Organization Proposes Naming Hurricanes After Climate Change Denying Policy Makers

What do think Disinfonauts, is this a good approach?

Since 1954, the World Meteorological Organization has been naming extreme storms after people. But we propose a new naming system. One that names extreme storms caused by climate change, after the policy makers who deny climate change and obstruct climate policy.

,

  • Charlie Primero

    Hells yeah. This would highlight how the Climate Fraud is a political scam to benefit energy corporations and banksters. I hope they start doing this.

    • echar

      Hey, maybe the Koch brothers can grease some palms and make it happen. Give ‘em a call and shoot it by them.

      • Charlie Primero

        The Koch brothers are little pissants, worth at best, a hundred billion dollars. Stop reading kiddie fluff and dig into the carbon market financials as if you were going to become an investor.

        You’ll discover that the Climate Fraud is being engineered by REAL heavyweights like BP, Siemens, Petrobras, EADS, Deloitte, Deutsche Bank, Citigroup, and the World Bank.

        • echar

          Clever, call up their competition and get them involved. Muddy up the waters.

        • doodahman

          Right on. AGW is the scam of the big financiers.

        • moremisinformation

          At least three people (so far) don’t appreciate cognitive dissonance.

  • ishmael2009

    Sure. Let’s also call the hundreds of thousands of deaths from preventable Vitamin A deficiency after GMO Deniers.

    This is a poor and entirely transparent attempt to confuse policy problems with scientific phenomena. If, as Dr Hansen has suggested, a large part of the blame can be laid at the feet of the anti-nuclear renewable energy “kool aid drinkers” (his phrase not mine) then are we going to start naming hurricanes after them as well? Of course not, because that wouldn’t fit established preconceptions.

  • Simon Valentine

    oh i clicked the wrong link i thought the title mentioned the milky way…

  • godozo

    Bad idea.

    Just keep naming the hurricanes as you have been. No reason to change things….

  • Dingbert

    Funny, but upset to see Collin Peterson in there. Yes, he’s a skeptic and needs to ditch the corn subsidies, but he still votes for:

    -tax credits/incentives for renewable energy and conservation
    -criminalizing oil cartels
    -eliminating oil/gas subsidies
    -no new oil refineries
    -no ANWR drilling
    -a goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025
    -increasing Amtrak funding

    If you support good energy policy, what difference does it make if you don’t accept man-made climate change? I wonder sometimes if people care more about correctly interpreting weather patterns than actually improving our quality of life.

    • doodahman

      I don’t believe in AGW as serous problem but I have a very small carbon footprint because there are tons of real reasons to ditch fossil fuels. Not this crapola that will ultimately entrench coal and oil since the carbon markets will suck up so much capital.

  • BuzzCoastin

    what’s a climate denier
    someone who doesn’t believe in weather?
    seriously
    whatever one thinks about Global Warming
    will have no effect upon whatever Nature decides to do
    we’re long past the point of human intervention, let alone reversal

    believing in Santa has better odds for payoff in your lifetime

  • wfzlsster

    It doesn’t get any more stupid than this. Instead of debating the known facts it comes down to name calling.

  • Ted Heistman

    Hurricanes are natural. Humans turn nature into culture but through unintended consequences Culture becomes nature, once again, when chaos enters the system. So then what?

    Try even harder to tamp it down. Engineer the weather, so that nature will be our complete bitch again.

    That’s what this is all about. Liberals arguing with conservatives is just the usual misdirection. Way to see the small picture.

    • echar

      Out of curiosity, when was the weather ever our bitch?

      • Calypso_1

        in days of yore

        • echar

          Yore speech is confounding.

          • Calypso_1

            Best controlled by randomness, though the subjects of the interlocutor are oft afraid of such independent paths o’entropy.

          • echar

            Such hubris, to think, to act…

          • Calypso_1

            Oft I meditate upon the amaranthine black humors of our Promethean patron.

  • Lookinfor Buford

    Giving a name to something is the first step in exerting control over it.

  • Calypso_1

    As long as they name one after Pat Robinson.

  • Andrew

    Having a hurricane named after you isn’t such a bad thing.

    • echar

      Florida Man may disagree.

  • doodahman

    Uh, maybe you didn’t notice, being facts and all, but even the IPCC in its latest report DEBUNKS the connection between hurricane activity and global warming. Like with a “low to no confidence” rating on the connection. They were forced to this conclusion by the failure of hurricanes in particular, and extreme weather events generally, to increase as predicted as CO2 concentrations increased. So, even the alarmists don’t argue this link anywhere.
    It’s only fools who think they understand climate change who continue with such idiocy because they can’t even keep up with what their own side of the issue believes.

    • echar

      Are you more than 50% certain that’s what it said?