Scientific American (!) Tells People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

See the source image

Forget about it!

The we’re-all-gonna-die crowd got a poke in the eye recently from Scientific American, of all people, in an article telling the world to “chill out over Global Warming” (

The Climbit Change alarmists’ “apocalyptic scenarios are simply false,” says the article, exhibiting “radicalism and fatalism” that denies the undeniably beneficial effects of industrialization and modernization, especially in the world’s poorest countries. And if there are any real effects of Global Warming, human ingenuity will be up to the challenge of dealing with it.


But of course, the Climbit Change ideology is a mere grab, the biggest grab in history, for raw power and fabulous amounts of public money. After all, once it’s established that everything our dear leaders do is to Save The Planet, they have license to do anything they please.

Even Scientific American can see that now.

14 comments on “Scientific American (!) Tells People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

  1. Erie, Pennsylvania so far this winter has had 190 inches of snow, threatening to break Buffalo, New York’s record of 199.7 inches for the winter of 1976-1977 (the year of our famous ‘Blizzard of ’77). So much for global warming. As you said, Unknowable – finally someone unafraid to stand up.

    1. That’s why they changed their sales pitch to “climate change”. So now any extremes in weather is proof of man-made climate change.

  2. “Scientific American” actually published such an article? Wow, next thing you know, there’ll be a flight of pigs overhead and snowball fights in Hell. 🙂

    Of course, normal people (i.e., non-lefties) have been saying the same things for years. And even these SA writers still insist on the global warming idea, although they do add a reasonable “but” afterward. And they seem not to have mentioned that carbon dioxide is a plant food and that warmer climates produce more arable land. (I say “seem,” because I haven’t read their article, just this report on it.) But hey, it’s a start. I’m looking out my window now, watching for those flying pigs.

  3. Uh.. perhaps you need to re-read that (damn.. you read Breitbart??) Scientific American re-post… there was no mention that climate change wasn’t going to happen… or even that it wasn’t going to happen to the degree the apocalypse people seem to think. The article simply suggests that there’s little need to panic if we trust the adaptability of humanity based on past achievements… it doesn’t deny the science that proves climate change is occurring at a more rapid rate because of human consumption on top of natural changes of nature.
    If 50 or 100 years from now we learn that climate change didn’t affect us as much as we might have thought it won’t be because of the science was wrong.. it will be because humanity adapted.

    In the meantime, all you’re worried about is the here an now short-sighted idea that some deep state conspiracy wants to get rich somehow.

    1. Please don’t put words in my mouth. I never mentioned any “deep state conspiracy”–and it isn’t a conspiracy when they’re doing it for everyone to see.

  4. Netflix is coming out with a talk show featuring Barack & Michelle Obama. I can hear them now saying how awful climate change is and how we need to surrender our sovereignty to a “higher authority,” (think Paris Accord). God controls the climate, not man. The Left entered Science and has corrupted it. If you agree with the PC crowd you get the grant money, otherwise you do not. Try getting a professor’s job in college if you don’t believe in evolution but instead believe in Intelligent Design.

  5. You like Scientific American articles.. here’s one…

    Why White Males Are Stockpiling Guns

    Students across the United States staged walk-outs Wednesday to protest gun violence. They did so against the backdrop of a country that has seen the number of guns being manufactured and imported soar in the past decade. But Jeremy Adam Smith notes in the Scientific American that it’s a very specific demographic that is stockpiling arms.

    “Some groups of men are much more avid gun consumers than others. The American citizen most likely to own a gun is a white male—but not just any white guy. According to a growing number of scientific studies, the kind of man who stockpiles weapons or applies for a concealed-carry license meets a very specific profile,” Smith writes.

    “These are men who are anxious about their ability to protect their families, insecure about their place in the job market, and beset by racial fears. They tend to be less educated…In fact, stockpiling guns seems to be a symptom of a much deeper crisis in meaning and purpose in their lives. Taken together, these studies describe a population that is struggling to find a new story—one in which they are once again the heroes.”

    “Unfortunately, the people most likely to be killed by the guns of white men aren’t the ‘bad guys,’ presumably criminals or terrorists. It’s themselves—and their families.”

Leave a Reply