This is pretty funny. From Huff-n-Puff
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) dismissed the idea that the U.S. government could do anything to combat climate change Wednesday, the day after he gave the Republican response to President Barack Obama’s State of the Union.
“The government can’t change the weather. I said that in the speech. We can pass a bunch of laws that will destroy our economy, but it isn’t going to change the weather,” Rubio said on Fox and Friends, as part of a series of interviews on the morning shows following his response Tuesday. “Because, for example, there are other countries that are polluting in the atmosphere much greater than we are at this point — China, India, all these countries that are still growing. They’re not going to stop doing what they’re doing.”
“America is a country, it’s not a planet,” he continued. “So we can pass a bunch of laws or executive orders that will do nothing to change the climate or the weather but will devastate our economy. Devastate it!”
All of this is very shocking to the mind numbing dolts, we call alarmists. Apparently, it got them so excited they decided to blather vapid inanities. The author had this to say…..
China and India, in fact, have cap-and-trade systems to control emissions, while the U.S. does not. A proposed system for the U.S. passed the then-Democratic-controlled House in 2010, while it died in the Senate. China is, of course, the world’s leading emitter of carbon dioxide, but it also has a population over four times the United States.
Apparently, the author wants us to have control systems just like China and India. I’ll swipe Warrick Hughes’ graphic…..
So, let me get this straight. We need to cap our CO2 emissions because they’re not growing. And we need to adopt a capping system like China’s and India’s, because they’re the fastest growing CO2 emitters. This is a wonderful insight to the piercing intellect of an econutty alarmist.
Because the author, Luke Johnson, doesn’t want to be the only person looking like a complete imbecile, he quotes another one.
Jonathan Chait of New York Magazine breaks down the reasoning behind climate change for Rubio:
1. The government has a bunch of rules that control how much coal, oil, and whatnot gets burned. 2. The more greenhouse gasses we burn, the warmer the climate gets. It’s science. 3. The warmer the climate gets, the more frequently we have extreme weather events. This is also science.
Hmm, let’s look at those claims. The more GHG’s the warmer we get………
“….the more frequently we have extreme weather events.”
Well, we could take a bunch of lunatic rent seeking alarmists words for this, or we could actually look at the data……
And for floods……….
Green is a decrease in the frequency and intensity, red shows areas where it has increased. Blue = no change.
Now for droughts to complete the droughtflood index.
I’m not sure what science Jonathan Chait thinks he’s noting. But, most people accept empirical evidence tracked and interpreted by trained scientists as science, rather than some opinions being spewed.