The scaremongering climate cultists are relentless. But since the IPCC, who’ve yet to predict anything with any degree (see what I did there) of accuracy, released their most recent requiem to the earth mother, they’ve been intolerable.
It’s gotten so bad that the city of Boston is looking to milk developers for the cost of a sea wall to protect the “Seaport’s Raymond L. Flynn Marine Park.”
“The marine park, like many other parts of Boston, is vulnerable to the sea level rise from climate change,” said Devin Quirk, real estate director at the BPDA, which this year is launching an effort to lean on private sector developers to help pay for defenses.
Given that large portions of Boston are sitting on fill pushed into the ocean by previous generations, you’ll probably have to deal with some water whenever the wind blows. No one asked you to build there or be there, so in one respect, this confidence scam is at least equitable. They are asking the people occupying the area in question to help fund a wall to defend them from so-called climate change and sea-level rise.
If they buy into both it’s their money.
Related: Shared This on Sen. Shaheen’s Facebook Page on Exposing Sea Level Rise Fraud
My advice? Save some of that money and see if you can develop on Martha’s vineyard. The Obama’s spent 12 million and all they needed to defend themselves from the rising seas was a bit of hubris, some hypocrisy, and a deaf ear or two.
But theirs is an important lesson.
“…the Boston Planning & Development Agency believes it will cost up to $124 million to construct the most urgently needed protections for a 191-acre area that in its current state could be prone to flooding as soon as the 2030s and could be largely under water at high tide by the end of the century.”
For a fraction of what the BDPA is suggesting, you can live without walls at sea level, and if anyone complains, call them a few names and shout the word “consensus” without any need to mention the latest IPCC fairytale, which the Globe article does, or the IPCC’s terrible record on predicting, which the Globe does not.
Nor does it take up column inches to remind us that the IPCC is a self-serving UN agency pining for relevance (and funding) and therefore a need for more failed predictions about catastrophic warming.
And right on cue, July 2021, is now the hottest month on record.
My question is, what record because it’s not the temperature record.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has posted a press release titled, “It’s official: July was Earth’s hottest month on record.” The media have run rampant with the press release, with articles on the topic dominating the top of Google News search results for “climate change.” The objective data, however, show no such record heat.
…
In New Hampshire, July 2021 was 0.15 degrees above the 20-year mean. Globally, July was 0.2 deg C above the 1991-2020 average. Anyone with working eyeballs can tell in a glance that last July 2021 was anything but the hottest. And this was data run by a guy who actually believes in Global Warming.
What NOAA and the media have done is Ju-Lie about the data.
This year’s “hottest July ever™” was actually sub-par compared to recent July’s. So why bother with the fakers? Again, the IPCC report, which is itself a lie, needs to be reinforced so that scams like those in Boston have a stool upon which to stand.
Related: Climate Alarmists – Portsmouth Naval Shipyard at Risk from Sea Level Rise
Always with the assumption that no one will check or they can dismiss any evidence that contradicts them.
Just make more noise, like what we’re likely to hear out of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, which runs a similar scam along the same lines. One that, like Obama’s Vinyard getaway, has a fatal flaw. Scads of wealthy liberals are still plunking down huge sums for a front-row seat and it’s not to stare at the fearmongered seawall they promise us we will need.
Which is to say, never mind what we do, just listen to what we say, which is the hottest lie, hands down.
Update: Corrected a few awkward transitions and some typos.
