On Saturday morning, reacting to Hurricane Ida and other recent extreme weather events, CNN delivered its latest one-sided discussion of the global warming issue, allowing climate alarmist Michael Mann to have the floor for eight minutes to make his case. All CNN host Boris Sanchez offered was sympathetic prompts.
The Pennsylvania State University professor argued that Democrats will have to push new regulations to make radical changes without help from Republicans.
Sanchez poured out his empathy as some Americans refusing to take his predictions of doom seriously:
Stepping aside from your expertise and your experience as a scientist — as a human being, it has to be incredibly frustrating for you to point this out and to be sounding the alarm for decades, and, yet, there doesn’t seem to be any urgency among leadership that is required to meet the moment.
In spite of environmental alarmists having a history of making predictions that don’t come true, Mann asserted that he laments that so many of his dire predictions allegedly do come true. “Literally, you know, 30 years ago — the scientific community had already come to the conclusion that we could see the impact of human-caused climate change, and it would get much worse if we didn’t take action.” No one at CNN notes that 30 years ago, these alarmists said we had maybe 10 years to stave off doom.
And even though several hurricanes in the past have been stronger than Ida — and several others tied with it in strength — Mann claimed that its strength was a sign that there will soon be category 6 hurricanes. Sanchez could only ask “What’s your message to lawmakers?”
Mann endorsed regulations pushed by radical Democrats as he responded: “I would say there are a couple of stragglers right now in the Democratic party. In order to get meaningful action — unfortunately, Republicans are unwilling to act — Democrats are need to going to (sic) get that legislation through on a purely partisan basis.”
But Mann often sounds like a Democrat, as Climate Depot reminds us:
This CNN informercial for the Democratic party’s agenda was sponsored in part by Allegra. Their contact information is linked.
September 4, 2021
10:08 a.m. Eastern
MICHAEL MANN, PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY: It gets worse if we don’t reduce carbon emissions dramatically in the years ahead.
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: So, Michael, you lay out the science, and it’s clear that there’s a backing for the arguments that you’re making. Stepping aside from your expertise and your experience as a scientist — as a human being, it has to be incredibly frustrating for you to point this out and to be sounding the alarm for decades, and, yet, there doesn’t seem to be any urgency among leadership that is required to meet the moment.
MANN: Yeah. And, you know, there is a certain level of frustration in seeing your predictions come true. As a climate scientist, the worst thing that can happen is to watch our predictions come true because decades ago — literally, you know, 30 years ago — the scientific community had already come to the conclusion that we could see the impact of human-caused climate change, and it would get much worse if we didn’t take action. And now, you know, decades later, we’re saying the same thing.
And now what we mean by action is a dramatically different thing. If we had acted decades ago, we could have brought our carbon emissions down fairly gently. We could have sort of gradually moved away from fossil fuels. Now, in order to prevent a truly catastrophic warming of the planet of more than three degrees Fahrenheit, we have to bring our carbon emissions down by a factor of 50 percent within the next 10 years. And that’s going to require a monumental effort on our part. There’s some signs of progress. The United States has made a very bold pledge to bring its carbon emissions down by that amount within the next 10 years.
Other leaders from other countries are now coming to the table. The United States is one who is leading again on this issue, and that’s making a real difference. But there’s still a gap between what countries are promising and the policies that they have in place, what we call an implementation gap. We’re still building new fossil fuel infrastructure. When the conservative international energy agency has told us that if we are to avert catastrophic warming of the planet, there can be no new fossil fuel infrastructure — no new pipelines, no new coal-fired power plants.
SANCHEZ: And, Michael, paint a picture for us of what the future looks like. If what we’re seeing now is this category 5 hurricane that floods Louisiana and then also winds up flooding the Northeast, what can we expect with that three-degree shift that you were talking about?
MANN: Yeah, if we warmed the planet more than a degree and a half Celsius or three three degrees Fahrenheit, then we know these storms will become even more intense — even more damaging because there’s a pretty basic physical relationship. The energy that intensifies these storms and provides them with all this moisture that leads to the flooding rainfall that we’ve seen comes from the heat content of the ocean.
And the heat content of the ocean this year was higher than any other year. That extra heat is fueling these stronger storms and, you know, this storm almost — if it had had a little bit longer, would have become a cat 5 storm. It would have landfalled as a category 5 storm. Here’s the thing — we are going to need to define new categories — category 6 storms — storms with winds of 200 miles per hour or greater sustained. Arguably, that’s a category 6 storm. And we’re already starting to see those.
SANCHEZ: Michael, there’s intense debate on Capitol Hill, not just between Democrats and Republicans, but even within the Democratic party, about the urgency with which to approach the issue of climate change. What’s your message to lawmakers?
MANN: Yeah. I would say there are a couple of stragglers right now in the Democratic party. In order to get meaningful action — unfortunately, Republicans are unwilling to act — Democrats are need to going to (sic) get that legislation through on a purely partisan basis.