money to control our lives.

Scientific studies have shown that droughts were much longer in the past, prior to when humans and fossil fuels could have caused them, so why do climate change alarmists continually lie that we cause longer and more severe droughts? Isn't that a daily assault on the truth?

Scientific studies have shown that droughts were much longer in the past, prior to when humans and fossil fuels could have caused them, so why do climate change alarmists continually lie that we cause longer and more severe droughts? Isn't that a daily assault on the truth?

We have been warned that because humans and fossil fuels cause warming, we would have snowless winters. Why were the predictions so wrong, and why should we believe the doom and gloom about the future since previous predictions have been 100% wrong?

We have been warned that because humans and fossil fuels cause warming, we would have snowless winters. Why were the predictions so wrong, and why should we believe the doom and gloom about the future since previous predictions have been 100% wrong?

What caused the ice to melt after the Ice Age, since humans and fossil fuels couldn't have caused it?

What caused the ice to melt after the Ice Age, since humans and fossil fuels couldn't have caused it?

How come the ice is still in the Arctic after 150 years of exponential growth in fossil fuel use, since we were told it would be gone by now?

How come the ice is still in the Arctic after 150 years of exponential growth in fossil fuel use, since we were told it would be gone by now?

It is too bad that journalists won't question John Kerry and other fear-mongers, but here are a few easy ones for them:

The predictions were 100% wrong in 1922 as the ice came back, and so far, they have been wrong now . But somehow, being wrong so consistently allows them to say the science is settled. The only reason they get away without being questioned about their bad previous predictions is that almost all journalists just repeat what they are told with no questions.

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.

People writing in the Washington Post have been spewing forth this climate change alarmism for a very long time. In 1922, they essentially predicted the same garbage as they have predicted for the last approximately forty years. Snopes.com dug up the 1922 article:

But the administration's most dangerous collision with facts has been its effort to paralyze U.S. efforts to join the nations of the world in confronting climate change. The White House plans to convene "experts" to "determine" whether climate change is a national security threat. We know what the outcome will be: President Trump's council of doubters and deniers will convene to undo a 26-year-old factual consensus that climate change is a national-security threat multiplier.

Many have become immune or anesthetized to the daily assault on truth that is the Trump presidency, an alternative reality where North Korea has denuclearized and Russia might not have attacked our elections in 2016. It would be laughable were it not dangerous. Presidents are supposed to hold consensus together, not invent fictions to fray it.

The thing about global warming alarmists is that they can't stand debate. Anyone who disagrees with their theory that humans cause global warming or climate change is called a denier and told to shut up. Not one of us who question the theory that humans, fossil fuels, and CO2 cause warming (or climate change, if you will) has ever said the climate is constant and has never changed, so calling us "deniers" is a bald-faced lie.

Tuesday, that brilliant climate scientist John Kerry was at it again. He penned an op-ed in the Washington Post saying President Trump should disband his "Climate Denial Panel."

Many have become immune or anesthetized to the daily assault on truth that is the Trump presidency, an alternative reality where North Korea has denuclearized and Russia might not have attacked our elections in 2016. It would be laughable were it not dangerous. Presidents are supposed to hold consensus together, not invent fictions to fray it. But the administration's most dangerous collision with facts has been its effort to paralyze U.S. efforts to join the nations of the world in confronting climate change. The White House plans to convene "experts" to "determine" whether climate change is a national security threat. We know what the outcome will be: President Trump's council of doubters and deniers will convene to undo a 26-year-old factual consensus that climate change is a national-security threat multiplier.

How dare Trump bring in scientists who disagree with the indoctrination?

People writing in the Washington Post have been spewing forth this climate change alarmism for a very long time. In 1922, they essentially predicted the same garbage as they have predicted for the last approximately forty years. Snopes.com dug up the 1922 article:

The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

The predictions were 100% wrong in 1922 as the ice came back, and so far, they have been wrong now. But somehow, being wrong so consistently allows them to say the science is settled. The only reason they get away without being questioned about their bad previous predictions is that almost all journalists just repeat what they are told with no questions.

It is too bad that journalists won't question John Kerry and other fear-mongers, but here are a few easy ones for them:

How come the ice is still in the Arctic after 150 years of exponential growth in fossil fuel use, since we were told it would be gone by now?

What caused the ice to melt after the Ice Age, since humans and fossil fuels couldn't have caused it?

We have been warned that because humans and fossil fuels cause warming, we would have snowless winters. Why were the predictions so wrong, and why should we believe the doom and gloom about the future since previous predictions have been 100% wrong?

Scientific studies have shown that droughts were much longer in the past, prior to when humans and fossil fuels could have caused them, so why do climate change alarmists continually lie that we cause longer and more severe droughts? Isn't that a daily assault on the truth?

There are thousands of questions, and it is sad that no one asks the alarmists. It is obvious that the climate has always changed and always will change naturally, and it is arrogant to believe that politicians and bureaucrats can control temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity forever. They just want the money to control our lives.

It is no wonder that twenty-nine-year-old Ocasio-Cortez believes this garbage, since she has been indoctrinated with it her entire life. She actually tells young people that maybe they shouldn't have children because she believes the nonsense she has been told.

Since she believes what journalists and others have taught her, she and others have come up with what can best be described as an abjectly ignorant Green New Deal that would absolutely destroy our economy. Russia would certainly be happy to have politicians destroy America. They would love to have people like Kerry, Hillary, Pelosi, Schumer, and Ocasio-Cortez in charge instead of Trump.

Image credit: Pixabay.