No Dissent Allowed: Chaos as protesters disrupt climate skeptic

. . . "It never occurred to me that the extreme alarmists, including the Democrat presidential candidates, would adopt this impossible goal and declare a crisis because of that impossibility. This is truly climate madness.

This madness would be great fun if it were not so threatening. Invoking emergency powers to achieve an impossible (and pointless) goal is a clear prescription for disaster. And history is replete with cases just like this, where mindless zealotry seized power with disastrous consequences.

The threat of extreme climate change action is now far greater than the threat of climate change." . . .  David Wojick*

Morano’s speech at Georgetown University – Campus police shut down event – Activists ‘would not accept the hosting of’ skeptics – Video 

. . . even moderate expressions of skepticism on matters of climate science, seem to escape without challenge."

School climate strikers should answer these two questions
1:. . .The first should answer the question: “Does scientific evidence support the notion that ‘the Earth is dying’?” As for resources to answer that question, I point them towards the latest IPCC report as well as the data sources which feed into it. That would include Nasa data on sea ice in the Arctic, which shows a sharp retreat in recent decades, as well as satellite data from the same organisation on wildfires – which shows a fall in the acreages burned in recent decades. They might also like to look at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Organisation’s report on hurricanes which last month concluded: “it is premature to conclude with high confidence that human activity–and particularly greenhouse warming–has already caused a detectable change in Atlantic hurricane activity”.

2:"Essay number two should be on the question: “What would it mean for the global economy if governments really did eliminate all carbon emissions by 2025?” Given that this is the central demand of many of the climate strikers, this is a rather pertinent question." . . .
. . .
"In addition, the pupils must answer this: if global food production did fall as a result of efforts to eliminate carbon emissions, which groups of the global population would suffer most?" . . .

Is the “climate crisis” a cruel hoax or tragic blunder?

. . . "Some prominent alarmists have tried to point out that the doomsday crisis narrative is way overblown. These include the head of the Word Meteorological Organization, which is co-owner of the IPCC. But the objections have been very muted, no doubt out of fear of retaliation from the extremists who now dominate the political stage.

"Simply put, the “crisis” is either a cruel hoax or a tragic blunder. No science supports it." . . .
* David Wojick, Ph.D. is an independent analyst working at the intersection of science, technology and policy. For origins see http://www.stemed.info/engineer_tackles_confusion.html For over 100 prior articles for CFACT see http://www.cfact.org/author/david-wojick-ph-d/ Available for confidential research and consulting.