You may have noticed that there is a new template for "news" stories. The old "....unproven election-fraud claims" template is gone for the time being. The new hotness? "......due to climate change....."
A couple of weeks ago, Little Local Pravda ran a story about the increase in insurance-cost for American Family Field. Why the increase? Because of the FLOODING risk posed by the nearby Menomonee River. "Flooding?", you say. "Huh?"
Well, flyover-rube, the chief poohbah of some insurance company said that insurers have been paying lots of flooding claims lately, all due to global warming.
...along with increased flood risks affecting other properties throughout the United States, are tied to climate change, said Don Griffin, vice president, policy, research and international, at the American Property Casualty Insurers Association, an industry trade group....
Where did this bullshit come from?
The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)!
But the IPCC's claims of increased payouts due to climate change is a lie.
...For example, the IPCC ignored 52 highly relevant peer-review articles showing that “normalised disaster losses” saw no increase attributable to climate change yet highlighted one, out of 53 papers, that claimed there is an increase in losses. That one paper is – not surprisingly – flawed, but apparently its conclusions were so appealing to the IPCC that they fell for it. The strategy of the IPCC seems to be to hide any good news about climate change. ...
You've heard that 'sea levels are rising at a record pace,' right? Obviously, CLIMATE CHANGE!!!! Ooogledy-Booogledy!!
...The IPCC claims there is an acceleration in the rate of sea level rise in recent decades. We show this claim is flawed because the IPCC ignores decadal natural variability in the sea level rate. We also show that the IPCC sea level tool – made available for the first time – shows a mysterious and unlikely jump upward in 2020....
Why not run with this stuff? The MSM will write whatever they're told to write! They won't check, and your basic reporters and editors can't understand the math anyway. So what the Hell!! Run with it!
...On top of that, the IPCC is ‘addicted’ to its highest greenhouse gas emission scenario, the so-called RCP8.5 or now SSP5-8.5 scenario. In recent years, several papers have demonstrated that this scenario is simply not plausible and should not be used for policy purposes. Deep inside the WG1 report the IPCC acknowledges that this scenario has a ‘low likelihood’, but this very important remark was not highlighted in the Summary for Policy Makers, so the media and policy makers are unaware of this. This implausible scenario is commonly used in the report....
There are other examples of shading the truth, hiding the truth, or just old-fashioned making s**t up mentioned in the linked essay.
Our problem is--frankly--not IPCC. Nobody believes their crapola--except a band of fanatics in the Biden Regime. They are the problem: the ones who will make gas stoves illegal and who are determined to eliminate fertilizers (and cattle) from farms, not to mention eliminating reliable electric generators and then forcing you to drive electric cars.
Think about that.
Vote carefully next time.