In their quest to ensure the hysteria about climate change remains undiminished in the face of mounting evidence that it's all bullshit; the BBC are now reporting the lunatic suggestion that climate change is responsible for all sorts of natural disaster phenomenons such as: -
- Hurricanes (these being a new phenomenon obviously)
- Flooding (which again, never occurred before those pesky factories started up
- Tsunamis, and
- Earthquakes
Whichever moron penned this article is a fucking tool And the quoted insurance representative who said this (one Torsten Jeworrek of Munich Re)
Climate change has already started and is very probably contributing to increasingly frequent weather extremes and ensuing natural catastrophesis a disingenuous twat.
But just to illustrate how bad things are though, the BBC gave us this picture of someone from China weeping over the remains of his home, doubtless destroyed by that pesky global warming caused earthquake.
Damn you global warming!
8 comments:
Even the Beeb didn't make the link between MMGW and earthquakes as explicit as that, although I take your point.
What is irritating is that they use the phrase 'natural disaster' to refer to 'lousy planning decisions'. If you build your house on a flood plain, or on the Louisiana coastline, or on the San Andreas fault etc. you are asking for trouble.
It's like the question 'If a tree falls over in a forest, is there a sound?'. If there's a massive great tidal wave on an uninhabited beach or tidal wetland, then who gives a shit, frankly?
Then why did they choose to illustrate the article with a picture of someone who lost his diggs in an earthquake? If it's not outright bullshittery then it's misleading at the very least.
As for the floodplain / housing thing - why bother with insurance anyway when the government will compensate you?
er... it's not the beeb but an insurance company making the link; and if you removed your head from your arse you'd see they weren't saying it was a causal link, simply that the effects of natural (weather) disasters would be exascerbated by an increasingly warm world.
The picture is ridiculous, I'll say that. But the article doesn't say that which you suggest it does.
Thing is though Madame anonymong, if it's bullshit (which it plainly is), why report it? By reporting it it lends weight to it.
Re-read the article, it starts and finishes by banging on about climate change, and illustrates with a picture of some bloke without his house. It is making the suggestion - as the Beeb loves to do - that MMCC is responsible for all the ills of the world.
Tell you what, I'll write an article that talks about nonces, then shoehorn a picture of Noel Edmonds and some blather about him - what would be the resultant implication?
Except the BBC misrepresents with our license fee.
Hmm. Who to trust, eh? An ill-informed swearblog who eventually concedes it was Munich Re rather than the Beeb making the link between climate change and weather-created natural disasters (and not the BBC as he originally stated - AND EVEN THEN failed to see that the reason it was reported was that the bank was calling for global emissions reductions...), or an insurance company who wishes to limit its liability?
As I said, I think the picture is highly disingenuous; but i'll wager the person who put the picture on wasn't the person who wrote the article. Read the piece again. Nowhere is the link made between earthquakes and global warming - which is what your post said. Now who's being disingenuous?
No - it's far easier to see this as an example of the liberal conspiracy driving the British media.
And one last thing fuck-faced cuntychops - don't go slagging me off for using the blogger-enabled anonymous option when you don't sign your own fucking submissions. You cock-faced cretin.
Devil's Kitchen you are not, my sweet, sweet friend.
Oh dear anony, upset you have I? Enough to try some stringing together of some big-boys swear words. Bless.... I'm sure nanny will be along any minute to give you a cuddle; and possibly a reading lesson as you'll note the comments are headed up with my name. Divvy.
At what point do I say the BBC made the link? I don't. To quote my post: - "the BBC are now reporting" - what is unclear or has changed about that then? Nowt.
Someone talks crap, they report it as fact. Who's the bigger fool - the fool or the fool who follows him? But maybe they'll report it because it suits their agenda.
"The Scumbag" is your name? Bless, even your mum was displeased with the scrawy sack of shit that emerged mweling all those (thirteen) years ago.
Explain where in the fucking piece the BBC reported that Munich Re suugest CC causes earthquakes and tsunamis. As you say, in your post, that it does.
You can't, you cunt.
The BBC is a zanulabour conspiracy that pushes the climate change agenda at all times even if the facts don't always fit the story
Post a Comment