While we banned plastic straws, Russia drilled and doubled nuclear energy production.
How has Vladimir Putin—a man ruling a country with an economy smaller than that of Texas, with an average life expectancy 10 years lower than that of France—managed to launch an unprovoked full-scale assault on Ukraine?
There is a deep psychological, political and almost civilizational answer to that question: He wants Ukraine to be part of Russia more than the West wants it to be free. He is willing to risk tremendous loss of life and treasure to get it. There are serious limits to how much the U.S. and Europe are willing to do militarily. And Putin knows it.
Missing from that explanation, though, is a story about material reality and basic economics—two things that Putin seems to understand far better than his counterparts in the free world and especially in Europe.
Putin knows that Europe produces 3.6 million barrels of oil a day but uses 15 million barrels of oil a day. Putin knows that Europe produces 230 billion cubic meters of natural gas a year but uses 560 billion cubic meters. He knows that Europe uses 950 million tons of coal a year but produces half that.
The former KGB agent knows Russia produces 11 million barrels of oil per day but only uses 3.4 million. He knows Russia now produces over 700 billion cubic meters of gas a year but only uses around 400 billion. Russia mines 800 million tons of coal each year but uses 300.
That’s how Russia ends up supplying about 20 percent of Europe’s oil, 40 percent of its gas, and 20 percent of its coal.
The math is simple. A child could do it.
The reason Europe didn’t have a muscular deterrent threat to prevent Russian aggression—and in fact prevented the U.S. from getting allies to do more—is that it needs Putin’s oil and gas.
The question is why.
How is it possible that European countries, Germany especially, allowed themselves to become so dependent on an authoritarian country over the 30 years since the end of the Cold War?
Here’s how: These countries are in the grips of a delusional ideology that makes them incapable of understanding the hard realities of energy production. Green ideology insists we don’t need nuclear and that we don’t need fracking. It insists that it’s just a matter of will and money to switch to all-renewables—and fast. It insists that we need“degrowth” of the economy, and that we face looming human “extinction.” (I would know. I myself was once a true believer.)
John Kerry, the United States’ climate envoy, perfectly captured the myopia of this view when he said, in the days before the war, that the Russian invasion of Ukraine “could have a profound negative impact on the climate, obviously. You have a war, and obviously you’re going to have massive emissions consequences to the war. But equally importantly, you’re going to lose people’s focus.”
But it was the West’s focus on healing the planet with “soft energy” renewables, and moving away from natural gas and nuclear, that allowed Putin to gain a stranglehold over Europe’s energy supply.
As the West fell into a hypnotic trance about healing its relationship with nature, averting climate apocalypse and worshiping a teenager named Greta, Vladimir Putin made his moves.
While Putin expanded Russia’s oil production, expanded natural gas production, and then doubled nuclear energy production to allow more exports of its precious gas, Europe, led by Germany, shut down its nuclear power plants, closed gas fields, and refused to develop more through advanced methods like fracking.
The numbers tell the story best. In 2016, 30 percent of the natural gas consumed by the European Union came from Russia. In 2018, that figure jumped to 40 percent. By 2020, it was nearly 44 percent, and by early 2021, it was nearly 47 percent.
For all his fawning over Putin, Donald Trump, back in 2018, defied diplomatic protocol to call out Germany publicly for its dependence on Moscow. “Germany, as far as I’m concerned, is captive to Russia because it’s getting so much of its energy from Russia,” Trump said. This prompted Germany’s then-chancellor, Angela Merkel, who had been widely praised in polite circles for being the last serious leader in the West, to say that her country “can make our own policies and make our own decisions.”
The result has been the worst global energy crisis since 1973, driving prices for electricity and gasoline higher around the world. It is a crisis, fundamentally, of inadequate supply. But the scarcity is entirely manufactured.
Europeans—led by figures like Greta Thunberg and European Green Party leaders, and supported by Americans like John Kerry—believed that a healthy relationship with the Earth requires making energy scarce. By turning to renewables, they would show the world how to live without harming the planet. But this was a pipe dream. You can’t power a whole grid with solar and wind, because the sun and the wind are inconstant, and currently existing batteries aren’t even cheap enough to store large quantities of electricity overnight, much less across whole seasons.
In service to green ideology, they made the perfect the enemy of the good—and of Ukraine.
Take Germany.
Green campaigns have succeeded in destroying German energy independence—they call it Energiewende, or “energy turnaround”—by successfully selling policymakers on a peculiar version of environmentalism. It calls climate change a near-term apocalyptic threat to human survival while turning up its nose at the technologies that can help address climate change most and soonest: nuclear and natural gas.
At the turn of the millennium, Germany’s electricity was around 30 percent nuclear-powered. But Germany has been sacking its reliable, inexpensive nuclear plants. (Thunberg called nuclear power “extremely dangerous, expensive, and time-consuming” despite the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change deeming it necessary and every major scientific review deeming nuclear the safest way to make reliable power.)
By 2020, Germany had reduced its nuclear share from 30 percent to 11 percent. Then, on the last day of 2021, Germany shut down half of its remaining six nuclear reactors. The other three are slated for shutdown at the end of this year. (Compare this to nextdoor France, which fulfills 70 percent of its electricity needs with carbon-free nuclear plants.)
Germany has also spent lavishly on weather-dependent renewables—to the tune of $36 billion a year—mainly solar panels and industrial wind turbines. But those have their problems. Solar panels have to go somewhere, and a solar plant in Europe needs 400 to 800 times more land than natural gas or nuclear plants to make the same amount of power. Farmland has to be cut apart to host solar. And solar energy is getting cheaper these days mainly because Europe’s supply of solar panels is produced by slave labor in concentration camps as part of China’s genocide against Uighur Muslims.
The upshot here is that you can’t spend enough on climate initiatives to fix things if you ignore nuclear and gas. Between 2015 and 2025, Germany’s efforts to green its energy production will have cost $580 billion. Yet despite this enormous investment, German electricity still costs 50 percent more than nuclear-friendly France’s, and generating it produces eight times more carbon emissions per unit. Plus, Germany is getting over a third of its energy from Russia.
Germany has trapped itself. It could burn more coal and undermine its commitment to reducing carbon emissions. Or it could use more natural gas, which generates half the carbon emissions of coal, but at the cost of dependence on imported Russian gas. Berlin was faced with a choice between unleashing the wrath of Putin on neighboring countries or inviting the wrath of Greta Thunberg. They chose Putin.
Because of these policy choices, Vladimir Putin could turn off the gas flows to Germany, and quickly threaten Germans’ ability to cook or stay warm. He or his successor will hold this power for every foreseeable winter barring big changes. It’s as if you knew that hackers had stolen your banking details, but you won’t change your password.
This is why Germany successfully begged the incoming Biden administration not to oppose a contentious new gas pipeline from Russia called Nord Stream 2. This cut against the priorities of green-minded governance: On day one of Biden’s presidency, one of the new administration’’s first acts was to shut down the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada to the U.S. in service to climate ideology. But Russia’s pipeline was too important to get the same treatment given how dependent Germany is on Russian imports. (Once Russia invaded, Germany was finally dragged into nixing Nord Stream 2, for now.)
Naturally, when American sanctions on Russia’s biggest banks were finally announced in concert with European allies last week, they specifically exempted energy productsso Russia and Europe can keep doing that dirty business. A few voices called for what would really hit Russia where it hurts: cutting off energy imports. But what actually happened was that European energy utilities jumped to buy more contracts for the Russian oil and gas that flows through Ukraine. That’s because they have no other good options right now, after green activism’s attacks on nuclear and importing fracked gas from America. There’s no current plan for powering Europe that doesn’t involve buying from Putin.
•
We should take Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a wake-up call. Standing up for Western civilization this time requires cheap, abundant, and reliable energy supplies produced at home or in allied nations. National security, economic growth, and sustainability requires greater reliance on nuclear and natural gas, and less on solar panels and wind turbines, which make electricity too expensive.
The first and most obvious thing that should be done is for President Biden to call on German Chancellor Scholz to restart the three nuclear reactors that Germany closed in December. A key step in the right direction came on Sunday when Vice-Chancellor Robert Habeck, the economy and climate minister, announced that Germany would at least consider stopping its phaseout of nuclear. If Germany turns these three on and cancels plans to turn off the three others, those six should produce enough electricity to replace 11 billion cubic meters of natural gas per year—an eighth of Germany’s current needs.
Second, we need concerted action led by Biden, Congress, and their Canadian counterparts to significantly expand oil and natural gas output from North America to ensure the energy security of our allies in Europe and Asia. North America is more energy-rich than anyone dreamed. Yes, it will be more expensive than Russian gas sent by pipeline. But it would mean Europe could address Putin’s war on Ukraine, rather than financing it.
Exporting gas by ship requires special terminals at ports to liquify (by cooling) natural gas; environmentalists oppose these terminals because of their ideological objection to any combustible fuel. So it’s a good sign that Chancellor Sholz announced plans on Sunday to build two of these terminals to receive North American gas, along with announcing major new military spending to counter Russia.
Third, the U.S. must stop shutting down nuclear plants and start building them. Every country should invest in next-generation nuclear fuel technology while recognizing that the current generation of light-water reactors are our best tool for creating energy at home, with no emissions, right now. What you’ve heard about waste is mostly pseudoscience. Storing used fuel rods is a trivial problem, already solved around the world by keeping them in steel and concrete cans. The more nuclear power we generate, the less oil and gas we have to burn. And the less the West will have to buy from Russia.
Putin’s relentless focus on energy reality has left him in a stronger position than he should ever have been allowed to find himself. It’s not too late for the rest of the West to save the world from tyrannical regimes that have been empowered by our own energy superstitions.
Michael Shellenberger
Best-selling author of “San Fransicko” (HarperCollins, 2021) “Apocalypse Never” (HarperCollins 2020) :: Time Magazine “Hero of Environment” :: Green Book Award winner :: Founder and President of Environmental Progress
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins,all of them imaginary.” – H.L. Mencken
“Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.” – C. S. Lewis
MOST citizens, the world over, would have thought that “the vaccine(s)” would have put an end to draconian, deadly and pointless lockdowns. Don’t bet on it. Lockdown’s, under the guise of “climate change”, are now being recommended, by ‘the experts’, to stay for good.
Surprise, surprise.
The Coronavirus has made our leadership class more powerful than they have ever been. Why would they relinquish that?
Never letting a crisis go to waste, the United Nation’s meteorological affiliate, WMO, belled-the-cat back in November, 2020 – lockdowns, your ‘new normal’.
“But the lockdown provides a platform to grow back better and take #ClimateAction” — WMO
According to WMO, if CO₂ concentrations didn’t budge, at all, during the most comprehensive global science experiment ever undertaken in mankind’s history (global industrial lockdown), then how do we know that they are even ‘ours’ to “bring down”?
The Guardian article notes “Lockdowns around the world led to an unprecedented fall in emissions of about 7% in 2020, or about 2.6bn tonnes of CO2“.
NOAA current data reveals that global CO₂ levels are higher now, not lower, than at the same period in 2020.
ClimateChange™️ has morphed into a $1.5 TRILLION per year, or $4 BILLION per day business, according to a 2015 figure by Climate Change Business Journal. And, besides the lucrative and seemingly unlimited taxpayer funds available to feed-the-green-beast, far too many egos, jobs and reputations are now at stake for ClimateChange™️ (and now suggested endless lockdowns) to go anywhere soon.
It’s not science. It’s politics and power at play, and you’re paying the piper, and the ultimate price.
“BLIND trust in authority is the greatest enemy of the truth.” – Albert Einstein
***
AS many of you may have read from twitter, I’ve decided to back-off, temporarily, from the constancy of battle against the Left’s ideological crusade against science and reason, in favour of completing my degree in psychology/counselling. A modality that will, most probably, be in ‘yuge’ demand in the coming years, following the Left’s most recent assault on your freedoms and existence, COVID-19. A mutation of the common coronavirus that just happens to fall in a US election year. A natural mutation that has a survival rate of 99.97% (globally). In my country, Australia, the average age-of-death-by-covid is 83. The average age of mortality in Australia is 82, and yet, in Victoria, we are suffering the most draconian lockdown measures in-the-world. The mind boggles…unless you’re a socialist, of course.
SO, in an effort to soothe our collective wounded COVID souls, at the same time, help soothe the ails of the constant barrage of impetuous climate alarmism, set aside twelve minutes of your precious time to view some of the incredible work done by (GBR-climate-science-hero) Jennifer Marohasy, as she documents, with Emmy Award winning cameraman Clint Hempsall, the pristine, Great Barrier Reef, for all to marvel.
Enjoy and best,
Jamie
***
Via Email (1/10/20)
(Climatism bolds)
via Dr Jennifer Marohasy Researcher, Writer & Filmmaker
Keeping You in the Loop
Many of the media headlines that give the impression the Great Barrier Reef is a ruin are based on aerial surveys by one man. The same Terry Hughes who incorrectly claimed the inshore reefs off-Bowen are now mud-flat. Paid not by an oil company, but rather the long-suffering Australian taxpayer through generous research grants, he gets to sit in a light aircraft and fly at about 300 metres altitude every few years and determine (by looking out the window) that the corals are badly bleached.
Hughes is a myth maker. The Great Barrier Reef is still beautiful. There are still colourful corals and curious fish.
Earlier this year, I went to the Ribbon reefs with Emmy Award winning cameraman Clint Hempsall in search of death and bleaching. Instead we found so much life as I explain in my second short film, just yesterday uploaded to a new page at the Institute of Public Affairs’ website:
The short film will only take 12 minutes of your time. The music was all composed by local Noosa guitarist Mungo Coats.
At the Ribbons, in January, the waters were so warm, the corals so colourful and the fish not at all frightened of me. In fact, as you will see in the film – a giant cod fish looked me in the eye, and more than once! He came back to me, again and again. We swam together. It was magical.
For me, the Ribbons at the Great Barrier Reef, are the most special and awe-inspiring place on this planet. I was so privileged to dive them with Clint Hempsall and so much thanks to Mungo Coats for putting it all to music.
Thanks for caring. Sincerely, Dr Jennifer Marohasy Researcher, Writer & Filmmaker
*
What is the true state of the Great Barrier Reef? If you asked most Australians, they’d say the Great Barrier Reef is at risk of imminent collapse from climate change. It was for questioning this claim, and the quality of science behind it, that eventually led to Dr Peter Ridd being sacked from James Cook University.
In January 2020, Emmy Award winning cameraman Clint Hempsall, and IPA Senior Fellow Jennifer Marohasy decided to find out. They spent a week exploring the Ribbon Reefs 250kms to the north east of Cairns in search of coral bleaching – the process of corals turning white as a result of warmer water temperature, which climate scientists say is being caused by climate change. Some argue 60% of the coral at the Ribbon Reefs was irretrievably bleached in 2016.
If there was extensive bleaching back then, Jennifer and Clint couldn’t find much evidence of it in January this year. What they did find was healthy corals, curious clown fish, a giant potato cod, reef sharks, and an underwater cave. Indeed, much of the coral Clint filmed was growing vertically and would thus be invisible to the aerial surveys underpinning the bleaching scare.
The Ribbon Reefs have coral gardens hanging over underwater cliff-faces that drop 2,000 metres to the sea floor – all washed over twice a day by the warm waters of the South Pacific. There are ten such coral reefs in far north Queensland where they grow over the top of the north eastern edge of Australia’s continental shelf.
BBC busy spreading climate change fear and panic to the vulnerable. Paul Homewood corrects the MIAMI sea-level rise record straight with actual “science” and data …
Just down the coast from Donald Trump’s weekend retreat, the residents and businesses of south Florida are experiencing regular episodes of water in the streets. In the battle against rising seas, the region – which has more to lose than almost anywhere else in the world – is becoming ground zero.
The first time my father’s basement flooded, it was shortly after he moved in. The building was an ocean-front high-rise in a small city north of Miami called Sunny Isles Beach. The marble lobby had a waterfall that never stopped running; crisp-shirted valets parked your car for you. For the residents who lived in the more lavish flats, these cars were often BMWs and Mercedes. But no matter their value, the cars all wound up in the same place: the basement.
When I called, I’d ask my dad how the building was doing…
“PEOPLE have been imagining that the climate is changing, exaggerating every weather event, getting widespread press coverage, and blaming it on man – for as long as there have been newspapers.”
– Tony Heller Climate Change Insanity Never Changes
DEEP within human nature there are certain types of people who yearn for catastrophe. They yearn to have significance in their lives believing that theirs is the time when the chickens are coming home to roost and everything is going to go tits up.
THE biggest selling environmental books in history, predict the mass destruction of the planet. Rachel Carson’s 1962 international bestseller “Silent Spring” predicted mass cancer from plant pesticides and DDT. Population freak, Paul Ehrlich’s 1968 book “The Population Bomb”, argued on Malthusian lines that population explosion would mean mass starvation around the world. People buy this stuff. They lap it up and books like this sell in droves, in a way that more reasonable books that say “hang on, lets look at the facts”, don’t.
MORE than half a century on, we still ‘yearn for catastrophe’. The perpetrator, still, ‘evil’ mankind.
“The Earth has cancer
and the cancer is Man.”
– Club of Rome (Eco consultants to the U.N.)
THIS time around; “Climate Catastrophe, “Climate Armageddon”, “Climate Crisis”, “Climate Emergency” and every other hyperbolic descriptor of climate and weather are all blamed on mankind’s excesses, chiefly its production of trace gas carbon dioxide – the byproduct of around ninety per cent of all global energy production.
ATMOSPHERIC Physicist, former MIT Professor of Meteorology and IPCC lead author Richard S. Lindzen, examines the politics and ideology behind the CO2-centricity that fuels the ClimateChange™️ agenda.
LINDZEN’s enlightening summary goes to the very heart of why Carbon Dioxide has become the centre-piece of the ‘global’ climate debate :
“For a lot of people including the bureaucracy in Government and the environmental movement, the issue is power. It’s hard to imagine a better leverage point than carbon dioxide to assume control over a society. It’s essential to the production of energy, it’s essential to breathing. If you demonise it and gain control over it, you so-to-speak, control everything. That’s attractive to people. It’s been openly stated for over forty years that one should try to use this issue for a variety of purposes, ranging from North/South redistribution, to energy independence, to God knows what…”
WITH a clearer understanding of why colourless, odourless, trace gas and plant-food carbon dioxide is demonised as “carbon pollution” by the zero-emissions-zealots, let’s wind back the clock to gain some historical perspective into the relentless bombardment of “Hottest Evahh” and “unprecedented” hyperbole that dominates the lexicon of the lazy mainstream media, deliberately fanning the flames of ClimateChange™️ hysteria.
OVER the weekend, Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney endured two days of January summer weather, prompting the usual suspects to default into extreme rhetoric mode.
THE “heatwave” that South-Eastern Australia just endured, lasted two days. A cool change arrived in Adelaide yesterday and Melbourne last night, ending the “Darwin” like climate…where humidity in Melbourne maxed at a mere 45% on Friday. Darwin’s relative humidity for January averages 71%. Wrong, wrong and deceptive again, the mainstream media.
*
WHAT A REAL “HEATWAVE” LOOKS LIKE
IN 1908, when CO₂ was at “safe” levels, Adelaide experienced fourteen days of temperatures over 38°C (101.9°F minimum) in the month of January. The average temperature over these fourteen days was 142°C (107.3°F).
WHAT is even more astonishing is that the extreme month of heat was split into two mega-heatwaves lasting six days for the first and seven days for the second.
A cool change separated the two, though this would have brought little comfort to the population who endured the extended heatwaves without the luxury of AC!
THERE was little respite in February with another four-day heatwave delivering temps again over 100°F.
WITH current global CO₂ levels pushing an “unprecedented” (blah, blah…) 411 ppm it would track that heatwaves should be longer and hotter during the hottest month of the Australian year – January – and temps significantly higher. That is if CO₂ is doing its job properly.
UNFORTUNATELY for ClimateChange™️ “doomers” Adelaide max temps have been well below average for January with only three days above 38°C (101.9°F) and no consecutive days of ‘heatwave’.
MELBOURNE has been about average for January. With only two days above 38°C (101.9°F)
*
‘HISTORY IS HERESY!’
A recent tweet that compared January 2020 Adelaide max temps to those in January 1908, prompted this post.
ONE angry troll responder noted, “Wow so you presented two data points & drew a conclusion! Very scientific- did u get a science degree from a cornflakes packet???”.
Wow so you presented two data points & drew a conclusion! Very scientific- did u get a science degree from a cornflakes packet??? 🤦♀️
SHE is right, two data points don’t necessarily ‘draw a conclusion’.
HOWEVER, just imagine if any capital city in the world, today, had two consecutive heatwaves in one month – with one lasting six days and the other, seven days with temps averaging 42°C (107.3°F) ?
THE mainstream media would have apoplexy, and @alison_rixon along with her Extinction Rebellion mates and GretaThunberg™️ in tow would be glueing themselves to the nearest sidewalk, demanding big employers be shut down, whilst pleading for global communism in order to stop the “CLIMATE CRISIS!”.
***
CONCLUSION
“The study of History
is the beginning of wisdom.” — Jean Bodin
AN area of great success for climate change realists, in the process of hitting back against dangerous and costly ClimateChange™️ alarmism and mainstream media eco-hysteria has been in the area of historical referencing. Comparing past climate and weather events to present ones.
CLIMATE sceptics are denounced as “deniers” for daring to use the past to nullify hysterical claims of the present or even the modelled future. ‘How dare’ anyone refute claims by ‘leading scientists’ that current conditions are “unprecedented”!
THE master of historical referencing has ‘historically’ been @Tony Heller aka Steve Goddard over at Real Climate Science. I urge you to checkout his excellent and powerful work. You will even get a good laugh, too! A very clever scientist, environmentalist and humanitarian.
YE shall know the truth and the truth shall make you [and your power bills] free.
“MUCH that passes as idealism is disguised
hatred or disguised love of power.”
– Bertrand Russell
“THE urge to save humanity is almost always a
false-front for the urge to rule it.”
– H.L. Mencken
•••
ECO-extremist org @PETA, cloaked as an “animal rights organisation”, has jumped on the climate-ambulance-chasing bandwagon, linking Australia’s devastating bushfires to the wool industry.
Is your wool sweater killing the planet AND sheep AND koalas AND kangaroos? 🔥
Australia’s massive wool farming industry is directly contributing to climate change, causing massive fires on the continent. One sheep can produce up to 30L of methane in one day. #WearVeganpic.twitter.com/zcUePM30xP
SICK and twisted, to say the least, when you consider that the bushfire body count is still rising after police, Thursday, found an unidentified body in Moruya, the day after three American firefighters were killed in a water-bombing plane crash.
AUSTRALIA’s 2019/20 bushfire death-toll now stands at 33.
*
SENSATIONALISM SELL$
AS an opportunistic activist org, PETA unashamedly uses disaster-porn to promote themselves in the aim of attracting clickbait, followers, members and ultimately … money, aka power.
PETA activists stage nearly-nude protest at rib fest – NY Daily News
*
THE CLIMATE BANDWAGON
PASTING blame on Australia’s hard-working farming families who ‘work’ to produce some of the finest Marino wool and produce in the world, including new proteins that are being used to create new wound dressings, bone graft implants and medical sutures, is not only lazy (as we avoid reasoned and logical discussion into the real causes of Australia’s seasonal and often catastrophic bushfires) but has far more sinister undertones that threaten the very existence of Western civilisation.
OF course, PETAisn’t using ClimateChange™️ in an effort destroy hard-working farming families in order to corral them into “Sustainable” cities and lock up their land. That would be a “Right Wing Nut Job (RWNJ) conspiracy theory”, right?
SARCASM aside, this is precisely the plan for farmers and private land owners in accordance with draconian U.N. dictates, of which seasoned ClimateChange™️ catastrophists and maniacal Malthusians dutifully abide by.
DON’T take it from here, take it directly from the U.N’s own documented history advancing their “Sustainable development” aka “Agenda 21“, globalist goals.
IN the U.N’s very own words …
“LAND … cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.”
– U.N. Habitat I Conference 1976
ACCORDING to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction. Social Equity (Social Justice) Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” Redistribution of wealth. Private property is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it. National sovereignty is a social injustice. Universal health care is a social justice. All part of Agenda 21 policy.
“Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound
reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world
has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both
governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift
will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences
of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.“
– UN Agenda 21
“In a nutshell, the plan calls for governments to take control of all land use and not leave any of the decision making in the hands of private property owners. It is assumed that people are not good stewards of their land and the government will do a better job if they are in control. Individual rights in general are to give way to the needs of communities as determined by the governing body. Moreover, people should be rounded up off the land and packed into human settlements, or islands of human habitation, close to employment centres and transportation.
THE creator, fabricator and proponent of global warming and founder of UNEP, Maurice Strong, made this profound statement on the U.N.’s ‘sustainability’ goals at the U.N’s 1992 RIO+20 Earth Summit :
NO meat, no AC and no white picket fence. This is the new-world-order, designed by unelected, U.N. eco-bureaucrats, destined for you and I – the great unwashed.
STRONG added :
“ISN’T the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
– Maurice Strong, founder of UNEP
*
TWENTY EIGHT years later, the exact same message is being peddled by a 17 year-old child soldier prophet :
“The climate crisis is not just about the environment.It is a crisis of human rights, of justice, and of political will.Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fueled it.We need to dismantle them all.”
– Greta Thunberg
United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat) promotes socially and environmentally sustainable towns and cities. It is the focal point for all urbanization and human settlement matters within the UN system. UN-Habitat envisions well-planned, well-governed, and efficient cities and other human settlements, with adequate housing, infrastructure, and universal access to employment and basic services such as water, energy, and sanitation.
UN-Habitat mainstreams human rights into all aspects of its operational and normative work. This includes cooperating with the High Commissioner for Human Rights to promote implementation of international conventions at national, regional and municipal levels
UN-Habitat’s concept of sustainable urban development includes the rule of law and the protection of vulnerable groups as central elements. The Programme’s legislative work focuses on the quality of law, in particular its effectiveness in delivering policy and its accountability and includes:
Exploring the current status of urban law in cities and towns globally,
Understanding the role urban law plays in facilitating good urban development,
Identifying and promote urban law methodologies and mechanisms that promote the sustainable development of human settlements.
FROM a quick glance of the feel-good phrases and statements within the “Human Settlements” programme, one would be excused for speculating that the implied utopia was more akin to residing in a caged, quasi-police state. With your every move, gesture and thought monitored twenty-four-seven-three-six-five. And, as Winston found out in Orwell’s 1984, there is no escape from Big Brother.
*
HIDE AGENDA 21’s U.N. ROOTS FROM THE PEOPLE!
“Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy- fixated groups and individuals in our society… This segment of our society who fear ‘one-world government’ and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined ‘the conspiracy’ by undertaking LA21. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.”
EVERYTHING associated with Agenda 21 aka Sustainable Development is deceptive. The language they use, the names they give the projects, the means by which they lure local governments (under the ICLEI program) into the trap and then slam the door – absolutely everything is deceptive from beginning to end. The reason is obvious once you understand what they have in mind …
AGENDA 21 THE GOAL, CLIMATE THE COVER
THE evidence is all around us if we choose to see it. Most people know it on some level but they choose not to see it because it would turn their worlds inside out to acknowledge that everything we thought was true about Global Warming Climate Change – is a lie.
“Men occasionally stumble on the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.” – Winston Churchill
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”
– Voltaire
***
ANOTHER great example of how climate ‘scientists’, supported by the compliant mainstream media, use scary things to frighten you into submission and belief that the world is in peril, care or ‘evil’ mankind and his/her ‘evil’ trace gasses.
BUT, have you ever noticed how global warming climate change threatens imminent decline in cute, cuddly animals like Polar Bears? Yet, on the other hand, climate change threatens an *increase* in our most feared critters, like “aggressive” spiders?
Global warming may result in more aggressive spiders around the world, a new study suggests.
Researchers at McMaster University in Canada found that aggressive spiders have a greater chance of surviving and reproducing following hurricanes than more docile breeds.
The study suggests the evolutionary impact of spider populations will be affected by extreme weather events, which scientists predict will increase because of rising sea levels caused by global warming.
Extreme weather events such as hurricanes may cause aggressive spiders to flourish, scientists have found.. (AAP)
Experts studied the communal spider or tangle web spider which lives in North and South America, reports the Independent.
They found aggressive colonies had a higher rate of reproduction after a tropical storm, while in storm-free regions more docile spiders thrived.
Researchers studied 240 colonies throughout North and South America and compared them with control sites.
Features of aggressive behaviour included the speed and number of attackers that respond to prey, the tendency to eat other spiders and how easily foreign spiders get into a nest.
Experts studied the communal spider or tangle web spider which lives in North and South America, to determine how they behaved after hurricanes impacted their environments. (Supplied)
Results suggest aggressive spiders are better at gaining resources but are more prone to infighting if they are short of food or the colony gets too hot.
The study – published in Nature, Ecology and Evolution – found that after hurricanes, more aggressive colonies produced more eggs and had more spiderlings survive into early winters.
Lead author Jonathan Pruitt said more extreme weather will impact wildlife development.
“As sea levels rise, the incidence of tropical storms will only increase. Now more than ever we need to contend with what the ecological and evolutionary impacts of these storms will be for non-human animals,” he said.
IN order to validate the ‘science’ that spiders ‘could’ become more aggressive due to global warming, we should check the data.
ACCORDING to the latest government data and the last two U.N. IPCC reports on “Extreme Weather”, there has been “NO” increase in extreme weather events, even as CO2 has risen to 400PPM – a rise of one CO2 molecule in every 10,000 parts of atmosphere since 1950.
“Numerous studies towards and beyond AR5 have reported a decreasing trend in the global number of tropical cyclones and/or the globally accumulated cyclonic energy”– UN IPCC SR15 (2018)
“There is only low confidence regarding changes in global tropical cyclone numbers under global warming over the last four decades.” – UN IPCC SR15 (2018)
“Sea level has been rising for the last ten thousand years, since the last Ice Age…the question is whether sea level rise is accelerating owing to human caused emissions. It doesn’t look like there is any great acceleration, so far, of sea level rise associated with human warming. These predictions of alarming sea level rise depend on massive melting of the big continental glaciers — Greenland and Antarctica. The Antarctic ice sheet is actually growing. Greenland shows large multi-decadal variability. …. There is no evidence so far that humans are increasing sea level rise in any kind of a worrying way.” — Dr. Judith Curry, video interview published 9 August 2017
“Observed sea level rise over the last century has averaged about 8 inches, although local values may be substantially more or less based on local vertical land motion, land use, regional ocean circulations and tidal variations.“
UNTIL the official ‘scientific’ data suggests that extreme weather events, like hurricanes and tropical cyclones are, in fact, increasing in frequency and intensity and not the other way around, as is occurring now, we should take such scary ‘spider’ studies with a pinch of salt and a whole lot of suspicion as to the real motives of the global warming climate change, misanthropic movement.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
– H.L. Mencken
“The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.” – Bertrand Russell
***
DAY by day, all around the globe, Global Warming Climate Change is being exposed as simply a moral issue for the wealthy urban elite.
BLUE collar workers and the silent majority are not buying into the relentless fear-mongering and warming hysteria driven by climate theory-obsessed politicians, propped up by a compliant mainstream media.
THE incessant propaganda and orchestrated alarmism has lead to the mad rush into costly UNreliables – wind and solar ‘energy’ – that are sending energy prices through the roof and jobs and industry to China or other countries who have not been driven to ‘green’ energy poverty by climate theory-obsessed politicians pushing draconian “Save The Planet” policies.
CAMPAIGNING on climate guarantees political death. Its latest victim, Bill Shorten, The Australian Labor Party and the Greens, who, last night, lost the “unlosable” election to incumbent conservative PM Scott Morrison.
CLIMATE CHANGE, CENTRAL TO THE ELECTION
THE mainstream media flagged “Climate change to be decisive issue in Australian election.” :
GLOBAL REJECTION OF DRACONIAN CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY & ‘GREEN’ ENERGY POVERTY
ALL around the globe, voters are increasingly showing their displeasure with costly unreliable-energy policies imposed by politicians in an inane effort to fight the purported “climate catastrophe”.
IN France in late 2018, protesters donning yellow vests took to the streets—and have stayed there ever since—in large part to protest scheduled increases in fuel taxes, electricity prices, and stricter vehicle emissions controls, which French President Emmanuel Macron claimed were necessary to meet the country’s greenhouse gas reduction commitments under the Paris climate agreement. After the first four weeks of protest, Macron’s government cancelled his climate action plan.
Ford Nation – Scrap The Carbon Tax Scam – Election Victory
IN 2018, in part as a backlash against Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s climate policies, global warming skeptic Doug Ford was elected as premier of Ontario, Canada’s most populous province. Ford announced he would end energy taxes imposed by Ontario’s previous premier and would join Saskatchewan’s premier in a legal fight against Trudeau’s federal carbon dioxide tax.
IN Alberta, Canada, where the economy declined after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s climate policies took hold, voters on April 16 replaced Premier Rachel Notley and her New Democratic Party (NDP), which supports the federal climate policies, with the United Conservative Party, headed by newly elected Premier Jason Kenney, who vowed to scrap the province’s carbon tax and every other policy in NDP’s climate action plan. Among the other climate policies Kenny said he will reverse in an effort to revive the economy are NDP’s plans to accelerate the closure of the province’s coal power plants, and its plan to cap greenhouse gas emissions from the region’s oil sands. In addition, Kenny says he will challenge the federal government’s climate impositions in court and streamline regulations hampering Alberta’s critical oil and gas industry, including restrictions preventing pipeline construction imposed by NDP.
*
NETHERLANDS – Forum for Democracy (FvD)
The naked populist: Thierry Baudet stuns the Netherlands | eNCA – said the government should stop funding programs to meet the country’s commitments to international climate change agreements, saying such efforts are driven by “climate-change hysteria.”
In mid-March, the Forum for Democracy (FvD), a fledgling political party just three years old, tied for the largest number of seats, 12, in the divided Dutch Senate in the 2019 elections. FvD takes a decidedly skeptical stance on climate change. On the campaign trail, Thierry Baudet, FvD’s leader, said the government should stop funding programs to meet the country’s commitments to international climate change agreements, saying such efforts are driven by “climate-change hysteria.”
*
FINLAND – Finns Party
FINLAND : Finns Party
On April 14 in Finland, where climate change policies became the dominant issue in the election, support for climate skepticism surged. Whereas all the other parties proposed plans to raise energy prices and limit people’s energy use, the Finns Party, which made the fight against expensive climate policies the central part of its platform, gained the second-highest number of seats in the Parliament, just one seat behind the Social Democratic Party’s 40. The second-place finish was a big win for the Finns Party and its skeptical stance: just two months before the election, polls showed its support was below 10 percent.After the Finns Party made battling alarmist climate policies its main goal, its popularity soared. The New York Times credited the Finns Party’s electoral surge, in large part, to its expressed climate skepticism.
EVEN as daily headlines in the fake news / lamestream media become ever shriller, hyping climate fears based on projections made by unverified climate models, the public, especially the voting public, is becoming increasingly weary of the Chicken Little claims of impending climate doom. Voters in developed countries are saying “enough is enough” to high energy prices which punish the most vulnerable people in society and do nothing to regulate climate change.
TAKE NOTE, politicians and business groups – climate change alarmism, political correctness, class warfare and identity politics are the politics of division and are electoral and commercial poison.
“WHEN the heart rules the head,
passion takes over reason.”
– Ortega y Gasset
“IT would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.” ― Joseph Goebbels
***
THE widely held belief that ‘Extreme Weather’ has become worse, as a result of man-made carbon dioxide emissions, is a tribute to the success of climate change propaganda pushed relentlessly by CO2-centric politicians and compliant mainstream media.
Promoting Extreme Weather is specifically designed to shift public opinion about the purported seriousness of human-induced global warming climate change, through the use of emotional imagery and dire prognostications in order for draconian and costly climate policy to be accepted and implemented with as little resistance as possible from the taxpaying public.
COGNITIVE BIAS fuelled by an era of mass hysteria, delusion, groupthink and panic has helped foster dark and far-fetched clichés of a current “climate crisis”, that is an “existential threat” which will “end civilisation by 2030”.
*
Thanks to the dramatic rise in personal weather recording devices – smart phones and CCTV – the sampling rate (what you see or hear directly) of Extreme Weather events, broadcast via social and mainstream media, has risen dramatically in recent years.
But, have actual Extreme Weather events increased in frequency or intensity? In particular, over long-term ‘climate’ scales?
The short answer is no! Extreme Weather events have not increased in frequency or intensity as carbon dioxide emissions have increased. In many cases the exact opposite is occurring.
This ‘inconvenient’ fact has been proven by empirical data and confirmed by the last two (warmist) U.N. IPCC reports on Extreme Weather: SREX (AR5) 2013 report and the latest SR15 report released August, 2018:
UN IPCC : “Low confidence in the sign of drought trends since 1950 at global scale…likely to be trends in some regions of the world, including increases in drought in the Mediterranean and W Africa & decreases in droughts in central N America & NW Australia” – UN IPCC SR15 (2018)
IN 1934, when CO₂ was at ‘safe’ levels, severe to extreme drought covered around 80% of the entire U.S. Such conditions endured for most of the decade known as the “Dust Bowl” era :
“There is low confidence due to limited evidence, however, that anthropogenic climate change has affected the frequency and the magnitude of floods.” – UN IPCC SR15 (2018)
4⃣Floods: "There is low confidence due to limited evidence, however, that anthropogenic climate change has affected the frequency and the magnitude of floods. "
“Numerous studies towards and beyond AR5 have reported a decreasing trend in the global number of tropical cyclones and/or the globally accumulated cyclonic energy”– UN IPCC SR15 (2018)
“There is only low confidence regarding changes in global tropical cyclone numbers under global warming over the last four decades.” – UN IPCC SR15 (2018)
2018 was one of the least active US tornado years on record, despite record and rising CO₂ emissions.
AS of October, a new record low tornado count was set. The cumulative total for 2018 is 759; the previous lowest number of tornadoes for this date was 761. The SPC has records extending back 65 years.
This lack of tornadic storms in recent years should also correlate with lesser severe thunderstorm activity in general in the U.S., since the conditions which produce large hail and damaging winds are generally the same as are required for tornadoes (strong instability, plentiful moisture, and wind shear). – Roy Spencer PhD
NB// LOSS data does not include the two big CAT4’s that struck the US in 2018 – Florence (Sep) and Michael (Oct).
***
CONCLUSION
BIAS BY OMISSION
IN my opinion, the worst form of propaganda is ‘bias by omission’ – information and facts that you are ‘not’ told about, in order to keep the truth from you.
THE mainstream media has not and will not report the facts on “Extreme Weather”, as clearly laid out in the science and data above, because such facts are obviously extremely ‘inconvenient’ to their “catastrophic” man-made global warming narrative.
*
VITAL information central to the potential seriousness of climate change – Extreme Weather – has been purposely omitted by the mainstream media and replaced by emotions, alarmism and exaggerations in order to fit the climate-calamity narrative designed to scare you into belief and obedience.
THIS is why the global warming climate change debate has become so dangerously deceptive and dishonest. Climate truths hidden from you and replaced with a narrative far more acceptable – Hollywood-style climate hysteria based on alarmism, increased sampling rates and overheated, CO2-centric climate models that do not accord with observed reality.
•••
UPDATE
DID not see either of these instructive graphs painted on a placards at any of the kiddie climate rallies last Friday. Guess they don’t fit their ‘catastrophic’ climate narrative…
Global Deaths from Climate and non-Climate Catastrophes, 1920-2018
Carbon Emissions and World Prosperity
*
PERHAPS the climate kids would have been wise to read and learn the words of H.L. Mencken, before being forced out by their parents and teachers to act as standard bearers of new radical eco-socialism, protected by ‘innocence’ and lack of age :
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule it.” – H.L. Mencken
Climatism 
Recent Comments