The Politics of Climate Change: Green New Deal And Other Madness

[flashgordonv]

Kind of reminds me of the lawyer questioning the defendant. "So why did you club your husband to death in his sleep?" "Because he wouldn't take the arsenic."

But can you imagine a scenario where these soldiers would put their life on the line, to attack their own people, especially for some sort of murky ideology like this? I can't see it. I would give it near zero chance of happening. JMHO.

Unfortunately I can. IMO one of the reasons for the relentless "climate change is killing us, we only have XXX years to go" message is to get people so upset and frightened that they will gladly welcome this sort of event. You just have to post something on FB suggesting the the whole "CO2 is evil" thing should be questioned and see how quickly and how viciously people attack you. I have no doubt some of these people would be happy to resort to violence against sceptics. Comments on these posts frequently suggest that "deniers" are mentally deficient, hate science and should be punished or locked up. There are a huge number of authoritarian followers out there and they will do what their authority figures tell them, no questions asked.

[Hello H2O]

Yeah, you may be right. I quit FB years ago, and don't do Twitter, so I don't see that. The thing with media, and propaganda on any medium now, is there is a concerted effort to skew things. Skew things to fit a certain agenda. Personally I feel that they have been successful ingiving the impressionthat the majority of people are going along with this. My gut feeling is though, that it really is a minority. But that is just a gut feeling. I find it is easy to talk big, with a keyboard, but typing something on a keyboard is a lot different than picking up a gun and going after neighbors for an ideology. IMO.

[flashgordonv]

Yeah, you may be right. I quit FB years ago, and don't do Twitter, so I don't see that. The thing with media, and propaganda on any medium now, is there is a concerted effort to skew things. Skew things to fit a certain agenda. Personally I feel that they have been successful in giving the impression that the majority of people are going along with this. My gut feeling is, is that it really is a minority. But that is just a gut feeling. I find it is easy to talk big, with a keyboard, but typing something on a keyboard is a lot different than picking up a gun and going after neighbors for an ideology. IMO.

Maybe, but you really shouldn't discount the anger and passion of all those authoritarian followers

[thorbiorn]

My gut feeling is though, that it really is a minority. But that is just a gut feeling.

That may well be, though according to the history of political influencing, of coups and revolutions what percentage of the populations do you suppose really wanted a change to the extend that they actively worked for it?

[Joe]

There are a huge number of authoritarian followers out there and they will do what their authority figures tell them, no questions asked.

Like this guy, who doesn't exactly say it outright, but uses words like "backed against the wall" and "wrath of millions" "suffered from your greed" "first in line to put you there". He's using the kind of language reserved for war criminals etc. and applying it to ordinary people that don't agree with him.

[Joe]

I also thought what if the climate alarmist turn out to be justified in their alarmism, but not for the reasons they expect

I think that's the problem. There IS a serious problem with our climate that is threatening the lives and livelihoods of potentially everyone. The sticking point, and it's THE point that makes ALL the difference, is WHAT is causing it and WHY.

Consider the massive difference in perspective and attitude between believing it is caused by humans and that it is a 'natural cycle'. That is the difference between a belief that we humans are 'evil' and are destroying the planet and we must radically change the way we live if we are to survive, and, we humans are not 'evil', we are not destroying the planet, that there is no point in radically changing the way we live because the changes that are happening are part of a necessary natural process that involves large scale terrestrial and cosmic functions about which we know almost nothing. In essence, the truth: we are not so special.

如果people accepted the latter, imagine the potential for thoughtful discussion, contemplation and a sense of unity of predicament it would provide. That is, apparently, what 'events' are conspiring to prevent from happening, or so it seems.

[Carl]

I think that's the problem. There IS a serious problem with our climate that is threatening the lives and livelihoods of potentially everyone. The sticking point, and it's THE point that makes ALL the difference, is WHAT is causing it and WHY.

Consider the massive difference in perspective and attitude between believing it is caused by humans and that it is a 'natural cycle'. That is the difference between a belief that we humans are 'evil' and are destroying the planet and we must radically change the way we live if we are to survive, and, we humans are not 'evil', we are not destroying the planet, that there is no point in radically changing the way we live because the changes that are happening are part of a necessary natural process that involves large scale terrestrial and cosmic functions about which we know almost nothing. In essence, the truth: we are not so special.

如果people accepted the latter, imagine the potential for thoughtful discussion, contemplation and a sense of unity of predicament it would provide. That is, apparently, what 'events' are conspiring to prevent from happening, or so it seems.

Quite sad when you put it like that. Finally along comes a force and a situation that could unite all of humanity, but that opportunity is squandered in favor of disinformation, hysteria and power jockeying over who gets to lead the green new world (which will never arrive because these green measures won't save us). Its fitting and very human really.

[Aeneas]

下面的文章,即使不是认真的,home the message of how hypocritical the 'woke' climate people are and how impossible their ideology is.

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

How To Discuss "Climate Change" With A 'Woke' Teenager

byTyler Durden
Tue, 12/03/2019 - 20:25



Via ArmstrongEconomics.com,
After our daughter of fifteen years of age was moved to tears by the speech of Greta Thunberg at the UN the other day,she became angry with our generation “who had been doing nothing for thirty years.”

So, we decided to help her prevent what the girl on TV announced of “massive eradication and the disappearance of entire ecosystems.”


We are now committed to give our daughter a future again, bydoing our part to help cool the planet four degrees.
From now on she will go to school on a bicycle,because driving her by car costs fuel, and fuel puts emissions into the atmosphere. Of course it will be winter soon and then she will want to go by bus, but cycling through the freezing builds resilience.

Of course, she is now asking for an electric bicycle, but we have shown her the devastation caused to the areas of the planet as a result of mining for the extraction of Lithium and other minerals used to make batteries for electric bicycles, so she will be pedaling, or walking.
Which will not harm her, or the planet. We used to cycle and walk to school too.

Since the girl on TV demanded “we need to get rid of our dependency on fossil fuels” and our daughter agreed with her,we have disconnected the heat vent in her room. The temperature is now dropping to twelve degrees in the evening, and will drop below freezing in the winter, we have promised to buy her an extra sweater, hat, tights, gloves and a blanket.

For the same reason we have decided thatfrom now on she only takes a cold shower.She will wash her clothes by hand, with a wooden washboard, because the washing machine is simply a power consumer and since the dryer uses natural gas, she will hang her clothes on the clothes line to dry, just like my parents and grandparents used to do.

Speaking of clothes, the ones that she currently has are all synthetic, so made from petroleum. Therefore on Monday, we will bring all her designer clothing to the secondhand shop.

We have found an eco store where the only clothing they sell is made from undyed and unbleached linen and jute.Also can’t have clothes made on wool, because the emissions from farting sheep are supposedly causing bad weather.
Itshouldn’t matter that it looks good on her, or that she is going to be laughed at,dressing in colorless, bland clothes and without a wireless bra, but that is the price she has to pay for the benefit of The Climate.

Cotton is out of the question,as it comes from distant lands and pesticides are used for it. Very bad for the environment.
We just saw on her Instagram that she’s pretty angry with us. This was not our intention.

From now on,at 7 p.m. we will turn off the WiFi and we will only switch it on again the next day after dinner for two hours.In this way we will save on electricity, so she is not bothered by electro-stress and will be totally isolated from the outside world. This way, she can concentrate solely on her homework. At eleven o’clock in the evening we will pull the breaker to shut the power off to her room, so she knows that dark is really dark. That will save a lot of CO2.

She will no longer be participating in winter sports to ski lodges and resorts, nor will she be going on anymore vacations with us,because our vacation destinations are practically inaccessible by bicycle.

Since our daughter fully agrees with the girl on TV that the CO2 emissions and footprints of her great-grandparents are to blame for ‘killing our planet’, what all this simply means, is thatshe also has to live like her great-grandparents and they never had a holiday, a car or even a bicycle.

We haven’t talked about the carbon footprint of food yet.
Zero CO2 footprint means no meat, no fish and no poultry, but also no meat substitutes that are based on soy(after all, that grows in farmers fields, that use machinery to harvest the beans, trucks to transport to the processing plants, where more energy is used, then trucked to the packaging/canning plants, and trucked once again to the stores) and also no imported food, because that has a negative ecological effect. And absolutely no chocolate from Africa, no coffee from South America and no tea from Asia.

Only homegrown potatoes, vegetables and fruit that have been grown in local cold soil,because greenhouses run on boilers, piped in CO2 and artificial light. Apparently, these things are also bad for The Climate. We will teach her how to grow her own food.

Bread is still possible, but butter, milk, cheese and yogurt, cottage cheese and cream come from cows and they emit CO2.No more margarine and no oils will be used for the frying pan, because that fat is palm oil from plantations in Borneo where rain forests first grew.
No ice creamin the summer.No soft drinks and no energy drinks, as the bubbles are CO2.

We will also ban all plastic,because it comes from chemical factories. Everything made of steel and aluminum must also be removed. Have you ever seen the amount of energy a blast furnace consumes or an aluminum smelter? All bad for the climate!

We will replace her memory foam pillow top mattress, with a jute bag filled with straw, with a horse hair pillow.
And finally, she will no longer be using makeup, soap, shampoo, cream, lotion, conditioner, toothpaste and medication.Facewashers will all be linen, that she can wash by hand, with her wooden washboard, just like her female ancestors did before climate change made her angry at us for destroying her future.

In this way we will help her to do her part to prevent mass extinction, water levels rising and the disappearance of entire ecosystems.
如果she truly believes she wants to walk the talk of the girl on TV, she will gladly accept and happily embrace her new way of life.

[Hello H2O]

Consider the massive difference in perspective and attitude between believing it is caused by humans and that it is a 'natural cycle'.

Finally along comes a force and a situation that could unite all of humanity, but that opportunity is squandered

我认为这很好地总结了我们的计划。如果it is a natural cycle, then people and governments would unite to solve the problem. Marshall experts and technology to weather the storm, so to speak.

Human caused, well let's do the opposite, attack the food supply and decouple from traditional, and plentiful energy supplies. Things that will be absolutely essential.

So yes it is a massive difference, and will have the effect of pouring gasoline on a fire. Making things exponentially worse. Pretty sickening when you really think about it.

[thorbiorn]

从本周有以下CO2ctivists complain about the misleading nature of BP advertisement and suggest tobacco style scare advertisment instead. One could of course raise the question of what is more misleading the activist claim of CO2 emissions creating an emergency or the BP claims of becoming more "Green", though such a line of reasoning will not go down well with one of the parties.

Calls to ban fossil fuel adverts as global carbon emissions increase more slowly

Adverts from fossil-fuel companies like BP should come with climate change warnings or be banned according to the charity ClientEarth, which takes legal action to protect the environment.

eandt.theiet.org

Published Wednesday, December 4, 2019
Calls to ban fossil fuel adverts as global carbon emissions increase more slowly

Adverts from fossil-fuel companies like BP should come with climate change warnings or be banned according to the charity ClientEarth, which takes legal action to protect the environment.

The group said that BP frequently presents itself as “part of the climate solution” in its ads, which typically show wind turbines and other forms of renewable energy. But ClientEarth said that 96 per cent of the company’s annual spend is on oil and gas projects and it is one of the world’s biggest polluters.

They advocate a “tobacco-style warning” which lets consumers know that claims the company is rapidly transitioning to clean energy are largely misleading.

The environmental legal charity has triggered an official complaint under the guidelines of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), an international set of rules governing corporate conduct.
The complaint is being submitted to the Government’s UK National Contact Point, which is responsible for implementing the complaints mechanism relating to the guidelines.
ClientEarth climate lawyer Sophie Marjanac said: “BP is spending millions on an advertising campaign to give the impression that it’s racing to renewables, that its gas is cleaner, and that it is part of the climate solution.
“While BP’s advertising focuses on clean energy, in reality, more than 96 per cent of the company’s annual capital expenditure is on oil and gas.
“According to its own figures, BP is spending less than four pounds in every hundred on low-carbon investments each year. The rest is fuelling the climate crisis.”
She added:“We see real parallels with fossil fuel companies and the tobacco industry, which knew about the risks their products posed but used misleading marketing campaigns to sell them regardless.
“Make no mistake, this is a climate emergency. You only need to see the increase in extreme weather events around the world - from flooding in the UK, to wildfires in the US and Australia.”
The lawyers singled out BP’s “keep advancing” and “possibilities everywhere” campaigns as potentially misleading.[...]

From 2016:Limit internet growth to control energy consumption scientists sayThe article claims the Internet consumes 5% and perhaps now 6% of the global energy consumption. It would of course be interesting if they began to scale back on the wireless technology, but is that going to happen?

Limiting data growth and the expansion of the internet could help to lower energy consumption and carbon emissions, according to Lancaster University computer scientists.

They argue that the growth of remote digital sensors and devices that are connected to the internet, commonly known as the Internet of Things, has the potential to bring unprecedented rises in energy consumed by smart technologies.

Internet usage has increased significantly in recent years, with people increasingly watching video and streaming programmes on large smart TV’s with resolutions up to 4K. In addition to regularly checking their Facebook and Twitter accounts and even using online social media to track their runs and bike rides, internet usage has been expanding rapidly and looks set to continue doing so.

According to Ofcom, the UK telecommunications regulator, home monthly broadband data volumes in the UK rocketed from 17GB in 2011 to 82GB in 2015.

While data volumes for mobile devices are typically smaller, they are growing rapidly, more than doubling every few years according to Ericsson and Cisco.

This increase in data use has brought with it an associated rise in energy consumption, despite improvements in energy efficiencies.

Current estimates suggest the internet accounts for five per cent of global electricity use, but is growing faster at seven per cent a year, than total global energy consumption at three per cent.

Some predictions claim information technologies could account for as much as 20 per cent of total energy use by 2030.
[...]

[Aeneas]

Having made democracy a thing of name only in the EU member states, the conditions are ripe for a take-over and climate seems to be the ideal thing for a grasp of power. Some people are even seeing a totalitarian way as the only way to push things through as this article shows:

Even Faster, More Powerful Than Climate Change… Europe’s Movement To Ecological Tyranny Emerging Rapidly

notrickszone.com

Even Faster, More Powerful Than Climate Change… Europe’s Movement To Ecological Tyranny Emerging Rapidly
ByP Gosselinon 4. December 2019

Claims of an escalating climate crisis are getting ever shriller in Europe and calls for “real and radical action” are becoming increasingly urgent.
Leaders are now labelling their own citizens “ecological vandals”, and openly demanding they be brought under tight control by a China-modelled system. The building blocks for a tyranny are in place.
Lately the thinly veiled calls for watering down western democracy have been becoming increasingly clear and unmistakable.
All the cornerstones for a green tyranny are emerging in Europe: 1) a claimed climate crisis that is 2) attributable to reckless human behavior, 3) it is urgent and 4) thus justifies strict regulation of human behavior, and all accompanied by 5) actions to silence dissident views.

Consumers criminalized, being labelled “ecological vandals”
Blaming humans for the ” climate crisis” is already well underway across Europe.
Recently the在线《世界报》reported on a DPA interview of Green Party mastermind Nico Paech, who in the interview called for “a radical change in the behavior of citizens.”

Economist Paech, a proponent of a “post-growth economy which calls for a move away from consumerism and further economic growth, told the DPA that a majority society “believes it is climate competent, but lives like ecological vandals.” In other words, free citizens are to be viewed as criminals.

What is needed, said Paech, was a “radical reorientation” in order to “drastically reduce the emission of greenhouse gases quickly” and that it was necessary to “clear out our lifestyles”. What is needed is an authoritarian government to take swift and harsh control, he suggests.

German leader: China-like dictatorship “more efficient”
MeanwhileGerman Green Party leader Robert Habecklast year in an interview with Phoenix German public television told viewers that if a democracy is unable to keep pace with the pressing challenges, then “a centralized system, which is naturally faster” needs to be seriously considered.

Habeck cites China as an example on how to get things done when citizens get in the way. In China:

There is no opposition or participation by citizens. And if they make mistakes, they still cannot be elected out of office. Maybe there will be a revolt in China, but first of all the system is more efficient. Do we want that or not? The decision cannot be made economically. It can be made only based on values and, yes, I would say that’s what we want.”

EU declares climate state of emergency
And to lay the groundwork for implementing such radical authoritarian initiatives, it comes as no surprise thatthe EU just recently declared “a climate emergency429年favo议员投票后”ur and 225 against. “Europe became the first continent to make this declaration,”Euronews.comreported.
Note astate of emergency is defined asfollows:

A situation in which agovernment is empowered to perform actions or impose policies that it would normally not be permitted to undertake.A government can declare such a state during a disaster, civil unrest, or armed conflict. Such declarations alert citizens to change their normal behavior and orders government agencies to implement emergency plans.”

So, there’s really not much left to keep the EU from grabbing a lot more power, except ardent protests. But here, too, EU leaders are at work.

Free speech has its limits
Listen to German ChancellorAngela Merkel’s speechon freedom of expression,where she says ” freedom of speech has its limits” and that “we have to take away your freedom of speech, or else society won’t be free.”
Surely everyone is against hate speech. But deciding what qualifies as hate speech should not be left to governments – especially those obsessed with a climate doomsday to the point that they now label climate science skeptics as “deniers” and hinder them from expressing dissent and participating in public debate.
Moreover, Big Social Media like Twitter, Google and Facebook are also busily working behind the scenes obstructing dissenters from getting their views out over a variety of issues. And they are under increasing pressure to clamp down even harder.
So the building blocks of a green tyranny are already in place in Europe: crisis, urgency, culprit, proposed system, suppression of speech.

Opportunity knocks
Right now, the EU is just waiting patiently for that one opportune moment. We are possibly witnessing a watershed historical event in the making.

--------
So it appears as if the Greens are spearheading this descent into tyranny. One is reminded of some articles on Sott a while ago, about how the EU came into being by architects of the third Reich and thus could become the fourth Reich. Other examples in this thread show that a new witch hunt could become a reality and that climate sceptics could be singled out to be the scapegoats.

[PopHistorian]

Interesting video lecture by Patrick Moore from earlier this year. He's a co-founder of GreenPeace who was run out of the organization for, as he says, "telling the truth" and "stopping them from lying, when I could." I saw a rumor that Wikipedia actually erased his name as Greenpeace co-founder, to keep people from looking him up - to suppress his message.

He lays claim to an instrumental role in stopping gov'ts from engaging in atmospheric nuclear testing, factoring whaling, etc.

"This climate change thing is the worst thing to happen to science and The Enlightenment since Gallileo."

[Voyageur]

"This climate change thing is the worst thing to happen to science and The Enlightenment since Gallileo."

Yeah, had caught this one of Patrick's before. Good talk overall, and he does a short review of the Tar Sands in Alberta that attempts to realign the reality of it from what is, in perspective, to what is said about it in the main that picks up steam of people fuming about it from around the world. The funny thing is, they often cite (correctly in a way) arguing against this heavy crude vs Middle East light crude being better, yet never think of the regime changes, oil theft and head-choppers involved that ultimately happen to get it to market (and the rest of that ugly picture).

Have also sent this to some people I know who at one time or another held Moore in high esteem, and can only conclude that it must have poked their confirmation bias in these matters of C02, whereby their default is activated and they run back to Suzuki (David). Well, good luck with that.

[Voyageur]

It looks like the Goldman Sachs boys, as an appendage to the central bankers (or is it the other way around) have adjusted the climate screws on corporations a little tighter, refusing to fund traditional energy development. It's sort of like a Bushism of 'you are either with us or against us,' or as the governor of the Bank of England demands:"Corporations told to draw up climate rules or have them imposed" - which kind of speaks volumes with a period.

Citing climate change, Goldman Sachs rules out financing new Arctic oil projects -- Sott.net

The major U.S. investment bank acknowledged that a changing climate is linked to a raft of social and economic issues. After previously declaring there was no economic rationale for Arctic oil and gas drilling, Goldman Sachs now says it will go a...

www.sott.net

谈到州长(高盛校友himself), he will be taking over the U.N. special envoy on climate action and climate finance (while maintaining his Governorship) from special envoy for climate action, Michael Bloomberg, now that he has thrown his hat into the 2020 presidential ring. There is kind of a graduating line here starting with the historical climate U.Nring master, Maurice Strong (an old Rockefeller boy and ex CEO of PetroCanada).

One of many to get their marching orders is one of the Alberta Tar Sands giants, Suncor, whorecently announcedthe construction of a $300 million wind farm (50,000 acres) near Medicine Hat, Alberta. It's called 'The Forty Mile Wind Power project' (aka 'the Forty Mile Granlea wind farm') which follows the Whitla Wind Farm built prior. This is part of Suncor's grand $2 billion "CO2 reduction programe" - a part of its overallgreenwashingreduction strategy, while making people like the U.N.'s Special Envoy/head of the Bank of England, very happy. It will produce some construction jobs, and I don't know, probably add a real wake up number on peoples energy bills once it all comes on stream. Greta will be happy, too.

Speaking of Whitla, Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Energy Canada,announced南在2亿美元的资本支出me field's from Suncor's site claiming it will light up "79,000 homes" with energy. Warren, also (the guy is damn smart market wise ) owns AltaLink. Who are they? AltaLink is a "regulated transmission company which supplies electricityto more than 85 per cent of the Alberta population."

All this is being developed (in Canada) by Renewable Energy Systems, a UK firm (seeWikiandSir Robert McAlpine). It is noted, related to Buffett's project:

BHE Canada and RES are alsolookingforpower purchase partnersfor the proposed Forty Mile Wind Farm in southeastern Alberta _ they say with generation capacity of 398.5 MW, it could potentially be the largest wind power project in Canada.

Wonder what the 'real' numbers look like.

Lastly, read today a bit of future socioeconomic priming of the public 'Should Canadians carry a carbon card, loaded with a year's worth of points?'

Should Canadians carry a carbon card, loaded with a year's worth of points?

A Vancouver-based author suggests Canadians carry a card loaded with carbon points they’d use when buying everything from steaks to airline tickets. She says it’s a way to help fight climate change, but some experts aren’t convinced.

www.ctvnews.ca

Imagine if, tucked between yourdebit and credit cards, your wallet had a another piece of plastic:a points card designed to save the planetas you use it.

Loaded with a year’s worth of points, your carbon cardwould needto be presented to buy a pound of steak from the butcher, a flight to Mexico, a tank of gas – anything that adds emissions to the atmosphere and contributes to climate change.

Your annual points limit would be determined through a variety of factors, such as access to public transit or geography. A lobster fisherman in Nova Scotia who needs gas to power his boat would have more points than, say, a barista in downtown Toronto with access to public transit.

如果you run out of points before the year ends, you could buy more from someone加分备用——金融奖励for going green....

A triad: A debit card, a VISA card, and a climate card. A true technocracy'sdream?

[luc]

Speaking of Whitla, Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Energy Canada,announced南在2亿美元的资本支出me field's from Suncor's site claiming it will light up "79,000 homes" with energy.

The trick these gangsters play is to announce the capacity and then "calculating" the homes that could be served based on that. They certainly think we are idiots, because the capacity of a wind farm is just a theoretical technical specification. It's what a wind farm WOULD produce IF there was 100% wind ALWAYS. So:

Wonder what the 'real' numbers look like.

To calculate how many homes could be served by a wind farm, you need to take the lowest output that a wind farm will produce. Which is essentially zero, nada, zilch. If the output drops to essentially zero even for one second, then you can't power NOTHING with a wind farm. You need back-up power - which you could of course just use straight-away. The only argument that's left is that running wind is more CO2-friendly than running the "back-up plants". But even that collapses if you take into account the CO2 cost of producing and building all that infrastructure in the first place, not to mention that gas and nuclear are pretty "CO2-friendly" anyway.

Here is a site where you can visualize data about the renewable energy mix in Germany - I set the parameters so it shows the entire year 2018:

Agorameter

www.agora-energiewende.de

Quite revealing, isn't it? Go ahead and play with the parameters if you like; you can also export high-res graphics. Notice however that the resolution is one day for this view, so you won't see any drop to close to zero in wind/solar that happened only briefly.