The day after the coldest Thanksgiving in memory the ‘climate change’ alarmists issued yet another dire report about their favorite subject… the coming of the end of the world. This came on top of hundreds of such reports issued over the last few decades.
This report is full of warnings about how many people will die in the next century and how the planet will suffer from, well, heat or cold – it is not clear which. The Washington Times reports:
As many as 9,300 more people could die each year because of extreme heat or cold related to climate change by the end of this century, the Trump administration said Friday in releasing a massive new report on the controversial issue.
First, it is not “the Trump administration” that is the source of this report. The report comes from ‘the U.S. Global Change Research Program, made up of 13 federal agencies… in the Fourth National Climate Assessment,’ says the Washington Times.
So this is a bunch of left-wing federal agencies in Washington DC issuing a “national climate assessment” which is completely in synch with the doomsday mindset of the ‘green’ movement. This is no surprise since the federal government, including the EPA, is heavily infiltrated with bureaucratic environmental extremists.
Their agenda always calls for massive government intervention and control to ‘save the world’. This always means a vast increase in government power over the people, and more wealth and jobs for the ‘greenies’ and their cronies in the government and the press.
Second, it says “extreme heat or cold related to climate change”. This is pretty strange. Didn’t Al Gore describe ‘global warming’ as “settled science” in 2007? Yes. In fact, he famously said that “the planet has a fever”.
Did Gore mention “global cooling”? No.
And now ‘warming’ does not appear to be such a sure thing at all. There has been record cold all over the globe in the last decade; snow fell in Houston in November 2018.
It appears that we are in a distinct cooling trend and thus the ‘greenies’ have had to turn their arguments 180 degrees and point in the complete opposite direction and even to quietly alter the name of their crisis from “global warming” to ‘climate change’.
Gore also warned in 2007 that sea levels were going to rise 17 feet because ‘warming’ was going to melt the polar ice caps. But then the same Al Gore purchased a $9 million beachfront mansion in California in 2010. So apparently he does not believe his own propaganda.
So let us assume for the sake of argument that ‘global warming’ or ‘climate change’ indeed is “man-made” (which it is not; the climate and the weather are in a constant natural cycle of ‘change’ for both long and short periods. This change has been happening since the beginning of recorded human history).
But since liberals all over the world believe it is “man made” then how should they themselves address the problem and solve it very quickly?
It is simple: Let us assume that half of the world is liberal and supports the “man made” theory. And thus the liberal half of the world should drastically and permanently lower its personal energy consumption to stop “warming” in its tracks.
This sudden drop in demand would also cause global energy prices to crash, which would benefit all mankind.
But don’t ever expect to see liberals voluntarily reduce their own energy consumption since they are the most egregious energy guzzlers of all, particularly the rich ones.
For example, the ‘green’ lunatics in Hollywood flit about in their private jets while they warn us not to drive five miles to work in our humble cars. Or environmentalists fly to Mount Everest to go backpacking or to Peru to watch birds. Or they drive hundreds of miles on a weekend to climb a special mountain. Or wealthy liberal New York City elites give generously to the Sierra Club and then travel here, there and everywhere in their extravagant lifestyles. They often own multiple homes, all of which need to be heated, cooled and supplied.
The ultra-liberal and super-wealthy ski resort town of Aspen, Colorado is a classic example. It is full of radical environmentalists. Yet Aspen is also the most energy-intensive town in America. It not only requires a huge amount of energy to heat its condominiums, ski houses, restaurants and other businesses all Winter long and to run the ski lifts (which are major energy consumers powered by electric motors), but the town itself (year-round population is around 7,000) requires large amounts of energy to truck in food, fuel and other everyday needs to its remote locale (peak Winter population is 25,000).
Worst of all massive amounts of fuel are consumed year-round to get the skiers and other tourists to Aspen from hundreds or thousands of miles away, either by car or airplane.
Here are more excerpts from the Washington Times article by Gabriella Munoz and Stephen Dinan about the federal ‘climate’ report, with a Nikitas3.com comment after each excerpt:
Washington Times reports: The range of disease-spreading mosquitoes and ticks will expand, as will extreme weather events — all of which will bring additional mental health problems such as depression and even suicidal tendencies… All told, the health problems and other damage and mitigation costs will total hundreds of billions of dollars in drag on the U.S. economy by the end of this century, the experts said.
Nikitas3.com comment: Notice… “by the end of this century”. So let us debunk this nonsense right away.
Perhaps you remember 2017 when Hurricane Irma was heading for Florida. Just one single day before the storm hit, no environmentalist, including Al Gore, would predict the path of the storm. Nobody seemed to know where it was going to strike on the very next day.
Yet the same environmentalists are claiming to know what the global temperature is going to be in 82 years, and how much it is going to cost us.
The Washington Times reports: How much warming depends on what steps are taken. If the world can achieve significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, warming could be limited to 2 degrees centigrade. But without those limits, global temperatures could rise 5 degrees or more by the end of this century, compared to where they were before industrialization.
Nikitas3.com comment: Notice that it says “could be limited to 2 degrees” or “could rise 5 degrees”.
Obviously these people have no idea what is going to happen. Nikitas3.com believes that global temperatures could actually fall by these amounts if present cooling continues.
These vague threats to the planet are always offered in some fuzzy range of numbers at some indeterminate point in the future when we will all be dead or will have forgotten about their crazy forecasts. If you look back at environmentalists’ wacky predictions from the 1970s you see that they were laughably wrong.
Meanwhile the ‘solutions’ being promoted by ‘greenies’ are harming the environment every day. In fact solar panels contribute to ‘global warming’. Here is how:
If you walk across your lawn or across a grassy meadow on a sunny Summer day in your bare feet, you won’t feel any heat; the ground absorbs the heat and disperses it. But if you walk across a black asphalt parking lot you will burn your feet because the black color of the asphalt holds and then radiates the heat back up into the air.
All over America these ugly black solar panels are blanketing increasing numbers of our beautiful meadows. Those black panels are holding and radiating the sun’s heat back into the atmosphere on hot Summer days like a parking lot does. This contributes to ‘warming’.
Washington Times reports: The analysts said there may be some aspects of the economy that would benefit from a modest warming…
Nikitas3.com comment: This is one of the great truths that the ‘greenies’ are seeking desperately to cover up – that ‘warming’ can have tremendous benefits for mankind, like more abundant food supplies from a longer growing season; a stronger economy since warmer weather encourages economic activity; reduced energy consumption and costs for heating homes and businesses; lower costs and energy consumption for states, cities and towns as less snowplowing and road sanding/salting are needed; fewer car accidents and slip-and-fall injuries on the ice; less road repair needed after milder winters; fewer house fires from wood-burning stoves; etc.
During the Medieval Warm Period of roughly 900 AD to 1300 AD, when the earth was much hotter than today, the European peasants thrived and even grew taller. Europe’s economy flourished during that period as less time, money and energy were needed to keep warm while the growing season expanded as did the warmer season in which economic activity always thrives.
But environmentalists never mention this Medieval period because it contradicts everything that they have been preaching.
Fortunately president Trump is fighting back against the alarmists. “Brutal and extended cold blast could shatter all records — whatever happened to global warming?” he said on Twitter.
Good for the president. God bless Trump.
Added note: Around Thanksgiving in the US, tens of thousands of French people protested violently over rising gasoline and diesel fuel prices caused by increased taxes on motor fuel. Reuters reports:
They are opposed to taxes (that French president) Macron introduced last year on diesel and petrol which are designed to encourage people to shift to more environmentally friendly transport. Alongside the tax, the government has offered incentives to buy green or electric vehicles.
In other words, the French are furious about the ‘carbon tax’ that Democrats want to bring to the US.
These protests were barely covered in the ‘green’ US media since they represented a revolt against environmental extremism.
But they should be protesting in front of the offices of French enviro groups that have persuaded the government to impose fuel taxes to fund ‘green’ energy and electric cars.
This protest could be the start of a much-anticipated global reaction against oppressive environmental policies.