challenge the climate cultists

Another challenge to the climate cult from Chris Martz (US perspective), who does not hold back ... https://x.com/ChrisMartzWX/status/1818032783396397492

We make no apology for focusing on this subject since it is driving the economies of the West to make huge sacrifices and compromises over budget considerations, also than the UK where mad Ed Milliband has already made some expensive mistakes since taking office on July 5th. The call for evidence from Chris comes in the wake of David Siegel's long-term campaign for an honest debate - but we're still waiting for honest answers from the Cult.

"... Here are 10 questions for climate Nancy boys.

➊ To the nearest hundredth of a degree Celsius, what is the “correct” global mean surface temperature (GMST), and why?

➋ If your answer to question one is “the pre-industrial climate,” then explain to me why a 1.2°C cooler planet would be ideal for life on Earth in terms of agricultural and economic productivity. Explain to me why climate conditions during the Little Ice Age (LIA) would be less dangerous and more preferable?

➌ What is the “correct” amount of extreme weather? How many tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes; tornadoes; single-cell, multi-cell cluster, multi-cell line and supercell thunderstorms; damaging wind and hailstorms; droughts; coastal, pluvial and flash floods; heatwaves and cold waves; snowstorms, ice storms and blizzards; and wildfires should there be per year globally? Assign exact numbers then explain to me why.

➍ What is the “correct” level of atmospheric carbon dioxide supposed to be? What dry-air volume or even range of concentrations would minimize bad weather and optimize plant growth? Most alarmists tell me that the pre-industrial level of 180-280 ppm is ideal. But, why? Show me the data that can physically establish a mathematical relationship between carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and the amount of tornadic or hurricane activity in a year, for starters, then explain why 180-280 ppm is more ideal for plants than 800-1,200 ppm.

➎ Climate scientists say that the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which President Biden signed into law last year, was the “biggest piece of climate legislation in history.” But, since it was signed into law, the climate alarmists say that climate change has only become a lot worse. Why?

➏ To follow-up to question five, when will the IRA be effective? At 6:24 p.m. today? Noon tomorrow? Next week? 5-years from now? When will it give us the ideal climate? What does that look like? How do we know, and by what measure(s)?

➐ If the U.S. spends $50-78 trillion to decarbonize our economy by 2050, how much will that reduce GMST by 2100, if we assume climate model projections are an accurate representation of reality? Provide your answer to the nearest hundredth of a degree Celsius and show me your math.

➑ If you don't know the answer to question eight, here is a follow-up. If you don't know how much GMST will be reduced by 2100 if we go to “net zero” emissions by 2050, are we supposed to spend $50-78 trillion and just see what happens? That would cost each of you between $150,000 and $235,000 to achieve.

➒ China and India emit more carbon dioxide into the air than any other country. Why are their feet never held to the fire to reduce emissions? Why does the responsibility only fall on western countries, and all of a sudden the topic goes from total emissions to the per capita metric?

➊⓿ Why do efforts to mitigate negative impacts of man-made climate change focus almost exclusively on reducing emissions, as opposed to more effective (especially in the near-term) measures, such as better zoning codes in flood plains; investing in weather-resilient infrastructure along our coastlines and in hail and tornado alley; better city planning to reduce flash flooding damage; or placing power lines underground and improving forest management to reduce fire risk?

I'm still waiting for climate alarmists to answer these very basic questions in a clear and concise manner..."

We all are, then we can ask the people for an informed decision on how our priorities should be ranked, and pass that decision onto their MPs - to test their willingness to engage with - and acknowledge - the will of the Electorate.