The Cult Of Climastrology is at it again. OK, really, they’re just continuing on with their bat guano insane cult (via Weasel Zippers)
Climate change to make steak and chicken taste worse, ruining barbecues for future Aussies
THE good old Aussie BBQ may not taste quite as good for future generations, according to new research.
A study of the impact of climate change on 55 foods grown in Australia, found the quality of beef and chicken may plummet, eggplants may look weirder than they already do and carrots could taste worse.
The report by researchers at the University of Melbourne said Australia’s dry deserts will become hotter, heavy rain will increase in areas like NSW and cyclones will become less frequent but more intense in the north.
It found those predictions will impact agriculture production and force farmers to adapt to changing conditions.
That could mean cattle farmers switch to more heat-tolerant, but lower eating-quality, cows and winemakers will have to migrate south or face lower-quality yields.
May. Could. Might. Predictions. Same old palm reading BS.
Andrew Bolt writes “Aren’t scientists and journalists growing embarrassed at peddling these cheap scares?” Perhaps they are, but, most are also afraid of the insane pressure and vitriol that would be aimed their way from the CoC, along with Warmist politicians and the Leftist media. And the accompanying loss of funding.
This is just more sleazy advertising.
…And if you buy our product, you MAY become more attractive to the opposite sex!
Or same, if that’s what does it for you. :) Whatevs.
Not merely being satisfied with their run of the mill asshattery, they always find new and inventive ways to one up themselves…Chicken and beef not tasting the same?..Easy fix, wrap it in bacon..Why bacon?…Because, BACON!
The language of science is necessarily careful. Possible occurrences are described in the language of probabilities.
It would be useful if the scientists would attempt to assign more precise estimates, e.g., is the likelihood of a particular event 20-40% or 80-100%?
For example, the IPCC does not claim that AGW is a given, but that it’s 95% certain that man-made CO2 is causing the Earth to warm.
J, you stopped before the most important part. “It would be useful if scientists would be more precise…the IPCC is 95% certain that man-made CO2 is warming the earth.” The “precise” part would be to say what percentage of their alleged warming is CO2 and what percentage is natural. The outcomes of the IPCC’s predictions has been anything but precise in the past.
lol
Can you be more “precise” in your question?
Since 1890 to present it’s about 1/3 natural and 2/3 CO2.
Since 1970s to present it’s almost all CO2.
You’re welcome.
Nice try, J. There is absolutely no evidence of the figures you quote. Either way, “almost all” means you don’t know. What does “almost all” mean? Not precise at all. But let me get this straight -natural variation in temperatures somehow stopped in 1970? You’re more deluded than I thought. Now, you should thank me for bringing you back to reality.
Il do you believe in unicorns like the ones mentioned in the bible ? If you do. You just might be a climate truther !
Il s smarter than all those navy scientists
Well damn.
I have to replace my house every year because of all the tornadoes.
The East and Gulf coast keep getting ravaged by those category 7 hurricanes.
My kids don’t know what snow looks like.
And now the final straw, my kids won’t know what beef or chicken tastes like.
BAN ALL FOSSIL FUELS!!! Take every penny everyone makes and dump it all into solar and wind farms.
j,
You asked how much of the warming was CO2 vs “natural”, and I answered. Natural doesn’t mean magic or unexplained. What are the known “natural” phenomena that affect cooling and warming? Over the short term it’s variation in solar output (called insolation), volcanic aerosols, clouds and “natural” variations in greenhouse gases. Of course, “natural” processes haven’t stopped. But which of the measurable factors I’ve listed are causing the most recent burst of warming?
The “natural” warming in the early part of the 20th century is thought to be most likely from solar effects, and was slight compared to what the Earth has experienced the past 40 or 50 years.
Here’s a brief report that should help clarify your muddled thinking.
https://thingsbreak.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/anthropogenic-and-natural-warming-inferred-from-changes-in-earths-energy-balance.pdf