Dem Congressional Candidate Says Climate Skeptics Should Commit Suicide Via Car Exhaust

By Onan Coca and Jeff Dunetz

 

Rob Quist is the Democratic Party candidate for Montana’s at-large seat in Congress left vacant by Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke… Quist, who among his other talent is a folk singer popular at nudist resorts in the great state of Montana has an interesting way of trying to win over voters… he suggests that if they aren’t sure about climate change they should try… killing themselves yep he  believes they should lock themselves in their garage with their cars on and see what happens.

Now the Democratic candidate promises  on campaign website that he will bring the “values of rural Montana” with him to Congress if elected. What is not certain is he talking about nudist camps being the values of rural Montana or is he talking about suicide.

On a televised debate, Quist was given the last chance to comment on climate change when he made his strange recommendation.

“This is something that the entire world needs to address,” Quist said. “If any those of you that feel like this is not a problem, I challenge you to go into your car in your garage, start your car, and see what happens there.”

Quist doesn’t seem to understand the difference between carbon monoxide (which is the chemical emission from your car) and carbon dioxide (which is the supposed problem gas in the climate change fear mongering scenario). Perhaps his brain is fried from looking at all of those nudist senior citizens.  However, what makes this even worse is that carbon dioxide is essential to life on earth. In fact, the more carbon dioxide, the healthier our planet becomes and while yes, it could technically warm the earth… that warming could actually solve more problems for our planet than it creates

#

Related:

Watch: Schwarzenegger again threatens climate skeptics: ‘I would like to strap their mouth to the exhaust pipe of a truck — turn on the engine’ – Terminator wants to Terminate skeptics: 

Arnold Schwarzenegger again threatens skeptics: ‘I would like to strap their mouth to the exhaust pipe of a truck, turn on the engine and let’s see how long it would take them to tap out.’
Schwarzenegger also threatened death to skeptics in 2013: Flashback 2013: Arnold Schwarzenegger on global warming ‘deniers’: ‘Strap some conservative-thinking people to a tailpipe for an hour and then they will agree it’s a pollutant!”

Fox News reports on 7 shots fired at skeptical climate scientists’ building – ‘Animosity in the climate wars’

Watch Fox News video here: https://mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2017/05/03/53361/fnc-specialreport-20170503-johnchristyshots

Media Matters Reports (edited for accuracy): On the May 2 edition of Special Report with Bret Baier, host Bret Baier introduced a segment on the shooting as evidence that “animosity in the climate change wars is hitting new lows.” During the segment, correspondent Doug McKelway  reported that Christy “got seven bullet holes in his office windows” and made reference to Christy’s skepticism of computer model climate predictions.

Baier’s report comes after Breitbart.com, National Review, and numerous climate skeptics called for further investigation.

From the May 2 edition of Fox News’ Special Report with Bret Baier:

BRET BAIER (HOST): We are awaiting a decision from President [Donald] Trump on whether the U.S. will continue to participate in a worldwide global warming treaty that he criticized during the campaign. Correspondent Doug McKelway tells us tonight the animosity in the climate change wars is hitting new lows.

DOUG MCKELWAY: In 1991, climate skeptic John Christy got NASA’s medal for exceptional scientific achievement. Last week, he got seven bullet holes in his office windows during the March for Science weekend at the University of Alabama, Huntsville. Police think it was random. Christy thinks he was targeted. Christy measures actual earth temperatures from satellite data. He is skeptical of computer model predictions of warming and government remedies to fix it.…

No NY Times, Arctic ice is not ‘vanishing’

Via: http://junkscience.com/2017/05/no-nytimes-arctic-ice-is-not-vanishing/

Here’s the fake news headline:

Here’s the reality:

According to NOAA, Northern Hemisphere sea ice has declined somewhat since 1980, but it certainly is not “vanishing”:

And when you consider that NOAA has a pre-1980 sea ice record, you might reasonably wonder what all the fuss us about.

That’s why the NYTimes is called “fake news.”

#

Related Links: 

MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen: Believing CO2 controls the climate ‘is pretty close to believing in magic’

Lindzen on Arctic sea ice:

Satellites have been observing arctic (and Antarctic) sea ice since 1979. Every year there is a pronounced annual cycle where the almost complete winter coverage is much reduced each summer. During this period there has been a noticeable downtrend is summer ice in the arctic (with the opposite behavior in the Antarctic), though in recent years, the coverage appears to have stabilized. In terms of climate change, 40 years is, of course, a rather short interval. Still, there have been the inevitable attempts to extrapolate short period trends leading to claims that the arctic should have already reached ice free conditions. Extrapolating short term trends is obviously inappropriate. Extrapolating surface temperature changes from dawn to dusk would lead to a boiling climate in days. This would be silly. The extrapolation of arctic summer ice coverage looks like it might be comparably silly. Moreover, although the satellite coverage is immensely better than what was previously available, the data is far from perfect. The satellites can confuse ice topped with melt water with ice free regions. In addition, temperature might not be the main cause of reduced sea ice coverage. Summer ice tends to be fragile, and changing winds play an important role in blowing ice out of the arctic sea. Associating changing summer sea ice coverage with climate change is, itself, dubious. Existing climate models hardly unambiguously predict the observed behavior. Predictions for 2100 range from no change to complete disappearance. Thus, it cannot be said that the sea ice behavior confirms any plausible prediction.

It is sometimes noted that concerns for disappearing arctic sea ice were issued in 1922, suggesting that such behavior is not unique to the present. The data used, at that time, came from the neighborhood of Spitzbergen. A marine biologist and climate campaigner has argued that what was described was a local phenomenon, but, despite the claim, the evidence presented

CEI press release: The Legal and Economic Case Against the Paris Climate Treaty

 
Washington, May 3, 2017 – Today the Competitive Enterprise Institute released “The Legal and Economic Case Against the Paris Climate Treaty,” a new report outlining why President Donald Trump should withdraw the United States from the agreement.
According to the report’s authors, CEI’s Chris Horner and Marlo Lewis, the Paris Climate Agreement is a costly and ineffectual solution to the alleged climate crisis, and quite plainly, a treaty. Worse, the Agreement’s mid-century emission reduction target can’t be met without putting energy-poor countries on an energy diet. 
“Failure to withdraw from the Paris Climate Treaty would entrench a constitutionally damaging precedent, set President Trump’s domestic and foreign policies in conflict, and ensure many years of diplomatic blowback, imperiling America’s capacity for self-government,” said CEI senior fellow Marlo Lewis. “The agreement makes our country beholden to the demands of foreign leaders, U.N. bureaucrats, and international pressure groups, disallowing American consumers from determining our own energy needs and wants—including at what price.”
According to the report, in addition to being detrimental to America’s political and economic interests, the Paris Climate Treaty pursues an anti-energy agenda throughout the developing world that is both unjust and dangerous. The agreement, producing no detectable climate benefits, diverts trillions of dollars from productive investments that would enhance global welfare to feeding political ambitions.
New arguments from the U.S. State Department to remain in the Paris Climate Treaty are misguided, contrary to the language in the Paris Climate Agreement, and ignore serious legal consequences, says author CEI Senior Fellow Chris Horner. Horner responds to these arguments:
“The argument that we can simply renegotiate the Paris Climate Treaty is false; that’s not an option under the deal. The agreement’s language in Article 4 is clear and deliberate. According to this treaty, any revision must be more stringent—we cannot revise downward, and we are required to make it worse, every five years, forever. This is a truly terrible deal for U.S. consumers and the economy.
 
The Paris treaty is “politically binding,” like prior climate treaties, but carries huge potential legal consequences, and the State Department is misleading the White House by ignoring these risks. If President Trump stays in this treaty and follows through in his energy agenda, every climate-activist state attorney general, environmental group, and the entire climate industry will surely litigate on the basis of