The Destructive Behavior of Climate Alarmists

Another expose of a would be planetary savior who is wrong about 99% of the time with his "predictions" going back to 1968 now thinks we are just gonna all die soon.

While I do agree that human population growth is unsustainable for reasons other than food supply and that we do waste a lot of energy and Petroleum due to poor housing and building designs and profligate consumption lifestyles.

Watts Up With That?

Serially Wrong Paul Ehrlich Is Wrong, Again. We Are Not on The Brink of a 6th Mass Extinction Event

January 5, 2023

Guest Opinion by Chris Talgo

Excerpt:

On January 1, CBS News’ “60 Minutes” rang in the new year by airing a segment in which several scientists, including Dr. Paul Ehrlich, predicted that we are on the cusp of a sixth mass extinction event and that “the next few decades will be the end of the kind of civilization we’re used to.”

Suffice to say, Ehrlich does not have a stellar track record when it comes to making predictions about impending planetary doom. For those unaware of Ehrlich, in 1968 he authored The Population Bomb, in which he wrote, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970’s the world will undergo famines – hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death…nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.”

LINK

=========

60 biased minutes gave this anti-science whacko national airtime!

 

Of course world death rates have plummeted since that silly prophecy, and the fraction of the world's population suffering malnutrition and food insecurity likewise.

 

After 50+ years I think it becomes a form of mental illness as he has been corrected by many people over the decades, yet he still thinks his predictions are valid and mostly correct.

That to me goes well beyond being a fallible human being it is a total denial of reality.

 

Stupid is as stupid does.
How the Population Scare Predicted Climate Hysteria
Lewis Andrews, The Spectator



As lauded academics repeat inaccurate doomsday predictions, the exaggerated fear of climate change is causing its own harm Read More

 

Watts Up With That?

A Critical Examination of the Six Pillars of Climate Change Despair

January 19, 2023

Doug R Rogers

Excerpt:

Introduction

World still ‘on brink of climate catastrophe’[1]
World close to ‘irreversible’ climate breakdown[2]
Large regions of the world are becoming unlivable – lethal for 3 to 5 billion of us[3]
…slaughter, death, and starvation of 6 billion people[4] – Roger Hallam, Extinction Rebellion

In 2023 it’s hard to avoid seeing images and headlines like these. The result for many is a deep seated fear[5], anxiety[6] [7], and pessimism[8] [9] about the future. The topic of Climate Change (CC) has seeped into nearly every facet of our lives, and never in a positive way. It’s always present as a dark cloud hanging over society; a source of guilt for those who indulge in some of life’s most basic pleasures, the basis of moralistic judgments by those who like to signal their concern, and the cause of nihilism[10] [11] and hopelessness[12] felt by many in the youngest generations.

Why does CC have such deeply negative connotations and harmful effects on people’s mental well being? Because we are constantly reminded of the six dark and destructive consequences of CC:

1) heat will cause millions to die or live in misery

2) tens of millions (some say billions) will be forced to migrate

3) a million or more species will become extinct in just a few decades

4) sea level rise will have disastrous world-wide consequences

5) agricultural production will be devastated, causing widespread famine

6) humanity will suffer floods, droughts, and other terrible natural disasters

These are the six pillars of climate change despair that activists and the media obsess over. The activists do it because they think they are saving the planet; the media do it because bad news gets more clicks than good news. Plus, they both do it to appear virtuous. They both keep ramping up the rhetoric so that with each passing year the predictions about each of these consequences become even more frightening and apocalyptic. There are some lesser concerns (eg. Arctic and glacier melting), but these six are the catastrophic ones.

LINK

============

It is a very long article but shows what a bunch of whack jobs they are as they seem to prefer being misled and lied to about something that doesn't exist.

There is no climate emergency at all just the usual utter nonsense warmist/alarmists promote because they are mentally ill over something that isn't happening.

This post I made over a year ago here and also in other forums makes clear that warmist/alarmists are TERRIFIED of the CONTENT of the article because it shows exhaustively why there is no climate crisis existing and their obsession over a delusion is a waste of time.

Where is the Climate Emergency?

LINK

After 750 posts ZERO counterpoint to the CONTENT of the article has been made.

 

It’s intriguing, for one example, that alarmists haven’t figured out that increasing temperatures result in greater evaporation which results in greater precipitation not wide spread global drought conditions.

 

That is the "refusal to know" phenomenon that I have noted in many other contexts. When facts prove their beliefs are false, the only alternative to reconsidering those beliefs is refusal to know the facts that prove them false. As the preservation of their false beliefs is a higher priority for them than the truth, there is no way to alter such beliefs through fact, logic and reason.

 

Exactly. Facts don’t matter to faith based believers.

 

Formerly Respected Organizations; Now Just Foot Soldiers Of Leftist Orthodoxy Enforcement
January 22, 2023/ Francis Menton

• 
  As previously mentioned here, I’m currently involved in a legal case where my client — the Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council — seeks to compel EPA to reconsider and revoke the 2009 action by which the agency claimed to determine that CO2 and other “greenhouse gases” constitute a “danger to human health and welfare.”
  
  
• That agency action could well be the single most absurd and destructive thing that the U.S. government has ever done in its 234 year history. The “Endangerment Finding” is the regulatory foundation that underlies all of the more than one hundred initiatives of the Biden Administration to destroy our energy infrastructure, drive up the cost of gasoline, heat, and electricity, and leave the American people impoverished and freezing in the dark.
  
  
• It goes without saying that the government, under direction from the Biden White House and environmental zealots within EPA, opposes our efforts with every resource at its disposal.
  
  
• But here’s what does not go without saying: a collection of non-profit organizations who would otherwise be strangers to the litigation has nevertheless sought to “intervene” in the case to support the position of the government.
  

READ MORE

 

Ah, memories!

 

A bit more seriously, I was actually working in DC on this issue when it happened. The waning days of the Bush administration were spent trying to figure out what to do with the EPA v. Massachusetts decision which was so thoroughly absurd that the Bush folks took to issuing a unique AANPRM asking for public comment and including an individual position paper from every single member of his cabinet. In the end, Bush opted to punt to the still unelected next administration.

Obama of course won and virtually the very first thing he did was accept an absurd endangerment finding from California and put the EPA to work crafting CO2 regulations. The rest is history.

Now because CO2 regulation is so absurd, Congress some time in 2008 had the Congressional Research Service (CRS) write a paper on it. The paper came to pretty much the same conclusion as everyone else at the time- there's simply no way to get there from the real world.

But I remember how the CRS framed the issue because I thought it was genius. Basically it's a simple math equation: the amount of CO2 produced equals the population size times GDP (a proxy for wealth).

So literally, if you want to lower CO2 you have to choose to reduce the population or destroy the economy or both. Period.

That's as craven as it is bleak.

 

And of course the way to maximize the adaptability (and standard of living) to any localized issues due to any externality is to maximize the growth of gdp (aka wealth creation). The alarmists want to minimize the impact of the human race on the natural world not understanding that impacting the natural world is how the human race prospers.

 

Or they do understand it, but do not want the human race to prosper.

 

Yes! The dead giveaway is their lack of support for “non CO2 emitting” nuclear power.

They want to preserve benevolent Mother Nature. Mother Nature is anything but benevolent.

 

Climate Activism Has a Cult Problem
Zion Lights, The Free Press




As a member of Extinction Rebellion, writes Zion Lights, I watched people brainwashed into pulling outrageous stunts in the name of 'saving... Read More

 

The world population consists of a growing percentage of “victims” every year. It’s much easier to blame others for their problems than actually working hard to fix those problems. These people are perfect examples of that.

 

Steve Milloy captures this:


“Here’s the answer: greens don’t really want to increase our energy supply—whether with fossil fuels or renewable energy—because that would undermine virtually all of the greens’ ultimate goals: zero population growth, limiting the development of physical infrastructure, impeding economic growth, and redistributing wealth. Solving our energy problems would mean making available vast supplies of cheap, reliable energy, and that would open the door to booming growth on every front—the absolute last thing the greens will tolerate. Their very use of the “energy crisis” as their rallying cry is replete with irony given that they have played a huge role in creating and perpetuating all our current energy-related problems.”

— Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them by Steven Milloy
https://a.co/9irI8On

 

Green energy: Don’t stick Granny with the bill
Posted on January 29, 2023 by curryja | 51 comments
by Planning Engineer (Russell Schussler)

Renewable energy has an equity problem. Energy policies that force consumers to incur huge costs to meet larger public aims become a hidden form of taxation. Energy bills eat up much larger proportions of income for those at the lower end of the economic scale.

Continue reading →

 

As with all these “save Mother Earth” policies it’s those least able to afford the economic costs are the most negatively affected. These policies are a regressive form of taxation.

 

Germany's Coming Green Energy "Economic Miracle"
March 12, 2023/ Francis Menton

• 
  I’m old enough to remember the German post-World War II “economic miracle.” (Their term was “Wirtschaftswunder.”).
  
  
• After more than ten years of government direction of the economy under the Nazis, followed by the devastation of the war, Germany after 1945, under economics minister Ludwig Erhard, adopted the model of low taxes and light regulation.
  
  
• The economy boomed for decades on end.
  
  
• But Germany then gradually turned away from Erhard’s prescriptions. Today Germany is twenty or so years into the most aggressive green energy “transition” of any country with a large economy, with the government firmly in charge of picking the winners and losers in the energy sector.
  

READ MORE

 

"Stupid is as stupid does."
Countdown To New York's Rendezvous With Energy Impossibility
March 15, 2023/ Francis Menton

• 
  The race is on to see who hits the green energy wall of impossibility first. California, Germany and the UK (the “Poseurs”) might seem to have leapt early into the lead positions. But New York is now making a strong sprint to catch and surpass them, so it can be the first to splatter its citizens’ flesh and blood all over the impenetrable barricade.
  
  
• The Poseurs accumulate vast green progressive virtue credits for ridiculous promises, but their promises all have dates so far in the future that today’s politicians will be long gone when the crash detonates.
  
  
• Who has sufficiently pure cult adherence to set firm green energy deadlines with real consequences in the here and now? That task has fallen to the true climate heroes here in New York City.
  

READ MORE

 

Nothing like a bunch of old farts that couldn't give two fux about the youth and the state of the planet that they will inherit.

 

In the episode under discussion the "youth" seem remarkably ignorant.

 

You couldn’t be more wrong. Us “old farts” want our kids and grandkids to benefit from the highest standard of living and a clean environment. The way to do that is by exploiting the benefits of inexpensive fossil and nuclear power available 24/7 to achieve the maximum economic growth possible. It also maximizes the ability to adapt to any localized consequences of the current global warming phase (which started in the 1600’s well before measurable human CO2 emissions is occurring at a much lower rate than the consensus models predict). Global warming is beneficial. This has been shown by the consensus of economic models as documented in the college text book “Climate Economics” by Dr. Richard Tol. There is no future climate catastrophe.

 

Or is it just that they have some experience, and realize that eco-doomsters have been around for decades, have never had any genuine empirical science to support their prognostications, and have consequently always been proved hilariously wrong by actual physical events?