Start drinking now, cuz leftist site says we have just 18 months to save the Earth!!! Maybe only 14!

 Lord, what would we do without the leftist geniuses at "ThinkProgress"?
Oh wait, you may not have heard of the brain-trusts at ThinkProgress, so let me explain:  That site is a collection of the dumbest sons of bitches on the planet.

I mean, they'd lose a debate with a random panel of Somalis.  Really, really dumb.  And yet...

They "think" they know exactly what the U.S. and the world need to make "progress."

See, that's sort of an inside joke.  But I digress: 

If you're a hard-working American you may recall that a few months ago the brilliant AOC decreed that we only have ten years to save the planet from the dread "global warming" climate change.  Got that?  Cuz...well, just take her word for it.  If you don't believe 'em, you're a raaaaacist!  Or maybe a homophobe, or trans-phobic.  Wait, I got it:  You're a "climate denier."

See, I just made up a word.  Watch for that word to go viral on websites like "ThinkProgress."

Wait...are you saying the WaPo and NY Times and every other moronic leftist outlet have already coined that term?  Well damn...

So...one of the brainiacs at TP has decided that AOC's "We've only got ten years left..." isn't scary enough.  Ooooh, what to do, what to do?

I got it!  Shorten the window for action to save Earth to, oh, say, 14 to 18 months.


Yeh, dat's da ticket!  Ten years wasn't scary enough, so...

Okay, I can understand that you have a hard time believing any human could be that f'n dumb.  So to save you from the effort of clicking on their site, here's their entire story, titled

We don’t have 12 years to save the climate. We have 14 months!!

The deadline for protecting our children from a ruined climate is close at hand!!

It's by a really really smaht atmospheric physicist named Joe Romm.  Joe was actually a drama major at the South Chicago School of Drama and Climate Science before he decided to change his major to atmospheric physics.  But now he's published six highly-praised papers in that field and is widely recognized as one of the best climate scientists on the planet.  Really.

Okay, that might be a search result for a different Joe Romm.  Cuz, well, it's a common name.

So here's Joe's piece explaining why we have just 14 months to save the planet:

Scientific reality makes clear that the only plausible way to preserve a livable climate — and hence modern civilization — starts with aggressive national and global cuts in carbon pollution by 2030.

Really?  "Scientific reality" makes that clear, Joe?  Tell ya what, cupcake:  Meet me on any stage of your choosing, and I'll show you 14 unequivocal facts that demolish your alleged "scientific reality."  You're an idiot, and the scientists you cite are greedy frauds. 

Also, unless my math is rusty 2030 is more than 14 months.  Hell, I think it may even be more than 18 months.  But I thought you just got thru saying (headline) "14 to 18 months".  WTF?  But hey, I've only taken math thru calc-4 so what do I know, eh?  (Joe later makes clear that the "18 months" is the time to the 2020 election, which he claims is "our last chance to save the planet."

But political reality makes clear that such cuts can’t happen instantly — and that global action requires leadership from the United States. After all, the U.S. is the richest country in the world and the biggest cumulative source of heat-trapping emissions over the past century.

With eight years of a pro-science president, Barack Obama, the nation made steady progress on reducing emissions and committing to future reductions, enabling a global climate deal in Paris in 2015. But with just two and a half years of an anti-science administration, national and global progress have both stalled under President Donald Trump, who has begun to abandon the Paris Accord and undermine action here and abroad.

That means November 3, 2020 — the U.S. presidential election — is the deadline for Americans who do not want to destroy the health and well-being of  [everyone on Earth; actually Joe wrote "current generations, their children, and future generations" but it seemed a bit wordy]. If Trump is reelected, the prospects for the necessary national and global cuts in carbon pollution by 2030 will be gone.

Why are deep cuts by 2030 so important?  Back in October 2018, nations around the world unanimously approved a landmark report from scientists warning that we must make rapid reductions in global carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 in order to have any plausible chance of averting catastrophic climate change.

That report — published by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — led to headlines like “We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe, warns UN” by The Guardian, and “The world has just over a decade to get climate change under control, U.N. scientists say” from the Washington Post.

Yeah, cupcake, headlines equal scientific fact.  Really!  Just like all those articles back in the 1970s that screamed the planet was about to die from the "coming ice age!!!!"  So did you notice we're all still...how to put it?...alive?  Did ya notice how icy it got, and how we barely survived?  No?  How... interesting.  Almost like those headlines were hype--what you sophisticates would call click-bait or something.

But when freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) made the exact same point this January — that U.S. millennials "fear the world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change”...

Stop right there, cupcake:  "...U.S. millenials fear that the world is gonna end in 12 years if we don't address global warming climate change."  Yeah, dat's da only scientific info we need, right?  If "U.S. millenials fear" something, adults better damn well pay attention and snap to, eh? Cuz dey all bees atmospheeeeric physiks expurts or sumpin'.

— the right-wing and even some in the media pounced.

Ever notice how when people who actually know about science try to correct morons on the left who majored in drama, the mainstream media describe it as "the right-wing pounced"?

So ThinkProgress contacted leading experts on exactly what the science says.

And you may be certain TP contacted a wide range of "experts" on both sides of the argument, eh?  Wait, you say they only contacted "experts" who were firmly on the side of  "all global warming climate change is caused by CO2, emitted by human activity, mostly by Americans"?

They confirmed that, yes, as Ocasio-Cortez said, the world must act fast if we are to maintain any plausible hope of avoiding the catastrophic impacts that come with warming of 2 degrees Celsius or more above pre-industrial temperatures.

This is a classic propaganda technique: Ol' Joe put the "warming of 2 degrees C or more" at the end of that sentence.  But that's the entire claim that's being debated here, so putting it at the end of the sentence saying "if we are to have any hope of avoiding" implicitly forces readers to accept the premise, without any proof.


But I'm sure every intelligent American reader caught that.

For instance, climatologist Michael Mann told ThinkProgress “Projected impacts look especially bad beyond 2°C or so of planetary warming.  And there is no scenario for stabilizing warming below 2°C that doesn’t require rapid reductions in carbon emissions over the next decade.”

Mann is one of the handful of utterly corrupt assholes running this scam who was caught asking co-conspirators via email to block publication of  papers announcing the discovery of huge holes in the global warming climate change hypothesis.  But you can, like, totally trust Mann to be objective.

The ’12 years’ rhetoric does not originate from the fact that we might hit 1.5 degrees C in 2030. It originates from the fact that if we don’t make very deep cuts by 2030, we have no possible chance of keeping below 1.5 degrees — and if we don’t make deep cuts by 2030 we are going to blow past 2 degrees.

But the people using the 2030 deadline aren’t saying any specific disaster will happen immediately after missing such a deadline. They are saying if we don’t make deep cuts by 2030, then we can’t stop catastrophic climate change in the ensuing decades.

They aren't naming a "specific disaster," just that we can't stop catastrophe.  Ah...

The fact is, all the major climate change impacts — like sea level rise, Dust-Bowlification, and temperature rise — are irreversible over a span of centuries if not millennia.

See, that's where that degree in atomospheric physiks is needed.  Plain ol' orrdinary folks couldn't have deduced that temperature rise was...what was that word again?  Oh yeah: "irreversible"

Ya know, it's interesting that MOST of the scientific community agrees that millenia ago, CO2 levels were about four times higher than today.  So if CO2 is "irreversibly" driving warming, how the hell did we ever get back to a "livable" temperature, eh?

You're not supposed to ask that.

The IPCC made that very clear in its big 2014 “synthesis” report. The summary of that report for policymakers, which was signed off by every major country, mentions “irreversible” 14 times and has extended discussions of exactly what it means and why it matters. Deadlines matter.

If the world is to have any plausible chance of saving the climate, we need the strongest possible action by 2030, and that means we need to elect a president in 2020 who understands the urgency, and who understands that deadlines matter in the face of irreversible catastrophe. 

Wow!  I never saw that one coming, did you?  It's almost like Joe and the cunning editors at TP were using "global warming" climate change to scare incredibly gullible voters into voting for whoever the Democrat nominee is in 2020.

Yeh, nevah saw that coming at all.
===

If you wanna read Joe's full piece click here.