Obama Says “Climate Change” Will Destroy (Not Create) National Parks

yosemitefalls - CopyIn order to justify taking his entire family on a vacation out west on the taxpayers’ dime, Barack Obama recently made a speech about “climate change” while at Yosemite National Park.

Obama warned about the “threat” of “climate change” to our national parks, among other places. [emphasis added to quotes]

President Obama said … that climate change is already damaging America’s national parks, with rising temperatures causing Yosemite’s meadows to dry out and raising the prospect of a glacier preserve without its glaciers someday.

“Make no mistake. Climate change is no longer just a threat. It’s already a reality,” Obama said from a podium, with Yosemite Falls, one of the world’s tallest at 2,425 feet, as a backdrop.

At the California park, where Obama was spending the weekend with his wife, Michelle, and daughters Malia and Sasha, the president also talked about how a rabbit-like animal known as a pika is being forced further upslope at Yosemite to escape the heat.

“Rising temperatures could mean no more glaciers at Glacier National Park. No more Joshua trees at Joshua Tree National Park,” he said, adding that a changing climate could destroy vital ecosystems in the Everglades and threaten such landmarks as Ellis Island and the Statue of Liberty.

Imagine that! Climate change is “already a reality,” proclaims the genius Obama. It is?!!! Who knew?

Am I alone in perceiving the irony of this man standing in front of a geological formation that was itself CREATED by climate change and warning that climate change is “already a reality” that will destroy our national parks?

Most of the wonders in our national parks were created by climate change.

Yosemite valley. Yosemite Falls. Created by glaciers that came and went over millions of years. Natural occurrences that had nothing whatsoever to do with human behavior.

Indeed, these glaciers carved the landscape arguably before humans even existed! Humans didn’t cause “climate change” and they certainly aren’t going to be able to stop “climate change” in its tracks.

Climate change has been a reality since the planet came into existence. The climate is always changing. It’s the natural order of things. Species come and species go. Climate change made it possible for Obama to speak without having to keep an eye out for a pack Velociraptors.

Sometimes species don’t go, they simply become something else, like birds, or they adapt, like pikas moving to higher ground.

If it weren’t for climate change, some of the first immigrants to this hemisphere would never have arrived. Naturally melting ice sheets opened up a land bridge, allowing humans to enter what’s now the United States.

Does Obama not know this?

How about that phrase glacier preserve? As if there’s something inherently wonderful about glaciers that requires us humans to “preserve” them for posterity, as if we could. To what end?

Would Chicago be better off today had somebody like Obama been around to “preserve” that 2-mile thick sheet of glacial ice that covered the city’s current location, on and off until about 20,000 years ago? If someone had somehow figured out a way to “preserve” that ice sheet, then there would be no Chicago, no Great Lakes, and no Mississippi River. For that matter, but for the climate change that happened about 17,000 years ago, there would be no Everglades, either!

Somebody really should advise Obama about botany. He’s worried about “no more Joshua trees” because of global warming? Does he not know that they thrive in the hottest, driest place in the USA? The Mojave Desert? If anything, rising temperatures will cause Joshua trees to spread to more areas, not disappear.

yosemite - Copy

Since when did progressives like Obama become so conservative?

What else would you call someone who wants          environmental stasis?


160 responses to “Obama Says “Climate Change” Will Destroy (Not Create) National Parks

    • Did you see where Barry said concerning Brexit, “IF it happens.” This was said AFTER the vote, so just as with the Trump nomination vote, the powers that be are working hard to figure out how to overturn or at least GUT what the people in the UK voted for. Obama and the powers are pushing for the UK to still allow “freedom of movement of people” across their borders, especially workers. SO, if the Brit politicians agree to that, nothing’s accomplished because the muslims will continue to invade. In addition, Obama’s TPP and TTIP will accomplish the same for the USA. They include “free movement of PEOPLE, goods, etc.” PEOPLE. Not just market goods.

  1. 2 …CLOSE 2 CALL… neck & neck??? If HILL is so great ….
    what’s REALLY going on first pussy??? WHAT A JOKE!!!!!


  2. anotheropinionblog

    The climate change fiasco is a scam that is bigger than the y2k 2000 scam. It has been designed to fleece the worlds taxpayers of just more trillions of dollars

  3. I disagree. Climate change does happen naturally, but it has been accelerated by human behaviour. Here is proof: http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_anpXfmLTIUd_impacts/science/human-contribution-to-gw-faq.html#.WCI

    • Thanks for correcting the link. I read the article. I’m reading the one from the Guardian, too. Most scientists who have an opinion agree because scientists who don’t agree either don’t express their opinions or have their opinions purged from scientific literature. Do you notice that the Guardian article mentions “right-wing” in order to discount the opinions of the scientists who don’t “get with the program?” Why is that, do you think? To shame them and shut them up? Is that why the epithet “climate deniers” was invented?

      Most meteorologists disagree with man-caused global warming. The “scientists” who completely agree with man-caused global warming aren’t necessarily either climate experts or meteorologists, by the way. There’s a lot to read and a lot to absorb and one must read all sides in order to come to a logical conclusion. The POLITICS cannot be discounted. Here’s a good and thoughtful article: https://friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/Climate%20Science%20Is%20Not%20Settled.pdf

      Did you see the article I posted above that explains that the Union of Concerned Scientists (which isn’t comprised only of scientists, according to Wikipedia) has donated nearly 100% to Democrats? “Global warming,” of course, has morphed into “global climate change” because the models predicted warming that never happened. Temperatures were stable for 16 years, even as CO2 increased 25%. The scientific models didn’t predict that and cannot explain it. I read in the Wall Street Journal that even if we adopted every proposal to stop “global climate change” we would only be able to prevent a fraction of 1 degree. I don’t remember the specific number, but it was something like .3 of a degree. Is that small change worth destroying economies? Putting so many people out of work?

      One reason these politically-minded “scientists” donate to the Democrats is because global warming (now changed to “global climate change“) is their excuse to push through global wealth redistribution via global socialism. It’s a POLITICAL, not a scientific, issue.

      Some scientists predict benefits from global warming, in terms of longer growing seasons and the ability to farm in areas previously not amenable to agriculture. The ecosystem is dynamic, not static. As CO2 rises, plants absorb more and luxuriate.

      Human beings, actually all beings, have ADAPTED to natural climate change. They must adapt or die. The Anasazi didn’t adapt. The Mississippians didn’t adapt. Cultures in South America, Mexico, and Central America disappeared when they didn’t adapt to the same warm period that was not, by the way, caused by humans. These people’s cultures were destroyed by climate change because they couldn’t adapt or because they adapted by moving elsewhere and becoming another culture or being absorbed into another culture.

      Change is constant. It’s probably the only constant.

      I saw a TV program recently about the islands that supposedly are going to disappear as sea levels rise. Oddly enough, only a few have “sunk” but others, many others, have stayed the same or actually gotten larger. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/02/tuvalu-and-many-other-south-pacific-islands-are-not-sinking-claims-they-are-due-to-global-warming-driven-sea-level-rise-are-opportunistic/ This is where more politics comes in. Economies are bad on many of those islands. People want to emigrate to the U.S. and other Western nations. Viola! Call them climate “refugees” and make the receiving countries feel to blame, and then the onus is on them to accept them. Even give them citizenship. I wrote an article about that issue, too: https://wtpotus.wordpress.com/2014/08/21/environmental-migrants-and-fundamental-transformation/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s