WSJ: "In other words, humanity is doomed under the IPCC’s models no matter what we do. Nonetheless, the IPCC is urging immediate, drastic and large-scale economic changes that would affect everything from the kinds of cars people drive to foods they eat. Millions of acres of farmland would have to be converted into forests or plastered over with solar panels."
Mainstream media labels Marc Morano as someone who "rejects climate science."
Those who doubt mainstream climate science have for a long time downplayed the role of human-related emissions by saying that Earth's climate system has always fluctuated naturally. Trump flipped that around. He looked to the future instead of the past by suggesting that today's higher temperatures could decrease on their own — or "change back."
As scientists grappled with this new presentation of skepticism, others began repeating it. Trump made his remarks Sunday on CBS's "60 Minutes." Marc Morano, who runs the website Climate Depot, which rejects climate science, wrote that it was "scientifically, politically and economically accurate." "Once again, President Trump is accurately citing Earth's history," Morano wrote in an email to his followers. "The climate has varied over billions of years, millions of years, hundreds of thousands of years, thousands of years, hundreds of years and decades."
Analysis by Paul Homewood: "While Michael was certainly a disastrous hurricane, three specific claims have been made about it, which don’t stand up to scrutiny:
1) Claim: It was the biggest storm on record for the Florida Panhandle: Response: This first claim is plainly meaningless, given that the Panhandle is only a tiny part of the whole US coastline.
2) Claim: It was the third most powerful to hit the US, based on barometric pressure: Response: We know that Hurricane Hunter aircraft kept well away from the center of the strongest storms in the early days, so we have no way of knowing whether other storms prior to Camille were as intense unless surface observations were available...Michael may have had the lowest pressure of any storm since Camille, but such claims cannot be made for earlier periods.
3) Claim: It was the fourth strongest in terms of wind speeds: Response: The claim of 155 mph was based solely on SFMR measurements, which the NHC already admit are questionable...Maximum surge seems to have been around 7 feet. I have heard this described on a news bulletin as “epic”, which is utter nonsense – this is not unusual for any hurricane.
A surge of just 7 feet would suggest that Michael’s wind speeds were much less than claimed...By contrast, the storm surge during Camille was 24.6 feet.