“Wow, just wow. They always tell us who they really are.”
The insanity surrounding the “climate change” debate is like a pot boiling unattended on the stove. The mess it makes can’t be ignored when it finally boils over.
It’s not complicated. The climate change scam is about two things, and neither has anything to do with the climate.
One is that the globalists, totalitarians, corporatist fascists, and Marxists – call the assorted ne’er-do-wells what you will – want to control the world. They think you’re too stupid to live free or reasonably free. Think communist China and its mass surveillance, social credit score system, and slave labor here, people. The World Economic Forum (WEF) and the ‘great reset’ crowd meeting Davos this week openly yearn for the China model. (The irony is that China and India, the world’s two largest polluters, are exempt from any draconian climate restrictions – they’re not as stupid as Western politicians.)
The bottom line is that the world’s elites meeting in Davos hate human freedom like a gardener hates crap grass.
Second, the climate change nonsense is about money. Its proponents in Davos are grifters extraordinaire. They want cash – your cash. Over the last three decades, politicians, corporations, universities, and the science boys and girls have figured out that they can rake in untold billions – now trending to trillions – of dollars in subsidies, payouts, research, and on and on.
Climate change – formally known as the weather – is the perfect scam to loot billions out of helpless taxpayers – and in some sense, have them asking for more pain. If you keep scaring the bejabbers out of people by telling them without context that they’re going to die in a decade, the cities will flood, or the polar bears will die, they give you a lot of rope.
Here’s the US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate – that’s not a joke – and mega-rich by marriage (twice!) John Kerry Tuesday in Davos, telling us commoners that the only way to prevent climate catastrophe is to pay up. “So, how do we get there? Well, the lesson I’ve learned in the last years, and I learned it as Secretary, and I’ve learned it since, reinforced in spades, is money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money. I’m sorry to say that. I mean, yes, technology. Yes, exciting new initiatives, yes, organizing winning races politically. But we have to go further.”
But the billionaire Mr. Kerry, who reached Davos in one of the nearly 2,000 private jets descending on the Swiss ski resort, couldn’t let the moment pass. Here’s what he really thinks of you: “[At Davos, the WEF is] extraordinary that we select human beings… are able to sit in a room and come together and actually talk about saving the planet. I mean, it’s so almost extraterrestrial to think about quote ‘saving the planet’. If you said that to most people, they think you’re just a crazy tree-hugging Lefty liberal do-good… but really that’s where we are.”
Wow, just wow. They always tell us who they really are.
Over the years, I’ve written dozens of articles on climate change, demonstrating massive climatic events shaping our natural world. It’s not rocket science – it’s there to read for anyone. But like shape-shifters in Star Wars, every time the narrative of climate catastrophe changes – it used to be getting too cold. Now it’s too hot – the money grubbers changed the goalposts.
In the last decade, the debate has shifted to lowering carbon dioxide gas – CO2 – in the atmosphere. Supposedly the build-up of human-introduced CO2 is directly responsible for climate warming.
But is it true?
CO2 is 0.0415 percent of the atmosphere – not .4, but rather .0415 percent. However, some claim this is the highest level in a million years. But that, too, seems unsupportable, if irrelevant. Two eminent scientists claim CO2 levels are, in reality, lower than ever.
The two scientists, William Happer, Professor of Physics, Emeritus of Princeton, and Richard Lindzen, Professor of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences, Emeritus of MIT on June 17, 2022, issued a 28-page response to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s proposed climate change rule-making (their complete response here).
It was in answer to the rule titled “The Enhancement and Standardizations of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors.” (This complex rule could cost businesses billions of dollars in new disclosure burdens.)
Their rebuttal to the climate proposal clearly presents the selective data that the SEC used as its basis for the proposed rule and outlines the intentional fraud and manipulation of science for political and financial gain.
Here are key takeaways: [Associated graphs are found in the response.]
For hundreds of millions of years, when CO2 was very high, temperatures were low, and conversely, high temperatures corresponded to low CO2 levels.
Record low temperatures occurred when CO2 levels were at a record high of about 7,000 ppm compared to today’s CO2 of 415 ppm. They were highest approximately 60 million years ago when CO2 levels were low.
Temperatures have been much higher than today for the last 600 million years, and life on Earth has thrived.
CO2 levels have sharply declined over the last 180 million years from 2800 ppm to today’s 415 PPM – a level nearly at the 150 PPM minimum required to keep plants from dying of CO2 starvation!
The two professors present a brutal rhetorical beatdown on compromised scientific inquiry and call out “peer review” as used in new climate studies as “pal review” where only the “official” science is allowed into publications. They stated, “Misrepresentations, exaggeration, cherry picking, or outright lying pretty much covers all the so-called evidence [used as evidence of catastrophic global warming caused by fossil fuels].”
Piggybacked to this is the all-out media and political class assault to portray any deviation from the “settled science” and “scientific consensus” mantras as science “deniers” who should be removed from public platforms. Some politicians, public advocacy groups, and even the UN’s Unesco (here) have called for laws to make climate change denial illegal. So much for scientific integrity and inquiry, not to mention free speech and all that antiquated stuff.
Regardless of the integrity of data or the reality of climate change, if there is any at all, the Green New Deal and its price tag of trillions of dollars is certainly not the answer. When you determine to turn the world as we know it upside down, you have a responsibility to be dad-gum sure your prescription for this new world the radical left prescribes is workable, affordable, and efficient.
That is not where we’re at by a long shot. Bought and paid for ‘science’ is no science at all. It’s politics by stealth.
