# The Numbers On Hotcoldwetdry Are Scarier Than We Thought Or Something

by William Teach | September 23, 2016 7:23 am

The always unhinged Bill McKibben, who uses vast amounts of fossil fuels to travel the globe and attend anti-fossil fuels demonstrations is out with a new unhinged pronouncement

Recalculating the Climate Math[1]
The numbers on global warming are even scarier than we thought.

The future of humanity depends on math. And the numbers in a new study [2]released Thursday are the most ominous yet.

Ominous!

Those numbers spell out, in simple arithmetic, how much of the fossil fuel in the world’s existing coal mines and oil wells we can burn if we want to prevent global warming from cooking the planet. In other words, if our goal is to keep the Earth’s temperature from rising more than two degrees Celsius—the upper limit identified by the nations of the world—how much more new digging and drilling can we do?

That’s right: If we’re serious about preventing catastrophic warming[3], the new study shows, we can’t dig any new coal mines, drill any new fields, build any more pipelines. Not a single one. We’re done expanding the fossil fuel frontier. Our only hope is a swift, managed decline in the production of all carbon-based energy from the fields we’ve already put in production.

Bill and his palls, who, again, use fossil fuels to travel to all the protests, want to stop all fossil fuels production. The want to Keep It In the Ground, which means stopping all new production, pipelines, etc, while forcing a reduction of production of existing fossil fuels over time by governmental regulation[4]. For instance, a managed decline of fossil fuels of 50% by 2033.

This is literally a math test, and it’s not being graded on a curve. It only has one correct answer. And if we don’t get it right, then all of us—along with our 10,000-year-old experiment in human civilization—will fail.

Meanwhile, a new paper[5] says that the “fingerprint of global warming” doesn’t actually exist in the real world.

Four other papers link climatic changes to, get this[6], the sun and natural variability. The science just keeps coming out and showing that Warmists are politically driven (and hypocritical) buffoons.