Why, Yes, Think Progress Blames Fireworks Cancellations On Globull Warming

July 2, 2011 – 9:01 am

Deep in your heart, you just knew someone was going to link Independence Day and globull warming. In this case, it’s George Soros funded Think Progress: Global Warming Hates The Fourth Of July

As fossil fuel pollution heats the planet, one of the casualties is the traditional celebration of the founding of the United States. The record droughts, floods, and storms fueled by global warming are causing widespread bans on fireworks and the cancellation of numerous municipal firework displays, even a celebration for our soldiers in Oklahoma:

There will be no fireworks this year exploding over Fort Sill in Lawton. The U.S. Army base’s Independence Day celebration and concert will go on as planned Saturday, but its fireworks have been canceled. A fire that started on a base firing range last week burned across 5,500 acres before it was contained. Thirteen homes were destroyed and 1,500 people had to be evacuated.

Firework shows from Texas to Massachusetts have been canceled because of the deadly climate conditions:

They follow that with a short list of places where weather, er, sorry, extreme weather caused by a guy dressed as George Washington driving to a TEA Party rally in a non-hybrid vehicle.

Elsewhere:

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

This entry was written by William Teach and posted on at 9:01 am and filed under AGW Idiocy, Barking Moonbats, Global Warming. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post.
Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “Why, Yes, Think Progress Blames Fireworks Cancellations On Globull Warming”

  1. Razputin says:
    July 2, 2011 at 12:06 pm

    I love how “record droughts, floods, and storms” are all caused by global warming. How can drought and storms both result? That’s like saying a disease will cause a patient to have an abnormally high or low temperature. You can’t have both.
    I would like for global warming promoters to tell us which natural disasters DISPROVE the theory of global warming. Simply telling us that anything “bad” is proof of climate change does not sound scientific to me.

  2. david7134 says:
    July 2, 2011 at 2:56 pm

    They canceled fireworks in Shreveport. But I think it has more to do with the pediatricians putting their socialistic agenda in place.

  3. captainfish says:
    July 2, 2011 at 4:37 pm

    Quote:
    deadly climate conditions

    ummmmmm… like????

    hello? please define a climate condition.
    hello? please define a climate condition that is not potentially deadly to humans.
    hello? please define a climate condition that is not potentially erosive to this planet.
    hello? please define how life survived to this point through various global glaciations and world-wide firestorms and complete and utter conditions akin to… “Great Big Ball of Fire!”
    hello? please explain how life survived the 1930’s.
    hello? please explain the record snow storms that we had over last several winters. You can’t tell me it was due to more moisture in the air and now say we have less moisture in the air.

    Yes, what point does one NOT have conditions that highlight globull warming alarmism?

    If you can point to a null outcome in testing your hypothesis, then you might be studying science. Not until then.

Pirate's Cove