What if they named hurricanes after climate change denying members of Congress?

A brilliant (and funny) video about naming hurricane after climate change deniers in Congress, like Michele Bachmann, Marco Rubio, and Jim Inhofe.

“Michele Bachmann is incredibly dangerous. If you value your life, please seek shelter from Michele Bachmann.”






(I’m told that in order to actually see my Facebook posts in your feed, you need to “follow” me – so say the experts.)

(h/t Upworthy)

CyberDisobedience on Substack | @aravosis | Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

35 Responses to “What if they named hurricanes after climate change denying members of Congress?”

  1. Dredd Blog says:

    Great idea.

    Since those congress folk are hoaxes, perhaps tornadoes and typhoons could also be named after them.

  2. mgardener says:

    Naaa, not smart enough.

  3. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    My parents use to tell me that snow was the angels having a pillow fight. Of course, they also told me that thunder was the angels bowling. They had an alternate explanation which was God dropping a bag of potatoes. It’s a wonder I’m not screwed up more than I am.

  4. The_Fixer says:

    Certainly not a climate scientist. If he did, he’d know that snowier winters are a product of a warmer atmosphere.

  5. silas1898 says:

    Some other wingnut said the wind turbines are going to use up all the wind, then we’ll be in REAL trouble.

  6. emjayay says:

    You aren’t a scientist of any kind, are you?

  7. emjayay says:

    The political right tends toward ignorance of ALL science. Particularly the fundamentalist Christians (who are of course mostly politically right and make up a big part of the American political right) whose concepts of natural science of all kinds ignores pretty much everything that happened since about 1800. Until they get cancer or something and then suddenly take advantage of all of the past two centuries of scientific advancement.

  8. karmanot says:


  9. ArthurH says:

    I’m often surprised at the ignorance the political right has for atmospheric science. In 1993 a member of the Arizona House of Representatives argued that Freon couldn’t be harming the ozone layer because it was heavier than air. She even kept a balloon filed with Freon in her office. But if Freon would just sit on the ground instead of being whisked upward by atmospheric currents, all the Freon vented by refrigerator repairmen (that was the established procedure before recharging a cooling system until 1992) and motorist recharging their own automobile air conditioners would have uniformly covered the surface of the Earth to 6 feet by 1985, according to a rebuttal in Omni magazine. Of course, we all would have smothered by then.

  10. MoonDragon says:

    Snow requires moisture in the atmosphere. Moisture in the atmosphere comes from evaporation of surface sources. Higher average surface and ocean temperatures cause more evaporation, more atmospheric moisture, more snow.

  11. pappyvet says:

    It is conservatives who typically change the names of things, as in refusing to say “Democratic” but only “Democrat” and insisting on “death tax” rather than “estate tax,” even though only big estates are taxed, not death.Frank Luntz the rightwing word spinmeister championed switching from ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’ in 2003 because it was less frightening.
    That does not change the FACT that global warming is real and continuing. Winters with snow does not change the geological facts.

  12. Naja pallida says:

    Let’s see… the guy who is the majority owner of the Examiner site is an evangelical bigot whose primary investments are in oil and gas, and he sits on the board of the American Petroleum Institute, as well as the National Petroleum Council. Yeah. He has absolutely no reason to peddle lies about climate change.

    The guy who runs whatsupwiththat is just a laughable idiot who peddles in patently pathetic conspiracy theories, often citing Alex Jones as a viable source for his regurgitated nonsense and calling anyone who disagrees with him ‘sheeple’.

    I can definitely see how these two guys are so effective at duping the willfully ignorant. I mean, why bother actually looking at the peer-reviewed scientific sources, when you can just set your hair on fire and run around from site to site barfing nonsense?

  13. Monoceros Forth says:

    “I’m rather opposed to it.”

    Actually I’m sure you like big government just fine so long as it’s all about police powers and killing turrists.

  14. Lawerence Collins says:

    SMH!?! Climate change isn’t real? ROFLMFGAO… The worlds flat and the moons made from cheese and Sarah Palin’s one of the smartest women in the world! HaHaHaHaHahahaHaHa!
    I think it’s time to get your tinfoil hat adjusted!

  15. nicho says:

    No end to the amount of stupidity. Wow. Please have a responsible adult — assuming you know one — explain the difference between climate and weather. Then, come back and try again.

  16. Thom Allen says:

    Oh, and BTW, the hurricanes that were named were not all recent. In case you didn’t know Andrew was in the 90s, Katrina was from when shrub was president, Ivan was from 2004. So YOUR attempt at sarcasm was a major fail as were the rest of your comments. Burying your head in the sand won’t save your ass.

  17. Thom Allen says:

    Links to the Examiner and WUWT are hardly scientific evidence of anything.

    From NOAA:
    Americans’ health, security, and economic well-being are tied to
    climate and weather. In the last 2 years, the United States experienced
    25 climate- and weather-related disasters that claimed 1,141 lives and each exceeded $1 billion ($175 billion total) in damages.
    The public, businesses, resource managers, and policy leaders are
    increasingly asking for information to help them understand how and why
    climate conditions are changing and how they can prepare.
    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is a primary provider of climate science, data, tools, and information
    used by stakeholders and citizens in decision-making contexts. These
    resources are supported by our strong foundation in science — including
    global climate observation and monitoring networks; world-renowned
    scientists; and state-of-the-art climate models.

    From New Scientist: There’s a lot at stake with global warming, so for those not sure what to believe, we’ve debunked the most common climate myths http://www.newscientist.com/topic/climate-change

    NASA: http://climate.nasa.gov/

    International: https://ipcc.ch/

    Chevron: http://www.chevron.com/globalissues/climatechange/?utm_campaign=US_Energy_Issues_-_Climate_Change&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=bing_yahoo&utm_term=climate_change&utm_content=emfPgUbh|pcrid|1855863438|pkw|climate%20change|pmt|e

  18. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    We all listen to those we trust. Personally, I don’t find listening to a man (Anthony Watts) who was unable to graduate from Perdue to be very comforting. If you are comfortable with that, go for it. However, don’t confuse weather and climate which Watts is doing.

    Soft, wet snow is more compact, so it packs down. Warmer temperatures produce wet, soft snow. Colder temperatures produce a higher, fluffier snow. The amount of snow isn’t as important as the amount of moisture that produced the snow. I really can’t see the connection between global warming and snow. I do see a connection between the ice covers in the Arctic and on Greenland. That’s not good news.

    BTW – I hope it is a snowy winter. I love snow. That’s one reason I remain in Minnesota.

  19. Jim Hlavac says:

    While a cute joke, there is no “climate change” nor is there “global warming” — nor were there lots of hurricanes to justify the snark — http://www.examiner.com/article/2013-atlantic-hurricane-ends-with-record-low-activity-could-it-mean-more-snow

    Meanwhile, the snowiest winters on record are in the past decade of “global warming” — http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/03/02/2001-2010-was-the-snowiest-decade-on-record/

    The concept of global warming is a malicious fraud perpetrated by people who want ever more government control over everything. I’m rather opposed to it. Have at it fellows, but it’s nonsense. Enjoy the upcoming snowy winter, gentlemen.

  20. HelenRainier says:

    What a wonderfully ironic idea!

  21. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    It appears that you may have had a little Reefer Madness just before typing this comment. Proofread!

  22. leathersmith says:

    and a lot of it winter weather spews out of Minnesota

  23. leathersmith says:

    I don’t have, or will ever have kids. Do you?

  24. mememine says:

    How do we stop you remaining climate blame believers from telling our kids it “WILL BE” a crisis when science has agreed on nothing beyond just COULD BE a crisis and not one IPCC warning says; “inevitable” or “eventual”. Science has not said it will so you can’t either, although the kids are laughing now at this Reefer Madness of climate blame.

  25. karmanot says:

    ROTFL good one Nicho

  26. woodroad34 says:

    I believe that anything that ruins America can be placed at the feet of Republicans: earthquakes from fracking, oil spills, massive human deaths, anything.

  27. woodroad34 says:

    Actually, given Trey Radel’s recent cocaine arrest, naming snowstorms after Republicans is a terrific idea.

  28. nicho says:

    “Lindsey Graham made landfall in Atlantic City late last night. Early reports indicate that at least six sailors were blown under the boardwalk.”

  29. fletcher says:

    That’s not all the right-wing denies. The Tea Party thinks we have too many regulations. But when Homestead, Fla., got hit by Hurricane Andrew, an entire neighborhood of homes suffered almost total damage with eight exceptions. Those eight home were built by the Habitat For Humanity volunteers who before building checked Florida regulations and had their homes properly braced for a strong storm. The others lacked the full degree of roof bracing required so the builder could squeeze a few extra dollars profit and thus were rendered unlivable. Naming hurricanes after Tea Party leaders would remind homeowners why those regulations are necessary.

  30. Indigo says:

    We can do that, it’s a matter of remembering to do it when a storm approaches. Our hurricane season ends today (Nov. 30) but you Northeruners have all winter to practice naming blizzards. Let’s hear it loud and clear when Blizzard Antonin Scolia approaches.

  31. pappyvet says:

    It would appear that the rightwing simply will not remove the mote[s] from their eye before attempting to remove the splinter from somebody else. They rend their garments over the ACA and try desperately to make something out of Benghazi but 2 wars , WMD , a torched economy , and denying climate change as hard as they can is not a problem.

  32. 2patricius2 says:

    Perfect! I love it.

  33. pappyvet says:

    Absolutely. And what is really odd is that a portion of the population will go right along with them.

  34. pappyvet says:

    OMG ! You could take this in sooo many different directions. And I would love to comment but I have to get some Preparation H for that Mitch McConnel

  35. cole3244 says:

    i know the gopers don’t like to take responsibility for anything they do that’s negative but this would be justice and keep them from denying that they actually denied climate change in the first place, which they will eventually deny doing.

© 2021 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS