Thursday’s Democratic debate hosted by PBS and Politico was a rather dull affair, but one question regarding climate change from Politico chief political correspondent Tim Alberta stood out as particularly nutty by any reasonable standard.
In back-to-back questions, he presses candidates on their plans to pick up and relocate the entire population of certain cities.
Setting up the debate’s shift to climate alarmism, Alberta prefaced by noting that “many scientists say that even if the U.S. reduced its carbon footprint to zero by the year 2050, the damage will have been done, the climate change will have made certain places in the U.S. unlivable.”
In the question to Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Alberta wanted to know:
So, knowing this, would you support a new federal program to subsidize the relocation of American families and businesses away from places like Miami or Paradise, California, perhaps, Davenport, Iowa, because we know these places are going to be hit time and time again?
According to data from the United States Census, the population estimate for the city of Miami stood at just over 470,000, with the population of Miami-Dade county coming in at over 2.7 million people.
The same data estimated Davenport’s population at just a hair over 100,000.
“Well, I very much hope we’re not going to have to relocate entire cities, but we are will probably have to relocate some individual residents,” Klobuchar initially responded, obviously taken aback by what Alberta’s question entailed.
Alberta tried again when he repeated the question to radical leftist businessman Tom Steyer:
“Thank you, Senator Klobuchar. Mr. Steyer, would you support such a new federal program, again, to help subsidize the relocation of these families?”
Of course, Steyer bought right into Alberta’s premise.
“Look, I’m hoping that we, in fact, will do what I’m suggesting which is declare a state of emergency on day one of my presidency. I have made this. I believe I’m the only person here who will say unequivocally this is my number one priority,” Steyer exclaimed.
It’s interesting that PBS hosted the debate in conjunction with Politico, seeing as the former had a long history of dire climate predictions falling flat:
In 1990, the panic over global warming was in full swing, and from October 7 to 11, PBS aired ten hours of a series gaudily titled Race to Save the Planet. The show’s host was Meryl Streep, who proclaimed: “By the year 2000, that’s less than 10 years away, the Earth’s climate will be warmer than it’s been in over 100,000 years. If we don’t do something, there will be enormous calamities in a very short time.”
Earth Day founder Denis Hayes suggested that without an environmental revolution, man could cause “planetary death.”
Biologist Larry Harris stood in Florida predicting “the sea will come up about one foot within the next 25 to 40 years. That means that the edge of the sea, that we’re standing on today, will occur 10 miles north of here by about the year 2010.”
It says a lot about the moderation of the latest Democratic debate that such a bonkers question was asked so earnestly.
Read rest at NewsBusters
Dec 17, 2019 Greta, eugenics & fossil fuels: Another UN climate summit fails to save the earth
Sheila Gunn Reid of Rebel News reports: It’s been a wild time in Madrid, Spain at the annual UN Climate Change Conference.
https://youtu.be/AGG51HWod_w
People have been predicting doom for centuries. In the early 1900s a French Professor was predicting the next ice age due to the earth not producing enough carbonic acid gas. (carbon dioxide) Here is a report from an Australian Newspaper.
Richmond River Express and Casino Kyogle Advertiser (NSW: 1904 – 1929), Wednesday 8 August 1923, page 2
End of the World.
Professor Hordmann, of the University of Paris, a distinguished astronomer and meteorologist, declares that the world 200 years hence, will be caught in the frozen grip of another ice age, due to the earth not producing enough carbonic acid gas. He says that giant glaciers will form at the poles, and spread towards the equator and, in its inevitable progression twist the earth into an ice capped waste. The professor believes that already there have been two glacial periods, between which was a period with a temperature such as we now enjoy.
Obviously no relocation of cities will be necessary due to climate change. This just shows the extremism of the debate host. However, massive relocation of families may be necessary due to the climate change movement. Consider proposals to stop the use of coal and ban fracking. These actions would dry up the economic support for many communities. Also consider the impact of going to all electric cars. The higher cost of the vehicles and especially the high cost of them as used cars due to their battery issues would dramatically decrease the demand for cars. Places like the Detroit area already hard hit would see much of their remaining economic base disappear. As with other issues, it is not climate change, but the climate change movement that will cause the damage.
Only in areas of reoccurring flooding has the government relocated towns. What usually happens is an area becomes a ghost town, at least partially, as impacted families leave.
Its all a scam by the UN to transfer or wealth to them.check this out a UN IPCC Scientist Blows Whistle on Lies About Climate, Sea Level thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/31472-un-ipcc-scientist-blows-whistle-on-un-climate-lies
We needs to wake up and stop the UN from taking our sovereignty they are embedded in every City and Municipality under ICLEI iclei.org/en/members-search.html?region=North%2520America under the guise of Sustainable Development this is were the bike lane are from their Development plan
I’ve read more sound plots at a Scifi author discussion forums than what theses nut are spinning. I don’t believe a word of it.
I sure wish this Lunatic would relocate to a padded cell and straight jacket or maybe relocate to Mars or some planet fa far away like the ice planet of Hoth learn to live with the Whampas