.

CDC: Save the Planet from Poison CO2!!

“We used to think CO2 was a harmless trace gas…
How wrong we were!”

—Dr. Dillard “Sparky” Barker, SMFS,
The CDC’s Second Most Famous Scientist

Your noxious exhalations contain tons of CO2
So Dillard “Sparky” Barker has the newest mask for you.
It’s built to capture greenhouse gas and lock it in a filter
So that your breath won’t kill the earth, and kick this sphere off kilter.

Help us fight emissions, let’s douse our climate pyre.
Don’t walk, don’t talk, don’t blink, don’t breathe, don’t be a dumb denier.
We’re confiscating gasoline and rationing food and power
And water too… don’t swim, don’t bathe, don’t flush or take a shower.

Feel the fear, the end is near, we’re all in this together.
Pay the cost, it’s worth the pain to change inclement weather.
Let’s crush the curve, mask up, it’s just a short and sure-fire lockdown.
We will stamp out Carbon Crime, we’ll triumph with a Knockdown!

.

.

Mike Bryant is a poet and retired plumber living on the Gulf Coast of Texas.

NOTE TO READERS: If you enjoyed this poem or other content, please consider making a donation to the Society of Classical Poets.

The Society of Classical Poets does not endorse any views expressed in individual poems or commentary.


CODEC Stories:

113 Responses

  1. Joseph S. Salemi

    All modern civilization runs on gas, oil, and coal. No stupid solar panel or offshore windmill is going to change that. And CO2 is just a normal part of the process.

    The real problem is idiots like “Sparky” Barker and the millions of Chicken Little lemmings who want to shut down civilization with crackpot visions of veganism, organic food, and no transportation. These people aren’t scientists. They are basically religionists.

    A great poem, Mike.

    Reply
    • Anonymous by request

      CARBON DATED?
      Ironic.
      Carbon, the basic building block of life—
      as carbon dioxide, can end life as we know it.

      It did so eons ago, before humans,
      when it increased naturally,
      —over thousands of years—
      from belching volcanoes,
      until Earth became so hot,
      most of life was extinguished.

      Now, carbon dioxide increases
      at geologic light speed
      from almost everything we do:
      growing, moving, heating, building,
      burning, and making cement, steel, plastics.
      Because it absorbs heat, it is warming
      the Earth, causing ice sheets to crack,
      sea levels to rise, oceans to acidify,
      and storms, floods and fires to intensify.

      It is the alpha: carbon-based life.
      We had no say in that.
      It can again become the omega.
      We have a say in that.

      But, growing, moving, heating, building,
      burning, making cement, steel, plastics.
      Easier to imagine the end of the world.

      Did we come with a carbon expiration date—
      a time to be tossed out—like a washing machine
      with planned obsolescence?
      END
      Global atmospheric carbon dioxide set a record of 412.5 parts per million in 2020, comparable to [what it was] 3.6 million years ago.—National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, April 7, 2021.

      Reply
  2. Mike Bryant

    Thanks, Doc.

    “Under a “climate lockdown,” governments would limit private-vehicle use, ban consumption of red meat, and impose extreme energy-saving measures, while fossil-fuel companies would have to stop drilling. To avoid such a scenario, we must overhaul our economic structures and do capitalism differently.” – Mariana Mazzucato

    The above quote is from this article:
    https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/Panorama/Articles/Avoiding-a-climate-lockdown

    The people who locked us down and masked us up for a virus with a survivability rate over 99% are dead serious about doing “capitalism differently.”
    Just so everyone knows what she means, capitalism differently is socialism, Marxism, democratism, Democratic Socialism etc.
    The names are many names but they all boil down to dictatorship.

    Sparky ain’t the only one. Greta recently made her wishes explicit:
    https://redstatenation.com/greta-thunberg-finally-admits-what-climate-change-activism-is-really-all-about-and-its-not-about-saving-the-environment/
    The article is worth a look.

    Reply
    • Anonymous by request

      Apparently new to you. “Carbon Dated?” refers to the end-Permian extinction 250 million years ago that is most relevant to today, (“hot house earth”), not the end Cretaceous-tertiary extinction 65 million years ago that killed most the dinosaurs and involved an asteroid. There have been five mass extinctions in the last 500 million years. We are undergoing the sixth mass extinction, known as the Anthropocene, caused by man increasing the carbon dioxide and warming the earth at “light speed”, disrupting the natural carbon cycle. Try enlightening yourself by reading:
      “The Sixth Extinction” (Elizabeth Kolbert, Pulitzer Prize), “The Uninhabitable Earth” (David Wallace-Wells, NYT Best Book of the Year), “The Ends of the World” (Brannen, Forbes Ten Best Books on the Environment, Climate.)

      Reply
      • Adam Wasem

        Just so you know, Anne, and to spare you grief in the future, no one here gives a flying f*** about a Pulitzer prize in journalism, given by 95%+ left-wing panels to other left-wingers. As a corollary to that, no one believes a word the media says about CO2 either.

      • Mike Bryant

        The greatest, grandest prize, the Nobel, has become so political that an American President could receive the peace prize while he was engaged in two wars and in a campaign to divide his own country. So, yeah… the liars and thieves patting themselves on the back is an irrelevancy to the victims of their crimes, climate and otherwise.

      • Adam Wasem

        Oh, and no one gives a s*** about what the New York Times says, either. Or the Washington Post, or the New Yorker, or the Atlantic, or MSNBC, or CNN, or the BBC, or Youtube, or Facebook, or Snopes for that matter, in case you were wondering. You’re welcome.

      • Joshua C. Frank

        In fact, no one here (except a few leftists who really don’t belong here) believes anything the left claims, because we’ve learned that so much of what they say is not only false but harmful. Their entire system exists only as a rebellion against God and what He has revealed in the Bible, so how can they be any more right about anything than the proverbial stopped clock? So leftists may as well not waste time trying to argue with us. They think we’re simply stubbornly ignorant of the Great Truth they have to offer, when in reality, we’ve been listening to their version of the truth all our lives and reject it because it’s contrary to reason, to our faith, and to all else that is good, holy, and true.

        So, Anne, stop arguing with us. You won’t get anywhere. You think arguing with people online will change their minds, when you yourself are living proof that this is not true.

    • Joseph S. Salemi

      Like all elitist Swedes, Greta Thunberg was always about blanket anti-Western hatred. The environmentalism was just a way to get attention. Now that she’s established herself as a left-liberal icon, she can move on to the main business of stirring up a mindless hatred of civilization, and anyone who supports it.

      Reply
    • Carson Koziol

      Hey Mike,

      I couldn’t agree with you more. The whole climate agenda is bullsh*t. Those who are sensitive to sensationalism are the ones who can’t take an objective look and realize, scientists live on grants. So are they going to say what the money wants or what loses their grant? Here’s a great video more people should watch if they really want to throw figures around.

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8455KEDitpU&feature=emb_logo

      Also check out Judith curry she’s been shredding these idiot climate Alarmists for quite some time now. Smart lady.

      https://judithcurry.com/2019/12/14/the-toxic-rhetoric-of-climate-change/

      Anyhoozle, enjoyed the poem and I’m glad more and more people are speaking out about what’s clearly the latest money grab of the elite. God save us all.

      Reply
      • Mike Bryant

        Thanks Carson, your first link is really amazing… Tony Heller has done so much to educate us on the obvious lies of those who would further enslave us. And Judith Curry is a top climate scientist, ranking with the likes of Lindzen and Happer. Your link proves how destructive the propaganda is to our kids. Any teacher pushing this inhuman CO2 ideological crap should be tarred, feathered and sent from our midst.
        Thanks again.

    • C.B. Anderson

      If I were spewing such arrant misinformation, then I would likely request anonymity too. Take a look at this:

      Reply
  3. Anonymous by request

    These “journalists” are researchers who pull together all the scientific research and writing so people who are not scientists, like yourself, can understand the data and the significance of it. They are meticulously documented with hundreds of footnotes to the scientific studies and journals, which you can also read for yourself if you wanted to take the time. You don’t win a Pulitzer for fantasy BS. With the incredible volume of scientific data and studies available on all this, your insulting insinuations about my ignorance are really stunning. over and out.

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      I have neither implied nor stated that you are ignorant, Ms Gruner. I have lived my life under the impression that I am entitled to the freedom to express my opinions. Maybe you are a scientist and, of course, entitled to your opinion as well. But whether I am a scientist or a plumber, I am still entitled to my opinion… especially in my own living room. As the poet, I do not appreciate your high and mighty attitude. Thank you for stopping by.

      Reply
  4. Norma Pain

    I enjoyed your poem Mike. Fearmongering goes a long way in gaining power over populations. Be afraid… be very afraid… of fearmongering. Although I do try to buy organic food. Thank you for the read Mike.

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Thank you Norma… the powers that be have really cranked up the fear. You know exactly what is going on.

      Reply
  5. Anonymous by request

    In case anyone wonders:
    The CO2 Coalition is a nonprofit climate change denial advocacy organization in the United States founded in 2015. The group’s claims are disputed by the vast majority of climate scientists. The organization has 108 members. The organization been funded by energy industry firms and conservative activists who oppose climate change mitigation policies, such as the Mercer Family Foundation and Koch brothers.

    Reply
    • Joseph S. Salemi

      And who gives out Pulitzer prizes, and NY Times Best Book of the Year Awards, and Forbes Best Book on the Environment honors? You’re in a dream world, Anne, if you think this isn’t all political.

      Reply
  6. Mike Bryant

    Unfortunately, we live in an age where journalists are advocates. They are paid to push the narrative, not to tell the entire story.
    Dr. William Happer is the chairman of the NON-PROFIT CO2 Coalition and professor emeritus of Princeton University’s Department of Physics. Dr. Richard S. Lindzen is a CO2 Coalition member and past chairman. He is professor emeritus in the MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences.
    These physicists are on no one’s payroll. To trust the science, you must first trust the scientist.
    When money flows all over the “narrative” there is no trust.

    William Happer has published over 200 peer-reviewed scientific papers. He is a Fellow of the American Physical Society, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the National Academy of Sciences and the American Philosophical Society. He was awarded an Alfred P. Sloan Fellowship in 1966, an Alexander von Humboldt Award in 1976, the 1997 Broida Prize and the 1999 Davisson-Germer Prize of the American Physical Society, and the Thomas Alva Edison Patent Award in 2000.

    Richard Lindzen emeritus professor of meteorology at MIT, where he was the Alfred P. Sloan Professor, beginning in 1983. Prior to that he was the Robert P. Burden Professor of Dynamic Meteorology at Harvard University. Lindzen is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and fellow of both the American Meteorological Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He received the Jule Charney award for “highly significant research” in the atmospheric sciences from the American Meteorological Society and the Distinguished Engineering Achievement Award from the Engineer’s Council in 2009.
    Lindzen’s pioneering research in atmospheric dynamics has led to his conclusion that the sensitivity of surface temperature to increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide is considerably below that necessary to generate disastrous climate change.

    Reply
    • C.B. Anderson

      Dr. Lindzen is the best, Mike. Unfortunately, the address he delivered on the subject at MIT has apparently been taken down — because he spoke the truth, I imagine. The most powerful greenhouse gas, as it turns out, is water vapor, and just try eliminating that!

      Reply
      • Mike Bryant

        C.B. I looked for Dr. Lindzen’s address and I couldn’t find it either. But I did find this less than three minute video. It’s a short interview that covers the problem of politicized science:

  7. Paul Freeman

    A humorous, satirical piece, which will appeal to the mentioned eminent climate scientist deniers.

    On the poem’s content, of course the ultimate proof of CO2’s effect on the climate will be experienced by our children’s children and by their children, not by us – so better just to ignore the warming climate and pretend we’re not culpable.

    Thanks for the read, Mike.

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Who’s pretending Paul? It seems that someone who works for an oil powerhouse of a nation would be more likely to be pretending… one way or another. You’d have to either pretend that it is OK to continue the use of fossil fuels, or pretend that it’s not.
      As far as deniers go… seems like there are plenty of reality deniers wandering about.

      Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Also, Paul… your appeal to the children is very convincing… yeah… going full blown socialist is definitely the correct course… for the children.

      Reply
    • Joseph S. Salemi

      Paul’s use of the term “deniers” is a typical rhetorical sleight-of-hand used by liberals. If someone questions what you believe, call him a “denier.”

      I wonder if we could call Governor Hochul of New York a “denier,” since she denies that there is a rampant crime problem in her state. Or is that idiot Governor Newsom a “denier” because he denies that his state of California is on the verge of social collapse? Or is the Resident’s press secretary a “denier” because she claims that the 2016 election was stolen from Hillary?

      Paul also conveniently places the proof of his assertions way off into the future, so to avoid real debate, and to attempt shaming us or scaring us.

      Reply
      • Mike Bryant

        Joe, the word denier was purposely chosen for people that do not believe that a few degrees rise in temperature is an existential threat. It was chosen as a pejorative because of the previously existing term, “Holocaust Denier.” I used the term in the poem to point out its idiocy. Paul, however, embraces the term “climate denier” which was designed to create hate. Yes it is hate speech, which is, of course, protected by our constitution. Joe, if you worked for an oil powerhouse but at the same time proclaimed and believed that oil was killing off the human race, what kind of denier would that make you?

      • Paul Freeman

        You used the word ‘denier’ in your poem, Mike. Maybe I shouldn’t believe what I see or hear, as ordered.

        So much Doublethink on display. Orwell would have been amazed – or perhaps not.

      • Mike Bryant

        Listen Paul… Sparky is the idiot pushing the denier nonsense, not me… besides I am not working for one of the huge oil companies, who are, according to you, killing a string of future children…

      • Joshua C. Frank

        In fact, as I said elsewhere, why should he (or any other liberal) give a @#$& about killing off our children’s children when he’s so happy to support the “rights” of pregnant mothers to have their own children butchered?

        This goes beyond Doublethink and off into full-on La-La Land… except, at least crazy people are crazy through no fault of their own. Liberals have freely chosen the insanity. Like Satan, they say to God, “I will not serve.”

    • C.B. Anderson

      One thing that you are missing, Paul, is that increased atmospheric CO2, which compared to water vapor is a fairly weak greenhouse gas, will make plants (read: crops) grow better. Now, if you have any ideas on how to go about reducing the number of mouths to feed, then I’m sure we would all love to hear of them.

      Reply
  8. Russel Winick

    Mike – I appreciate the fine poem, expressing in free speech your point of view.

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Thanks Russel, free speech is under attack right now. America has always been a marketplace of ideas. When only one side has a monopoly on speech, the truth becomes malleable. Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

      Reply
  9. Joseph S. Salemi

    There’s an excellent book by the Danish writer Bjorn Lomborg, titled “False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions.”

    Thousands of scientists world-wide know that this “Climate Change” racket (it used to be called “Global Warming” until that label became embarrassing) is based on pure manipulation and fakery. But they have been threatened and browbeaten by their corporate employers and by political activists in the media and academia to keep their mouths shut. This is Soviet Lysenkoism on a global scale.

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Exactly right Joe… anyone that believes we are in a “climate crisis” is making money from the con, trusts someone making money from the con or just has not done enough reading yet.
      Lomborg is a top economist and has proven that the actions being taken today are foolhardy, ineffective and designed solely for the well-connected to loot the world’s treasuries.

      Reply
  10. Mia

    Hmm, deniers, climate change mitigation policies, foundations being set up left, right and centre and still no consensus
    is it any wonder people are sceptical and confused.
    On the one hand, Scientists write so many books on the destruction of the world due to what they term human activity. Meanwhile they go on producing more books, journals and whatever.
    I have read about the activities of Man being detrimental to the planet citing the atom bomb as one. But wait, didn’t scientists invent that one..
    and plastic, and aerosols and a few other things besides. Then people are blamed for using them.
    Oh and as I write this, for the last twenty minutes I am being deafened by the sound of fireworks outside due to Nov 5th in the UK. Should they be allowed? Do they not harm the environment? No?
    But someone somewhere is quite prepared to let people freeze to death due to the shortage of gas and we better not complain as it is all unsustainable.
    When they ban what is unnecessary I will be more prepared to listen.
    The fireworks are still going and it is only the 4th today, we have a whole weekend to go.
    I am writing this in the sincere belief that we need dialogue
    and from years of thinking that others know better because they have studied a subject only to find that actually, we the people need a voice too.
    or should we shut up and say we are culpable and freeze to death. That will take care of the surplus population. I am sure that will make a lot of difference to our children’s children. If they can afford to have any children that is. Or want to have them as they are constantly being bombarded with doom and gloom. No it won’t be the end of the world but the end of Man. Perhaps Putin will push the button and then climate change will be history. On that note, I think I’ll just go to the window and watch the fireworks!

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Mia, your comment absolutely proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the only thing that can save us is free speech. I have read volumes on climate change and the shenanigans that surround the mad dash for our money, but no one has described the con any better or more convincingly than you have just now. I’m going to start using this script when I talk to reality deniers!

      Reply
    • Jan Darling

      “I am writing this in the sincere belief that we need dialogue
      and from years of thinking that others know better because they have studied a subject only to find that actually, we the people need a voice too.”
      …so simply making a noise is more important than knowing something about the subject??
      What was it that Plato said about empty vessels?

      Reply
      • Mia

        Let us all watch mistakes being made and let them happen shall we?
        Have you heard the story of the Emperor’s New Clothes
        it took a child to voice the blooming obvious…

    • Mike Bryant

      Jan,
      The Climate experts ARE the empty vessels. For over 50 years they have been trumpeting predictions of doom. It does not take an expert to listen to the experts and remember.

      Climate ‘Experts’ Are 0-41 with Their Doomsday Predictions

      JOHN NOLTE Sep 2019

      For more than 50 years Climate Alarmists in the scientific community and environmental movement have not gotten even one prediction correct, but they do have a perfect record of getting 41 predictions wrong.
      In other words, on at least 41 occasions, these so-called experts have predicted some terrible environmental catastrophe was imminent … and it never happened.
      And not once — not even once! — have these alarmists had one of their predictions come true.
      Think about that… the so-called experts are 0-41 with their predictions, but those of us who are skeptical of “expert” prediction number 42, the one that says that if we don’t immediately convert to socialism and allow Alexandria Ocasio-Crazy to control and organize our lives, the planet will become uninhabitable.
      Why would any sane person listen to someone with a 0-41 record?
      Why would we completely restructure our economy and sacrifice our personal freedom for “experts” who are 0-41, who have never once gotten it right?
      If you had an investment counselor who steered you wrong 41 times, would you hang in there for number 42?
      Of course not. You’d fire him after failed prediction two or three.
      And if that’s not crazy enough, the latest ploy is to trot out a 16-year-old girl to spread prediction number 42, because it is so much more credible that way.
      Sometimes you just have to sit back and laugh.
      Anyway, I want you to have the data, so go ahead and print this out in advance of Thanksgiving dinner with your obnoxious Millennial nephew.

      LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT RIGHT:

      NONE.
      ZIP.
      ZERO.
      NADA.
      BLANK.
      DONUT HOLE.
      NIL.
      NOTHING.
      VOID.
      ZILCH.

      LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS THE CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT WRONG:

      1 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
      2 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
      3 1970: Ice Age By 2000
      4 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
      5 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
      6 1972: New Ice Age By 2070
      7 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
      8 1974: Another Ice Age?
      9 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life
      10 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
      11 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes
      12 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend
      13 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s
      14 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
      15 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)
      16 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
      17 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)
      18 2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is
      19 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
      20 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
      21 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018
      22 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013
      23 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World
      24 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’
      25 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014
      26 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015
      27 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2016
      28 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’
      29 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
      30 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources
      31 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years
      32 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
      33 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s
      34 1980: Peak Oil In 2000
      35 1996: Peak Oil in 2020
      36 2002: Peak Oil in 2010
      37 2005 : Manhattan Underwater by 2015
      38 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
      39 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
      40 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
      41 1970s: Killer Bees!
      Sorry, Experts… Sorry, Scientific Consensus… Only a fool comes running for the 42nd cry of wolf.
      Don’t litter, be kind to animals, recycling’s for suckers (it’s all going to end up in the ground eventually), so stop feeling guilty… Go out there to embrace all the bounty that comes with being a 21st century American. 

      Reply
      • Jan Darling

        Hello Mike – my comment was in response to the meanderings of Mia. I must have inserted my comment under the later Reply button. Do you misunderstand me? I couldn’t agree with you more! I play bridge with some very tiresome apostles of Doom and I have to curb my inclinations to commit violence upon their persons. I love your list – it’s neat to have such a succinct summary of stupidity. I shall put it to good use you can be sure. One question – to what does this refer: “Anyway, I want you to have the data, so go ahead and print this out in advance of Thanksgiving dinner with your obnoxious Millennial nephew”. I always hugely enjoy reading your and Susan’s poetry.

      • Mike Bryant

        I must have misunderstood. I copied the first list of 41 predictions. They are from a 2019 article by John Nolte. He wrote the article just before Thanksgiving so his readers could have some talking points for Thanksgiving 2019! I did find Mia’s words quite insightful and, of course, everyone is entitled to an opinion and a platform. Susan and I are looking forward to reading more of your one of a kind poetry.
        Thank You, Jan

      • Mike Bryant

        And that’s not all… here is a list of 67 climate predictions that failed:
        https://www.conservapedia.com/Failed_climate_change_predictions
        This list has some of the same predictions included in the 41 predictions above.
        However, this list also has links. It should be noted that neither list includes those predictions that have not failed yet. The experts are getting canny and are making longer term predictions now. That way they will already be dead or retired when their tales of doom fail!

    • C.B. Anderson

      Yes, Mia, enjoy the pyrotechnics while you can, which are similar to what a dialogue on this subject would entail. If all the politicians would just stop talking, then I am sure the problem of hot air would be solved once and for all. If you are a Christian, then you are pretty much required to have hope and you may leave the gloom and doom to the Edgar Allen Poets.

      Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Evan, I watched this short presentation by Dr. Richard Lindzen. It was very impressive. He has laid out the science and the other issues perfectly. It is well worth the few minutes he takes to put the fear mongering in the correct perspective.
      Thanks.

      Reply
  12. Mia

    Darling Jan,

    Calling me an empty vessel is staggering. But I rest easy in the knowledge that that says more about you than it says about me.
    But then there goes the arrogance of those who think they know it all and when they are losing the argument resort to name calling. Say something constructive about my arguments. Refute them if you can.
    I do meander, just like a river that is full of force . The more you know, the more you realise how much you do not know, don’t you know.

    I do know one thing that you seem to lack, well more than one actually
    courtesy, consideration, care for people regardless of who they are . That
    is priceless.

    have a great weekend Jan Darling.

    Reply
    • Mia

      Dear Mike
      I thank you for your comment. I was pleasantly surprised and whilst thinking of a suitable reply Jan got in before me. For an empty vessel, it seems , I do attract rather unwarranted attention. I would love some more comments such as yours but Thank you also for trying to defend my post.

      Reply
  13. David Watt

    I enjoyed your humorous, yet truthful poem thanks Mike. As Joe has said, we first had “Global Warming”, which was too specific and open to debate, then the suitably nebulous term “Climate Change”. The end game seems to be carbon footprint guilt/diminishment of freedoms.
    In our land of drought, flood, and fire, who can say that a swing to one or the other can be blamed on CO2?

    Reply
  14. Sally Cook

    How have we ended up with such a gaggle of ersatz leaders?
    When did weather become something to be feared and changed?
    And worst of all, when did we turn into sheeple:?
    I have now becfome such a cynic I deny almost everything but excellence, individuality, and love.

    Good work, Mike !

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Thank you Sally. The dumbing down of America didn’t happen overnight. It has been a determined and longstanding operation. Another commenter said, God help us. I agree, but each of us must do everything we can to stop the lies.

      Reply
  15. Joshua C. Frank

    Great poem Mike! It shows how disgusting such a mindset truly is, and how that whole movement is really about restricting our freedom.

    Some of the comments… it’s funny, you can deny the reality of biological sex or the humanity of the unborn all you want, but dare to deny that these “scientists” are the keepers of the truth and need to be obeyed, and people go postal.

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Thanks Josh, our children are targets from the moment of conception. Our natural love and affection for children is also used by the monsters who are pushing the lies… we don’t care about children if we don’t support abortion, the mutilation of minors and the teaching of climate catastrophe to our frightened children. One sadistic commenter is even holding our children’s children and their children as hostages to push this ruinous agenda. Keep the faith! And keep writing your pro-life, pro-sanity poetry. Our voices are meant to blaze with the light of truth.

      Reply
      • Joshua C. Frank

        Thanks Mike! One book I read (The Reactionary Mind by Michael Warren Davis) pointed out what should be obvious: why should people willing to kill children (let alone their own) by abortion care about anything to do with our children’s children?

      • Mike Bryant

        Yep… it ain’t about Climate Change, it ain’t about the children, it ain’t about reproductive rights and it ain’t about compassion. It’s about money and about the power it buys. Any lies, murders and mutilations that adds to the money and power is just fine with our sadistic, narcissistic, psychopathic ruling classes.

  16. Jeff Eardley

    Mike, was “Sparky” the creator of the most useful Helicap? I still use mine regularly to soar above the waves and marvel at the myriad wind turbines that so enhance the beautiful coastline of Olde Englande. As oil protesters glue themselves to motorways and throw soup over Van Gough paintings, I often reflect on the old Victorian warning that London would be five feet deep in horse-shit by now. A great, satirical and most enjoyable read.

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Thanks Jeff… yeah Sparky seems to be in the middle of everything. The great thing about the Helicap is that you can also run it in reverse to keep your feet firmly on the ground! You know… on that layer of shit thing… it’s a good thing that the governments of the world got together and required the automobile to come into existence. So I guess, since our rulers kindly bestowed cars, electricity, fresh water and indoor plumbing upon us, the pitiful serfs, it only makes sense that our all-knowing and compassionate rulers can take it all away. Who knows, the dark ages might be loads of fun! I hope they don’t take our Helicaps away…
      Sparky and the Helicap here:
      https://classicalpoets.org/2021/04/13/cdc-new-guidance-by-mike-bryant/#/

      Reply
      • Joseph S. Salemi

        This whole “environmentalist” thing really is about power, control, and dominance. And it has a perfect parallel in the medieval aristocratic notion that the beauties of the natural world belong to the nobility, and not to the serfs. Serfs have to be kept out of the forests so that they won’t kill animals for food, or gather firewood, or allow their swine to eat acorns, or do anything else to spoil the hunting preserves of the titled classes.

        And how do our current titled left-liberal classes assert their demands for dominance? Simple: they tell the serfs that they must not eat meat, that they must not use electricity or gasoline, that they must not reproduce, they they must not resist being de-culturalized, that they must not speak out in protest, that they must not think thoughts that the titled classes have forbidden, and that they must show absolute loyalty to their masters and to the paid whores-on-retainer in the media and academia who provide intellectual arguments for all of this tyranny.

        That’s what the Democrat Party is. It is the official mouthpiece, executive officer, and church for all of the above.

      • Mike Bryant

        I agree completely. Too bad that most of the Republicans are in cahoots with the Democrats… and the CCP as well. Do you remember Gingrich’s Contract With America? Yeah… they did some good but what happened with the promise of term limits? They are not THAT stupid. And do you remember what happened to that freshman class of Tea Partiers? It doesn’t take much time on Mount Olympus for our angels to turn into gods.

  17. Anonymous by request

    -Fact: the CO2 in the atmosphere is over 420, a 50% increase since 1750.
    -Fact: carbon absorbs and traps heat.
    -Fact: global temperature has risen almost 2 degree c.
    -The effects are everywhere: the melting, the sea rise, the fires, the flooding (1/3 Pakistan underwater.)
    Hippocrates: “There are in fact two things, science snd opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance.”

    Reply
    • Crotte

      Thank goodness for CO2! It is not a poison to trees, they need it and as favor to us who need O2 produce an abundance of it. As far as the disappearance of it in the Artic? in the last 2 years it has grown contrary to Al Gore and the climate experts who stated that the ice in the Artic would be gone by now. One has to wonder who is paying for these so called experts and what is their true assignment??????

      Reply
  18. Crotte

    Thank goodness for CO2! It is not a poison to trees, they need it and as favor to us who need O2 produce an abundance of it. As far as the disappearance of it in the Artic? in the last 2 years it has grown contrary to Al Gore and the climate experts who stated that the ice in the Artic would be gone by now. One has to wonder who is paying for these so called experts and what is their true assignment??????

    Reply
      • Mike Bryant

        It is settled science that there are more trees on earth today than there ever have been…

      • Mike Bryant

        It is an ominous sign that anonymous science whines an anomalous line of alarmist nonsense… and yet there are those who obeisantly bow down to the current baloney.

  19. Anonymous by request

    William Happer is a physicist, not a climate scientist. He’s had no training in climate science, which is quite complex. His misinformation about the climate is rejected by scientists in the field. His erroneous claims are cited snd fifputed below.

    Favourite climate myths by William Happer

    Below are many of the climate myths used by William Happer plus how often each myth has been used.

    Climate myths by Happer What the Science Says Usage
    “Hockey stick is broken”
    Recent studies agree that recent global temperatures are unprecedented in the last 1000 years.

    1
    “Medieval Warm Period was warmer”
    Globally averaged temperature now is higher than global temperature in medieval times.

    1
    “CO2 lags temperature”
    CO2 didn’t initiate warming from past ice ages but it did amplify the warming.

    1
    “Models are unreliable”
    Models successfully reproduce temperatures since 1900 globally, by land, in the air and the ocean.

    1
    “CO2 limits will harm the economy”
    The benefits of a price on carbon outweigh the costs several times over.

    1
    “It’s not bad”
    Negative impacts of global warming on agriculture, health & environment far outweigh any positives.

    1
    “Hurricanes aren’t linked to global warming” There is increasing evidence that hurricanes are getting stronger due to global warming. 1
    “Greenland was green” Other parts of the earth got colder when Greenland got warmer. 1
    “We’re coming out of the Little Ice Age”
    Scientists have determined that the factors which caused the Little Ice Age cooling are not currently causing global warming.

    1
    “CO2 was higher in the past”
    Climate has changed along with CO2 levels through geological time.

    1
    “CO2 is not a pollutant”
    Through its impacts on the climate, CO2 presents a danger to public health and welfare, and thus qualifies as an air pollutant

    1
    “Extreme weather isn’t caused by global warming”
    Extreme weather events are being made more frequent and worse by global warming.

    1
    “Climate sensitivity is low”
    Net positive feedback is confirmed by many different lines of evidence.

    1
    “CO2 is plant food”
    The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors

    1
    “CO2 is just a trace gas”
    Many substances are dangerous even in trace amounts; what really matters is the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

    1
    “Climategate CRU emails suggest conspiracy”
    A number of investigations have cleared scientists of any wrongdoing in the media-hyped email incident.

    1
    “Earth hasn’t warmed as much as expected” This argument ignores the cooling effect of aerosols and the planet’s thermal inertia. 1
    “Ocean acidification isn’t serious”
    Ocean acidification threatens entire marine food chains.

    1
    “Breathing contributes to CO2 buildup”
    By breathing out, we are simply returning to the air the same CO2 that was there to begin with.

    1
    “IPCC ‘disappeared’ the Medieval Warm Period”
    The IPCC simply updated their temperature history graphs to show the best data available at the time.

    1
    “It’s not urgent”
    A large amount of warming is delayed, and if we don’t act now we could pass tipping points.

    1
    “Clouds provide negative feedback”
    Evidence is building that net cloud feedback is likely positive and unlikely to be strongly negative.

    1
    “Renewable energy investment kills jobs”
    Investment in renewable energy creates more jobs than investment in fossil fuel energy.

    1
    Back to Climate Misinformation by Source

    Reply
    • BDW

      What is most appreciated in Mr. Bryant’s poem is his balladic structure and tone. What is most appreciated in his comments is his energy and his plumbing…depths.

      Miss Information at the Mike
      for th’ industrious Bright Ant
      by Lars U. Ice Bedew

      Anne Ominous “fifputes” Bill Happer and his climate myths.
      Medieval times were colder than these Present hotter fifths.
      No, CO2 does not lag temp; it amplifies this warmth.
      All of the Present models are successful thermal broth.
      CO2’s bad, it negatively changes ag and sky.
      The extra cost on carbon use does not make prices rise.
      Our storms are getting stronger due to this our heated hearth.
      The Little Ice Age cooling off has not caused fevered Earth.
      Carbon dioxide levels were not higher in the past.
      Yes, CO2 pollutes at geologic light speed—fast.
      CO2’s not plant food; high is Earth’s sensitivity.
      It’s not a trace gas, nor is this a hyped conspiracy.
      The IPCC didn’t interrupt Medieval puff.
      Our breathing doesn’t really add to CO2 build up.
      It’s urgent. Cloud feedback’s unlikely to be negative.
      Renewables do not kill jobs; they only make them live.

      Reply
      • Mike Bryant

        Bruce, thanks for this absolutely hilarious poem. If I didn’t know better I might almost think that you believed the nonsense! So, so funny…
        You are a hoot!!!

  20. Mike Bryant

    The argument here is not really about CO2. The argument is about the impoverishing of the “deplorables.”
    The elite do not want the serfs to be powerful… to have electricity. If it was about CO2 there would be nuclear power plants across this beautiful country.
    Don’t follow the rabbits down their rabbit holes.
    Keep your eyes on the lies, the money and the elite.

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      But… a rabbit hole… why do commercial growers pump CO2 into their greenhouses to double or even triple the amount of ambient?
      Because plants grow faster and healthier with much more CO2.
      Why do plants crave more CO2?
      Because the ancestors of those plants lived in a world of higher CO2 levels.
      We live on a CO2 starved planet.

      I challenge anyone here to tell me what the absolute perfect average temperature of earth is…
      No one will because real scientists understand that life prefers warmer temperatures… the reason that life is ten times more abundant per acre in the tropics than in the arctic… the reason so many people take vacations at the beach.
      Cold is the killer… not warmth.

      Reply
      • Mike Bryant

        And… a little known fact… no global warming is occurring in the tropics… it is occurring further north… and south… mostly at night.

  21. Mike Bryant

    Hippocrates: “There are in fact two things, science snd opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance.”

    Hippocrates, famous for the oath containing the ringing phrase, “First, do no harm.”
    Look what our elites at the CDC, the WHO, the NIH, Pfizer, and many many other elites with their slimy snouts in the public trough, have done to the “science” of medicine… that have appointed bought and paid for “scientists to give their “opinion” that our pure unthreatened children MUST take the experimental jab, even though the order is in direct violation of the Neuremberg code.
    Why start listening to Hippocrates now?

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Hippocrates also said, “A physician without a knowledge of Astrology has no right to call himself a physician.”
      I think I will stick with Lindzen and Happer.

      Reply
      • Mike Bryant

        Hmmmm… Hippocrates also said, “To do nothing is also a good remedy.”
        He may have been talking about CO2! LOL

  22. Joseph S. Salemi

    Anne Gruner’s visits here and her postings serve only to confirm what is now becoming glaringly obvious to millions of people: left-liberalism is a CRAZED EVANGELICAL RELIGION. It is dogmatic, insistent, proselytizing, bigoted, and reflexively reactive against anyone or anything that casts doubt upon its belief-system. It has its sacred dogmas, its holy texts, its saints and sinners, its longed-for Promised Land, and its devils.

    This is a formal poetry website. Many persons also come here because they know that conservative viewpoints are not censored. I’m willing to wager that Gruner doesn’t give a damn about formal poetry (her first posting here at this thread was a godawful piece of saccharine free-verse mediocrity), but only came because of intense religious outrage against Mike Bryant’s poem. And she continues to post here at this thread, despite seeing that almost everyone else disputes her views.

    She comes here for the following reasons: 1) to virtue-signal to the rest of the world how holy she is; 2) to claim for herself the mantle of martyrdom; 3) to scream about “the truth” and “science” (by which she means her left-liberal religion); and 4) to congratulate herself on standing up for her holy faith.

    Left-liberalism becomes much easier to understand when you realize that it is a full-fledged fanatical religion.

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Joe, your thoughts bring this C. S. Lewis insight to mind:
      “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
      ― C. S. Lewis

      Reply
    • Anneonymous

      You are so full of shit. I am a Republican, hardly left wing, NOT an evangelical. I have plenty of formal poems, including sonnets, villanelles, and haikus. the collective ignorance shown in these comments is stunning. I thought this was a legit website…but after this experience, I surely will have nothing to do with it. What you understand about climate change can fit in a thimble.

      Reply
      • Joshua C. Frank

        If that’s how you talk to people who don’t fit your narrow mindset exactly, we’re glad not to have you!

        Clearly, Joe is right on the money.

      • Mike Bryant

        Josh, there are plenty of Republicans who have fallen for the new time religion of climate catastrophism… it’s sad, really.

        Remember Newt and Nancy?

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi6n_-wB154

        Of course Newt and Nancy have vast investments in “renewable” energy.
        Money is the main reason that reasonable people espouse the unreasonable…

      • Joseph S. Salemi

        It looks like “Anne”-onymous is a typical RINO. She’d rather make deals with left-liberalism than fight its absurdities.

        By the way, on November 4th she said “over and out.” But now she’s back again, saying “I surely will have nothing to do with it” (i.e. this website).

        Isn’t that just like Liz Cheney? Scream that you’re a Republican, but throw a hissy-fit when you’re shown not to be one at all?

      • Susan Jarvis Bryant

        Anneonymous, I respect and appreciate that the belief in getting the Western world to a Net Zero carbon status is neither a left nor a right-wing policy. I am from the UK and David Cameron and Boris Johnson (former Conservative prime ministers) have pushed the Green agenda to the point where the people are suffering economically and utterly pissed off. David Cameron’s father-in-law was benefiting hugely from the subsidies for useless wind farms. Whether you’re a Republican or a Democrat, your views appear to be evangelical… they are pushing the new religion of “science” – government paid “science” in which every government-funded “scientist” is feeding at the lucrative trough of the ripped-off taxpayer. How can you say that what we at the SCP “understand about climate change can fit in a thimble” when you won’t even bother to acknowledge all the false predictions listed above, let alone give credibly listed non-government-funded scientists a voice. You belong to a religion I want no part in. I want to ask you this. If you believe wholeheartedly in our planet’s impending doom, why won’t you proudly present your name alongside your claims?

      • Susan Jarvis Bryant

        … and I’d like to add this: “In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.” – Galileo Galilei

  24. Susan Jarvis Bryant

    Mike, I just wanted to thank you for your poetry, your honesty, and your tireless endeavor to shed light on the truth in a post-truth era… not an easy thing to do, I know.

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Susan, I’m only trying to share a fraction of the truth that you do. It really is amazing that with resources as powerful as the internet and free speech the truth has become so difficult to ascertain. Things are changing though. As long as everyone is free to share their views on every internet platform, the truth will always win. The lies about climate, gender and a whole host of similarly contentious issues are becoming harder and harder to defend by those who would use those lies to silence half of the population. America and the internet must remain centers for absolutely free speech so that everyone can hear all sides of every issue so the best ideas can dominate in this marketplace of ideas. You always stand for truth, compassion and excellence… and you’re doing a damn good job of it.

      Reply
      • Joshua C. Frank

        It’s true, both of you are doing a great job of standing up for what is good. Keep up the good work!

        However, I think the Internet and free speech, in their own way, obscure truth as much as their absence does; also, as we see throughout the Bible, the majority of people flee from or attack the truth instead of embracing it, a fact unchanged throughout history.

        This brings to mind something I read in Neil Postman’s book Amusing Ourselves to Death (written about television, before the Internet took off):

        “What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny ‘failed to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.’ In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we desire will ruin us.”

        The author makes the point that Huxley was more right than Orwell. How long this holds true remains to be seen…

  25. Joseph S. Salemi

    Joshua Frank is partially right on this issue. The multiplication of new pleasures and distractions will keep a large segment of the population uninvolved in political action or subversive thought. People will be so fascinated by the intricacies of their newest smartphones that they won’t care who runs the government, or what tyrannical laws are enacted. A writer whose name now escapes me said that “Subject populations — as long as they are not grossly oppressed — are generally cheerful and merry, since they are free to amuse themselves with no untoward consequences.” (It’s not an exact quote, but that’s the gist of what he said.)

    And yes — if people don’t read, there is no need for an Index Librorum Prohibitorum.

    But freedom of speech and a wide-open internet are absolutely crucial today, and should never be questioned. The mere fact that the Liberal-Left is desperate to shut down internet discussion means that such discussion is dangerous to them, and they know it. Why else would they be cancelling people, organizing Twitter hate-mobs, taking down embarrassing videos, cutting the funding sources for websites they don’t like, and using the code-word “disinformation” to censor any unpalatable truth? That tells me that the left is utterly petrified of what we on the right can say in public forums.

    You want to know what really scares me? On some supposedly conservative Catholic websites, I have read posts from persons who complain that we should NOT oppose cancel-culture and censorship, because there is nothing wrong per se with cancel-culture and censorship. The only thing that’s wrong is that it isn’t being organized and carried out by “us.”

    Reply
    • Joshua C. Frank

      Yes, I agree that our message is important, and that’s why we’re being canceled. That’s why I wonder how long before we change from Brave New World to 1984.

      Part of it, also, is that there’s just so much contradictory information out there that all we can do is either painstakingly experiment on ourselves or just believe whatever we want. Some say the Internet has led to a pervasive skepticism for this reason, and I’m not so sure they’re wrong.

      As for Catholics who say cancel culture is OK as long as we do the canceling, I think they base this on things the saints have taught. Here’s part of a treatise by St. Alphonsus Liguori: https://thejosias.net/2015/07/22/on-the-utility-and-necessity-of-prohibiting-harmful-books/ Whether he was right or not, I think that’s where they’re coming from.

      Reply
      • Mike Bryant

        Hey Josh, IF the internet has led to a pervasive skepticism, I’d say that is a very, very good thing. That can only mean that the internet has remained at least partially free of control by those who want dominion of our thoughts.
        I read that about half of the world’s population believe that climate change/global warming is a serious problem. That makes me believe that the internet is only about half free of the globalist psyops. I understand that religions and other organizations must control the information they dispense. But no organization, and particularly no global government should be allowed to starve sovereign individuals of information… true, false, mis-, dis-, cis- or otherwise.
        You cannot have free people unless you have freedom of speech. Even God the Almighty allowed the serpent to speak… and IF there was ever a time when speech should have been curtailed, then on that day in the Garden of Eden that purveyor of misinformation should have been squelched.
        Since we were made in God’s image, I’d say He has set the example.

      • Joshua C. Frank

        Wow… such food for thought! I learn so much here.

      • Mike Bryant

        If Adam had decided to use his own freedom to speak, he might have said, “Eve, we don’t even know this snake. Before we do anything, let’s set up a meeting with God and find out why that snake is saying bad things about Him.”
        We might be living on a paradise earth.

  26. Margaret Coats

    Mike, thanks for the poem and for your work in this discussion to respond to carbon dioxide alarmism. Anyone who wants to do something useful about the perceived excess of carbon dioxide should simply plant fast-growing trees or any food-producing green thing. These need plenty of carbon dioxide to perform photosynthesis (upon which plant life and all food production depends), and in the process they absorb sunlight (thus countering the principal source of the heat that warms the globe). Furthermore, plants (if they only have enough carbon dioxide) produce oxygen that human beings need to breathe. Enemies of carbon dioxide (even if they hate humanity and would like to destroy it) are enemies of all life. They hate Mother Earth and want to leave her burnt out.

    Reply
  28. Mike Bryant

    As a footnote to this post I’d like to propose a simple thought experiment. Imagine that you have a million dollars. Imagine that you carefully place this money in one dollar bills on the ground in the sun. If you have carefully placed the bills, they will be edge to edge and cover a bit more than two and a half acres. Now imagine that you randomly select five hundred of these bills (which would fill a square about seven and a half feet per side) to represent the CO2 in our atmosphere. Paint these five hundred bills black so they will hold onto the solar heat longer than the other bills. Leave the million dollars, including the painted ones, in the sun all day. Do you really think that small area in your 2.5 acre lot is going to cause a problem? I don’t see any catastrophe arising out of those randomly placed bills.

    To get an idea what 400 parts per million means… imagine a room with a regular ceiling and walls that are eight feet tall. Now, imagine that you could separate the mixed CO2 in that room and place it as a layer on the floor. That layer would be about four ten thousandths of an inch thick, or .0004” which is less than half the thickness of a human hair.

    That is why CO2 is called a trace gas… there is barely a trace of it in our atmosphere. Earth’s atmosphere is CO2 starved.

    Reply
  29. Mike Bryant

    Also, in the past there were many magic numbers… the speed of sound, where aircraft reaching that barrier would immediately disintegrate or, during the early days of motoring, when a speed of 100 miles per hour would kill you from oxygen starvation. What about the Y2K scare? How many doomsday cults have picked a magic day in a magic year when all hell breaks loose? We have survived all those limits and thrived. We have survived 400 ppm of CO2. We have survived hundreds of predictions of climate doom. If, tomorrow, we could burn all the remaining fossil fuels, the CO2 levels in our atmosphere would still be below the CO2 level our submariners thrive in aboard our nuclear subs.
    Must we really belong to this mad Climate Catastrophe Doomsday Cult? What is the number now… 420? 450?
    The CO2 cult shouts a number representing the tiny amount of the tracest of trace gases which makes all life on earth possible. It is ridiculous.

    Reply
    • Joseph S. Salemi

      You can’t fight a religious cult, Mike. Climate-change alarmism is simply a part of the new left-liberal religion, which is spreading like wildfire everywhere. Nothing that we say or write will change the views of these committed fanatics by one iota.

      Could we convince the Taliban or ISIS crazies to become more reasonable? No — we simply had to go in and kill them. As the Italians say, “C’e bisogno delle daghe.” (It’s time for the daggers.)

      Reply
      • Mike Bryant

        Yeah… Russel’s new poem gave me a little hope that there might be a few mavericks out there that we can round up and brand before the reckoning!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Captcha loading...

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.