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

[Aeneas]

A dilemma:

A part of the push by the proponents of the politics of climate change seen in the previous mails have been for going vegan and to stop eating meat. Let us assume that the world tomorrow goes vegan, due to radical policies. The green will celebrate it as a major victory, but then arises the question, what to with the whole animal production that is currently living? It seem like a ridiculous question, but it raises some hot issues. To give an idea, the world pig population in 2018 was 769 millioner. We are not talking about cows, chickens or any other farmed animals.

If you are true vegan, which we then will be, then killing all those animals would be out of the question. There would be laws against it by the vegan thought police. Above I mentioned as an example of an environmentalist, Eileen Crist

Eileen Crist is an associate professor at Virginia Tech and her bio from her website gives a picture of her views and interests:

She has written a number of books, one of which is:

She is author of Images of Animals: Anthropomorphism and Animal Mind.

One should not judge a book by its cover, but the title suggest what many vegans proclaim, namely that killing animals would be akin to cannibalism and thus murder.

This brings me to the question of what to do with 769 million pigs not to mention the rest of the farm animals? Killing them would be out of the question, so the only thing would be to continue feeding them, right? And to restrict them from having sexual interactions and have young piglets, would also be cruel? Now an adult sow can have 20+ piglets (up to 30)/year, which within a year also can have young ones.

They will all need to be fed and allowed to live to a ripe old age, n'est pas? After a year or 2 we will have more pigs than humans. To feed them and us would be impossible as we would by the fact of being vegans all rely on vegetable and cereal crop production, which has a limited capacity. So the dilemma is what to do and remain a true virtue signalling environmentalist?

 

[Mike]

So the dilemma is what to do and remain a true virtue signalling environmentalist?

Feed the true virtue signalling environmentalists to the pigs!? Or at least give the pigs their allotted veggie food. They should be happy to sacrifice themselves for the cause... and presto less ideological retards.

 

[Aeneas]

Feed the true virtue signalling environmentalists to the pigs!? Or at least give the pigs their allotted veggie food. They should be happy to sacrifice themselves for the cause... and presto less ideological retards.

As Scottie says, it is complicated The point is that the Living System is way more complicated than these ideologically driven, black and white thinking people imagines. They like to propose radical solutions, schizoid declarations and manifestos, and if they gain momentum, it can (and will) go real bad and end in tragedy. The revolution in Russia in 1917 and Mao's revolution came with very radical solutions to complex topics and ended in tragedy for many.

 

[Seppo Ilmarinen]

Greta Thunberg shows example to 'man in the street' how to battle 'climate change' with small everyday acts:

1) acquire 4 million dollar luxury yacht
2) start your commute in two weeks advance
3) fly your personal crew to get the boat back home
This is the least you can do for the climate, eh.

 

[Voyageur]

Greta Thunberg shows example to 'man in the street' how to battle 'climate change' with small everyday acts:

1) acquire 4 million dollar luxury yacht
2) start your commute in two weeks advance
3) fly your personal crew to get the boat back home
This is the least you can do for the climate, eh.

WUWT (Worrall) had a piece on Greta:

Doh! Climate Messiah Greta Thunberg’s Plastic Boat Trip Will Require Four Transatlantic Flights

Eric Worrall / August 18, 2019

Greta Thunberg in front of the Swedish parliament in Stockholm, August 2018 – image: Wikipedia
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Dr. Willie Soon – Climate crusader Greta Thunberg’s “principled” trip across the Atlantic in a carbon fibre and non recyclable plastic boat is going to require at least four crew members to fly across the Atlantic.

Greta Thunberg’s two-week trip across Atlantic in ‘zero-carbon yacht’ may generate more emissions than it saves as two of the crew have to FLY to New York to bring the boat back to Europe

• On Wednesday, the Swedish eco-campaigner left Plymouth on the Malizia II
• Skipper Boris Herrmann and team founder Pierre Casiraghi will fly back from US
• The 16-year-old is set to address the UN climate change conference next month

By JACK ELSOM and DARREN BOYLE FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 10:57 AEST, 17 August 2019 | UPDATED: 06:50 AEST, 18 August 2019
Greta Thunberg’s trans-Atlantic voyage on a ‘zero-carbon yacht’ has been rocked by revelations that crew will fly to New York in a gas-guzzling plane to bring the boat back to Europe.
It is claimed that this would generate more emissions than the yacht saves and threatens to leave the 16-year-old’s plans to chart an environmentally friendly route to the United States in tatters.
On Wednesday, the Swedish eco-campaigner left Plymouth on the Malizia II for a two-week journey to the United Nations headquarters where she will address a climate change meeting.
But last night, it was confirmed that two crew will have to fly to the US east coast city to man the 60ft yacht on its return.
…
Read more: Greta Thunberg's voyage may generate more emissions than it saves

Could this absurd charade possibly get more embarrassing? Next time Greta, buy an airline ticket like the rest of your fellow greens.

When kids are rolled out having been inculcate with false ideas and filled with specious lies and then given a platform - exploited, it's a sad thing indeed (and it is not the first time). Greta, as has been discussed, comes from parents who gave her a false leg up in life, and who knows what else. However, the climate machine behind her - a machine that is doubling down on her exploitation (and by default those who she affects) are in the throws of desperation to maintain talking points on news cycles. They will ultimately discard her if and when she steps out of line, too, however for now she is being handled and the politicians will lap it up.

They will cover her sailing voyage across the sea and make the most of her grand entrance and words at the UN; she will make the TV rounds that I'm sure are already scheduled (probably be easy to predict where she will appear) - and worse, her actions will induce more children to act out in actions and words while further manipulating the masses.

It's really sad.

 

[Ruth]

Grannyopterix has some interesting observations regarding Greta Thunberg. She does a comparison between teenagers of a similar age or slightly younger. It's easy to see that Greta 'looks' a lot younger than her compatriots. "Gran" suggests the parents may have something to do with it.

 

[Jones]

Greta Thunberg has given a bit of her back ground on her facebook page.

 

[Seppo Ilmarinen]

Well, no one is "going after her looks or differences" but instead pointing out that people around Greta are using her as a puppet and feeding her high anxiety that comes with Asperger's syndrom. Her parents are especially to blame - like Greta says, she was depressed and alone, but instead of getting professional help, they enforced this young anxious child's thought that the world is going end really soon and it's not adults but children who have to do something about it. That's wrong.

 

[loreta]

Surely a lot of money is also behind this Greta and her parents? To be near multimillionaires surely gives you not only money but contacts, and to be part of a gang with all that means. Hmmm, interesting.

Are we sure that she is Asperger? There is something about her eyes that reminds me children who have the Down Syndrome.

 

[luc]

Also, this facebook post seems totally crafted. I'm pretty sure she didn't write it herself. It's the perfect PR text, each word scrutinized and with all the "right" politically correct messages. And yet (or because of it) it doesn't make any sense at all.

 

[Cosmos]

Joe posted the following on Facebook about the situation:

Listen to Greta Thunberg here as she explains her journey towards becoming a climate change activist. By her own admission, she was terrorized by repeated news of the complete destruction of the planet by 'man made global warming', to the extent that she became ill, depressed, stopped talking and stopped eating. She was then diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome, OCD disorder and selective mutism. As a result, she has a tendency to see everything in 'black and white'.

It is beyond unconscionable to exploit this girl to appeal to human sympathy to push a very specific agenda that has, as usual, money at its core.

 

[Ennio]

Watch Tucker Carlson brilliantly skewer CNN's 7 hour long(!) Climate Change 'Town Hall' meeting. From the clips he included, it is clear that CNN and the Democratic Party are clearly fine with melting people's minds with self-serving, un-scientific and ideologically possessed propaganda. Thank goodness CNN's ratings are in the toilet, otherwise I pity the folks who still do tune in to the largely discredited cable "news" station - on this or any other subject of importance.

 

[Voyageur]

Watch Tucker Carlson brilliantly skewer CNN's 7 hour long(!) Climate Change 'Town Hall'

On a positive note, CNN's climate town hall placed last in total viewership for all seven hours, so people are just not that gullible, and they like their hamburger.

 

[Ursus Minor]

The Politics of Climate Change (...) And OTHER Madness...

Swedish Behavioral Scientist and Marketing Strategist Magnus Söderlund suggests that it may be necessary to turn to cannibalism and start eating human flesh to save the planet.

A conference about the food of the future called Gastro Summit being held in Stockholm Sweden featured a presentation by Magnus Söderlund claiming that we must get used to the idea of eating human flesh in the future, as a way of combating the effects of climate change.

Söderlund refers to the taboos against it as “conservative.”

If you can stomach this idea then feel free to read on at ➡ The Epoch Times.

People can be “tricked” Soderlund teases, into “making the right decisions.”
Conflating resistance to eating human flesh with capitalist selfishness, the seminar’s talking points ask:
“Are we humans too selfish to live sustainably?
[....]
The logo for the talk, titled: “Food Of The Future: Worms, Grasshoppers, or Human Flesh,” features a splash of blood as part of the graphic design.

This whole "Save the planet" craze seems to be taking on a dramatic scale.
Every generation likes to think they are not going to be as easily manipulated as their parents or grand parents.
With news and information from the four corners of the earth provided to them in an instant - no, they won't be outfoxed...

The idea of saving the climate and/or the world seems to be the ideal shtick to push people into hysterization.
They may not know how the climate or the world really works, but many people feel they are called upon to do something for "the common good"... which is actually tapping into some STO tendencies of those under the influence of the social engineers.

What Söderlund does not mention, curiously, is the long documented science—the biological effect of cannibalism.

A tribe called the Fore lived isolated in Papua New Guinea until the 1930s. They believed in eating their dead rather than allowing them to be consumed by worms.

This led to an epidemic of a disease called “kuru, or “the laughing death,” caused by ingestion of human meat. This disease was not caused by a pathogen, but rather, a “twisted protein,” that tricks “other proteins in the brain to twist like it, damaging the brain’s cerebellum. Researchers compared it to Dr. Jekyll’s transformation. The last victim of kuru died in 2009.

 

[Voyageur]

From the FOS Group - always nice to see others trying to correct this AGW madness, comes a talk posted in July and comments. First, though, here is a quote from Christopher Essex from within this FOS pdf called 'Faulty Premises = Poor Public Policy on Climate':

The Climate Model Crystal Bal

l

“climate forecasting is not an empirical problem. If one had a computer large enough it is easy to estimate how long a typical modern computer would take to do one 10-year forecast without some of this fake (empirical) physics. With a Kolmogorov microscale of about a millimeter for air, one gets numbers like 100,000,000,000,000,000,000 years.* That is longer than it took for Douglas Adams’s famous fictional computer, Deep Thought, to answer the cosmic question.* Or...the age of the Universe, squared.

–Christopher Essex,Co-author of “Taken by Storm”Professor of Applied MathematicsThe University of Western Ontario

In the same pdf, its loaded with some pretty good data and quotes. On the 'Carbon Market' - here is one:

...unlike traditional commodities, which sometimes during the course of their market exchange must be delivered to someone in physical form, the carbon market is based on the lack of delivery of an invisible substance to no one.

–Mark Schapiro, Conning the Climate, Harper’s Magazine Feb. 2010

Environmentalism and its most extreme version, global warming alarmism, asks for an almost unprecedented expansion of government intrusion and intervention into our lives and of government control over us.

-Václav Klaus

From the guest speaker in the video below:

“Take away the speculative technology embedded across scenarios and models and the entire policy architecture of the Paris Agreement and its parent, the UNFCCC, falls to pieces.... Carbondioxide removal at massive scale is science fiction...”

-Roger Pielke, Jr. 76“Opening Up the Climate Policy Envelope”

FOS's 'Environmental Groups and Journalists Continue to Terrify the Public with False Connection between Climate Change and Weather Extremes says Friends of Science'

The Star reports that climate despair is driving people into depression and toward suicide based on hyperbolic reports of weather extreme and wildfires as signs of impending doom, says Friends of Science, but that’s a false connection. Roger Pielke, Jr., author of “The Rightful Place of Science: Disasters and Climate Change," offers journalists a free download of his book with the facts showing things are much better than reported.

CALGARY, Alberta (PRWEB) July 11, 2019

On July 8, 2019, The Star reported that climate change hysteria and news of extreme weather and wildfire as signs of impending doom are driving people, especially children and youth, into depression, PTSD and suicidal thoughts, but that does not reflect climate science facts, says Friends of Science.

Environmental groups across Canada and around the world continue to harp on the theme of increased extreme weathers, wildfires and costly disasters, when none of this is reflected by the evidence. Recently, 100 highly qualified Italian scientists have rejected Anthropogenic Global Warming (human-caused) in a petition to their government as reported by ItaliaOggi on July 3, 2019.

Scientist and climate policy analyst, Roger Pielke, Jr., author of “The Rightful Place of Science: Disasters and Climate Change” is offering journalists (via twitter DM) a free download of his updated book with the facts showing that things are much better than reported.

Pielke’s book walks readers through the confusion about the two different definitions of climate change – the political one of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and the scientific one of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The UNFCCC definition includes the judgement term ‘dangerous’ and states that humankind is responsible for destabilizing atmospheric gases to cause climate change. By contrast, the scientific definition does not ascribe blame or danger and simply describes climate change as a statistically measurable change in climate patterns, which may be attributed to human or natural causes, or both.

As detailed in Pielke’s 2005 paper “Misdefining Climate Change…” whichever definition is chosen has significant implications for climate policy.

Likewise, Pielke’s book “…Disasters and Climate Change” shows there is no increased trend in disasters, and when properly accounted for, no trend in financial losses either.

For telling this truth, he has been widely denounced by the climate hysteria movement – largely by journalists and mainstream media whose ratings generally rely on the headline catastrophe maxim “If it bleeds, it leads.”

A 2011 paper by climate scientist Mike Hulme entitled, “Reducing the Future to Climate: A Story of Climate Determinism and Reductionism” states: “In this new mood of climate-driven destiny the human hand, as the cause of climate change, has replaced the divine hand of God as being responsible for the collapse of civilizations, for visitations of extreme weather, and for determining the new twenty- first- century wealth of nations.” By ignoring human potential “The contingencies of the future are whitewashed out of the future. Humans are depicted as “dumb farmers,” passively awaiting their climate fate. The possibilities of human agency are relegated to footnotes, the changing cultural norms and practices made invisible, the creative potential of the human imagination ignored.”

DOI: 10.1086/661274 LINK: jstor.org/stable/10.1086/661274

Though climate activists like Greta Thunberg and most environmental groups claim the IPCC SR15 report only gives us 12 years before catastrophe, Pielke, Jr. posted a twitter review which shows the report says nothing of the kind.

LINK: twitter.com/RogerPielkeJr/status/1049109464035414017

It is essential in a free and democratic society that competing scientific views about how the sun, cosmic rays, oceans, volcanoes, and atmospheric oscillations (like ENSO) naturally drive climate change. The future holds promise and opportunity, born of human creativity and this view must be shared with the public, says Friends of Science. Apocalyptic fear mongering is putting lives at risk, especially those of impressionable youth.

Read Dr. Francis Manns' paper: Volcano and ENSO Punctuation of North American Temperature.

About
Friends of Science Society is an independent group of earth, atmospheric and solar scientists, engineers, and citizens who are celebrating its 16th year of offering climate science insights. After a thorough review of a broad spectrum of literature on climate change, Friends of Science Society has concluded that the sun is the main driver of climate change, not carbon dioxide (CO2).


Friends of Science Society
P.O. Box 23167, Mission P.O.
Calgary, Alberta
Canada T2S 3B1
Toll-free Telephone: 1-888-789-9597
Web: friendsofscience.org
E-mail: contact(at)friendsofscience(dot)org
Web: climatechange101.ca