I caught grief online by this jerk by saying that the seas aren’t rising and that his Global Warming religion was a lie. He was a pompous dick about it. I took grief from his pals, the now defunct Greenmonk and other like Analyst groups.
Fortunately, the truth wins out. He’s still a book publisher or whatever he does, but is still a troll. The tide comes in twice a day, that’s the only rising it’s done in a long time
The Independent posted an article claiming multiple small island nations are sinking into the sea, threatening the cease existing as nations, leaving their populations adrift. Data shows this is simply false. Amid modest sea level rise, the island nations that The Independent discusses have increased in size, population, and prosperity amid modest climate change. No real data shows that the oceans are about to swamp these countries.
“Small island nations such as Tuvalu, Kiribati, the Maldives and Marshall Islands are particularly vulnerable to climate change,” claims The Independent in its story, “These countries are sinking into the sea. What happens when they disappear forever?” “Rising seas, stronger storms, freshwater shortages and damaged infrastructure all threaten their ability to support life.
“Some islands even face the grim possibility of being abandoned or sinking beneath the ocean,” continues The Independent. “This raises an unprecedented legal question: can these small island nations still be considered states if their land disappears?”
While questions of international law with regard to the status of nations and their peoples should a country cease to exist are beyond the ken of Climate Realism, data indicates that the populations of these nations need not fear for their islands’ continued existence or, as result, the dissolution of their nation and national identity.
It was always a lie. Those of us who are critical thinkers saw it from the beginning, but then we’re the ones who wouldn’t get jabbed by the Covid clot shot. I bet Tim is fully boosted.
When you buy into a theory so obviously ludicrous without applying logic or pattern recognition to it, you’re going to come up looking like a fool, like Tim
Notice I didn’t say climate because global warming is a lie, a money laundering tool that is losing steam (see what I did there?)
Anyway, from Watts Up With That, why warming up is better than cooling.
Here in England this spring, there was dry, sunny weather through most of March, followed by gentle showers in April. And here is the opening couplet of Geoffrey Chaucer’s Tales of Caunterbury, written more than six centuries ago in 1387:
From the medieval climate optimum to the modern climate optimum, the weather in these islands has changed scarcely at all. The drought of March, the sweet April showers, the birdsong day and night, the bursting forth of primroses, bluebells, daffodils and other spring flowers, all are today just as Chaucer described them in the Middle Ages.
The wine-dark sea
One can even go back to Homer, in the 8th Century BC, who talked of the Mediterranean as “the wine-dark sea”. And here am I, almost three millennia later, recently recovered from a long illness caused by defective medication with no active ingredient in it, having climbed to the 1230ft summit of the Akamas peninsula in Cyprus, doing a Canute and challenging the wine-dark sea not to rise. The sea was wine-dark in Homer’s time. It is still wine-dark today.
Where, then, are the drastic changes in climate and consequent catastrophes and cataclysms so luridly predicted by the climate Communists? Where are the mass extinctions? Why is the climate much as it was in the Middle Ages? Why are ten times as many dying of cold as of heat? Why are crop yields at record highs? Why is the planet greening so fast?
Cold, not heat, is the real killer
Silvio Canto Jr., at the splendid American Thinker blog, reminds us that “Earth Day” began on Lenin’s birthday, 22 April. He sets out some examples of the half-witted predictions made by the totalitarian far Left in the early 1970s, when the “green holy day” started:
Paul Ehrlich, in a 1969 essay entitled Eco-Catastrophe!, wrote: “Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born. By [1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.”
In April 1970 he wrote in Mademoiselle: “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years”.
In the 1970 Earth Day issue of The Progressive, he sketched out his most alarmist scenario, telling readers that between 1980 and 1989 some 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in what he called the “Great Die-Off.”
In the May 1970 issue of Audubon, he wrote that DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons “may have substantially reduced the life expectancy of people born since 1945.” He said that Americans born since 1946 now had a life expectancy of only 49 years, and he predicted that if current patterns continued this expectancy would reach 42 years by 1980, when it might level out. According to the most recent CDC report, life expectancy in the US is 78.6 years.
That year he predicted that “air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone”. He predicted that 200,000 Americans would die by 1973 during “smog disasters” in New York and Los Angeles.
Five years later he predicted that “Since more than nine-tenths of the original tropical rainforests will be removed in most areas within the next 30 years or so [i.e., by 2005], it is expected that half of the organisms in these areas will vanish with it.”
Kenneth Watt, an ecologist, said: “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate … that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ’er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I’m very sorry, there isn’t any.’” Global oil production in 2024, at about 95 million barrels per day, was double the global oil output of 48 million barrels per day at the time of the first Earth Day in 1970.
He gave a speech predicting a pending Ice Age: “The world has been chilling sharply for about 20 years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an Ice Age.”
He also told Time that “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”
Barry Commoner, a Washington University biologist, wrote in the Earth Day issue of Environment: “We are in an environmental crisis that threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation.”
He also predicted that decaying organic pollutants would consume all of the oxygen in America’s rivers, suffocating freshwater fish.
George Wald, a Harvard biologist, estimated that “Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years [by 1985 or 2000] unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”
The New York Times, on its editorial page the day after the first Earth Day, wrote: “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.”
Denis Hayes, the chief organizer for Earth Day, wrote in the Spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness: “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation.”
Peter Gunter, a professor at North Texas State University, wrote in 1970: “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China, the Near East and Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions… By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” The prediction of famine in South America has come to pass only in Venezuela and only due to socialism, not due to environmental reasons.
Life Magazine reported in January 1970: “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution … by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching Earth by one half.”
Harrison Brown, a member of the National Academy of Sciences, published a chart in Scientific American that looked at metal reserves and estimated that humanity would totally run out of copper shortly after 2000, while lead, zinc, tin, gold, and silver would be gone before 1990.
Senator Gaylord Nelson wrote in Look: “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”
None of these lurid fantasies, mere pretexts for totalitarian control measures, has materialized.
While I have been ill, I have been quietly working on our team’s climatological research. For an update on our result, now published as an extended abstract after peer review, search YouTube for “Tom Nelson Monckton”.
I have also had long and detailed conversations with two Fellows of the Royal Society, who are justifiably concerned at the Society’s propensity to promulgate only the official narrative on questions such as global warming and are preparing to do something about it.
We have already notched up a useful initial victory. Several Communist Fellows had decided that now that Elon Musk is for some reason no longer a hero of the Left they should call a meeting of the Royal Society to strip him of his Fellowship.
In 2006 the State of California passed the Global Warming Solutions Act mandating an unattainable and massive reduction of greenhouse gasses within the state by 2020. This bill, and mindless near-religious allegiance to the “green” movement, set in motion the recent catastrophic events in Los Angeles and previously throughout much of California, a state that for the past twenty-five years has been increasingly controlled by a Marxist-inspired Democrat Party.
It is not a coincidence that the current environmental or “green” movement is the driving philosophical force animating the Democrat Party not only in California but on national basis as this movement has its roots in Marxism.
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote The Communist Manifesto in 1848. The general consensus on the Left is that Marx and Engels were in fact very conscious of and promoted the concept of what is considered to be the modern environmental movement. The current “green” movement is in reality a major facet of Marxist philosophy.
Among those who champion Marx’s environmentalism is Professor John Bellamy Foster of the University of Oregon. In 1997 he published The Crisis of the Earth, Marx’s Theory of Ecological Sustainability as a Nature-Imposed Necessity for Human Production.
Foster wrote, “Marx’s analysis of the crisis of the earth in the mid-nineteenth century led him to a concept of sustainability that was central to his vision of a communist society. Because this concept of sustainability was rooted in both a critique of capitalism and a vision of a future society, it has a richness and complexity all its own. A close examination of Marx’s concept of sustainability therefore offers important insight into the possibilities for the creation of a more just and sustainable world order.”
Per Raju J. Das of York University, Toronto, “Sustainability (or a healthy environment)… has to be fought for as part of a larger fight against the logistics of capitalism, such as endless accumulation, and against the system as a whole. Therefore, ecological sustainability is fundamentally a class issue.”
During the 1980s the global Communist Movement, due to setbacks in Russia and elsewhere, began to exploit and take over the fledging Marxist environmental movements in Europe and the United States. They saw the potential of the movement as a weapon to foment “peaceful” revolutions in democratic western nations.
The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 was not the end of communism but a metamorphosis of the means of revolution as environmentalism became the socialists/communists’ primary weapon in undermining capitalism and Western societies.
This tactic was quickly recognized by those who had suffered under the oppression of communism for decades. In his book Blue Planet in Green Shackles, Vaclav Klaus, the first president of the Czech Republic after the end of nearly four decades of Soviet dictatorship, warned the nations of Europe and the United States, “As someone who lived under communism for most of my life, I feel obligated to say that the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy, and prosperity at the beginning of the 21st century, is not communism or its various softer versions. It was replaced by ambitious environmentalism.”
One of the great deceptions used by the Soviet Union was the incessant propagandizing of a fictitious hypothesis — that humans are responsible for any change in the climate and the only means of saving the earth is by adopting Marxian socialism. A scientifically-proven false premise but a tactic fully embraced and exploited by the current environmentalist movement.
This propaganda campaign has successfully convinced over 54% of the American citizenry to believe in human-driven climate change and the unquestioned need for drastic action to combat the impact of human activity on the environment.
Among the hallmarks of Marxism/Communism is universal disregard for human life as mankind is viewed as a mere cog in a wheel and therefore whatever so-called rights he or she may be granted is solely at the whim of the state. An omnipotent entity that supposedly looks out for the best interest of the people. Yet, as history has amply chronicled, the advocates of communism have had no problem eliminating millions of lives in order to achieve a Marxist utopia.
Which neatly dovetails with the primary tenet of the green movement. Human activity causes climate change; therefore, human overpopulation is the cause of virtually all environmental and economic catastrophe. Consequently, any means of reducing the population is therefore acceptable, whether it is a negligently uncontrolled wildfire in Los Angeles, a green-agenda- induced drought or famine, an untested vaccine forcefully administered to untold millions around the globe, or the cataclysmic collapse of societies by accelerating the elimination of fossil fuels.
more here, if you dare, but it has nothing to do with caring for the environment. It’s using that as a tool to control the masses, just like Marxism
Just for the record, the Green New Deal is a Communist inspired strategy to spend money we don’t have until banrupt. Reagan did this to bring down the USSR. Learn from history. They only thing it would have helped would have been the bank accounts of the people supporting it.
Coming with the new year is a new president with a very different vision on energy than President Joe Biden, who campaigned on a promise to “end fossil fuel.”
President-elect Donald Trump is dismissive of the immediate “climate crisis” narrative that drove much of Biden’s energy policies. He promises to establish American “energy dominance” and focus policy on bringing down the cost of energy.
While Trump can overturn Biden’s industry-punishing executive orders and create a friendlier regulatory environment for the oil, gas, coal and mining industries, experts say there are economic and technical limits to what the outcomes of his policies will be. Looking ahead to 2025 and beyond, here’s what we might expect for energy and industry in the second Trump administration.
Market forces
During a speech at the Economic Club of New York luncheon in September, Trump said he would end the Biden-Harris administration’s “anti-energy crusade and implement a policy of energy abundance, energy independence, and even energy dominance.” This would include, he said, getting the price of gasoline down below $2 per gallon, which would decrease the cost of all goods and services.
“may have several negative impacts on the local environment and economy”
See the post below about Germany being dumbasses about the same thing. Use gas. It’s cheap and it isn’t killing whales or the environment. Those are lies made up by hypocritical zealots whose religion is green (money, not sustainability like Al Gore and John Kerry).
Drill baby drill and bring down the cost of energy, bringing down the cost of everything else. For those who worship the planet, watch and see that it won’t harm a thing. It will actually be better for everything except their wallets
Everyone knows this has been a boondoggle, even the left, but they’re so committed to supposed ‘green’ energy that they can’t let go.
A government regulator recognizing offshore wind’s destructive environmental effects is as rare as a North Atlantic right whale. But a recent, 600-plus page report from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) admits that the offshore wind development planned for the New York Bight—the triangular area bordered by the New Jersey and Long Island coastlines—may irreversibly harm whales, commercial and recreational fisheries, and seabirds.
The BOEM report is the agency’s first to evaluate the cumulative impacts of offshore wind development. Its authors cite a wide range of potential effects, from negligible (or even beneficial) to major. Acknowledging potentially “major” harms is a radical departure from the agency’s previously accepted Environmental Impact Statements for offshore wind projects, which have always focused on the impacts of individual projects, rather than the cumulative impacts of multiple projects.
The report, which BOEM bills as a “programmatic environmental impact statement,” admits that the proposed offshore wind projects on the New York Bight may have several negative impacts on the local environment and economy. The authors note, for example, that the effect on the North Atlantic right whale could be “major,” defined as having “severe population-level effects” that would “compromise the viability of the species”—in other words, potential extinction. The report also concedes that the projects could have major effects (“substantial disruptions”) on commercial and recreational fishing, which contribute billions of dollars to the New Jersey and New York economies.
While the report discusses the consequences of these wind turbines on ocean views and even on local housing prices, it makes no mention of these projects’ adverse effects on electric ratepayers and economic growth. These effects are substantial, as New Jersey’s experience reveals. The state’s Board of Public Utilities estimated that its two approved offshore wind projects in 2024, with a total capacity of 2,400 MW, would raise the monthly electric bills of a typical residential customer by about $7, a commercial customer by about $59, and an industrial customer by over $500. Those estimated costs, which don’t include what those customers will pay for new transmission lines and the backup generation needed to offset wind’s inherent intermittency, cumulatively amount to more than a $750 million annual increase in electric bills for the state’s 8.5 million electric ratepayers. , based on the numbers of these customers. If the Garden State succeeds in its goal of developing 11,000 megawatts of offshore wind electricity, despite mounting costs and the cancellations of two major in-state projects, ratepayers alone will end up paying an additional $3 billion to $5 billion more each year for their electricity.
Researchers have analyzed mummified remains pulled from Siberia’s permafrost in 2020 and determined they belong to a 3-week-old saber-toothed kitten that died at least 35,000 years ago.
Researchers have pulled the mummy of a newborn saber-toothed cat that died at least 35,000 years ago from Siberia’s permafrost — and the kitten still has its whiskers and claws attached.
A new analysis of the kitten’s stunningly-preserved head and upper body shows it was just 3 weeks old when it died in what is now Russia’s northeastern Sakha Republic, also known as Yakutia. Scientists found pelvic bones, a femur and shin bones encased in a block of ice together with the mummy. The circumstances of the animal’s death are unknown.
It is extremely rare to find well-preserved remains of saber-toothed cats, and this one belongs to the species Homotherium latidens, according to a study published Thursday (Nov. 14) in the journal Scientific Reports. Saber-toothed cats of the extinct genus Homotherium lived across the globe during the Pliocene (5.3 million to 2.6 million years ago) and early Pleistocene (2.6 million to 11,700 years ago) epochs, but evidence suggests this group became less widespread toward the end of the Pleistocene (also known as the last ice age).
“For a long time, the latest presence of Homotherium in Eurasia was recorded in the Middle Pleistocene [770,000 to 126,000 years ago],” researchers wrote in the study. “The discovery of H. latidens mummy in Yakutia radically expands the understanding of the distribution of the genus and confirms its presence in the Late Pleistocene [126,000 to 11,700 years ago] of Asia.”
The small, deep-frozen mummy shows H. latidens was well-adapted to ice age conditions, according to the study. The researchers compared the carcass to that of a modern 3-week-old lion (Panthera leo) cub and found the saber-toothed kitten had wider paws and no carpal pads — pads on the wrist joint that act as shock absorbers in today’s felines. These adaptations enabled saber-toothed cats to walk with ease in snow, while thick, soft fur observed on the mummy shielded the predators against polar temperatures.
The comparison with the lion revealed that saber-toothed cats had a larger mouth, smaller ears, longer forelimbs, darker hair and a much thicker neck. Researchers already knew from studying the skeletons of adult Holotherium that these saber-toothed cats had short bodies and elongated limbs, but the new research shows these features were already present at the age of 3 weeks.
They are killing whales. It’s not that hard to figure out. There are so many better ways to generate energy. Hell, AI has gone nuclear, which is as clean as you can get when done right.
In a surprising yet overdue move, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) has released its Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for the New York Bight. This document, despite its extensive layers of technical jargon and cautious language, marks a pivotal shift. It appears to be a rare admission from BOEM that offshore wind farms are indeed capable of causing harm—biologically, socioeconomically, physically, and culturally.
The PEIS covers six commercial wind energy leases off the shores of New Jersey and New York, totaling over 488,000 acres. While its primary focus is to outline measures to “avoid, minimize, mitigate, and monitor” impacts, the fact that BOEM is even considering these measures implies a long-overdue acknowledgment of offshore wind’s potential to harm marine ecosystems and coastal communities. The language in the document hints that these developments are not entirely benign, despite being repeatedly framed as environmentally friendly solutions to the climate crisis.
Impacts Revealed
While BOEM insists that the PEIS is “programmatic” and not the final say on the matter, the document does provide insight into some of the broader consequences of wind energy development. The PEIS details potential adverse impacts across various categories:
Biological Impacts: Marine mammals, sea turtles, birds, and fish could suffer due to noise, habitat displacement, and changes in migration patterns. Even bats, which are not typically associated with offshore environments, could be affected.
This is beyond ridiculous for stupidity on many levels. Besides the fact that it’s a tax based on a climate lie, it adds to the tax base of a group of socialists who pay one of the highest tax rates in the free world.
Of course, they tell you that education and medical care are free, but they just pay upfront, out of their paychecks. Nothing is free. Also, the medical care sucks. My wife’s relatives live there and I hear the stories directly from them about waiting six weeks for crummy care. It’s a schadenboner for me when I hear about Denmark doing another brainless move like this.
Here we go:
Dairy farmers in Denmark have to pay the world’s first carbon tax on their livestock, all in the name of a climate crisis that does not exist.
The country’s coalition government agreed this week to introduce the world’s first carbon emissions tax on agriculture. It will mean new levies on livestock starting in 2030.
Denmark is a major dairy and pork exporter, and agriculture is the country’s biggest source of emissions. The coalition agreement — which also entails investing 40 billion krone ($3.7 billion) in measures such as reforestation and establishing wetlands — is aimed at helping the country meet its climate goals.
“With today’s agreement, we are investing billions in the biggest transformation of the Danish landscape in recent times,” Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said in a statement Tuesday. “At the same time, we will be the first country in the world with a (carbon) tax on agriculture.”
Estimated cost per cow: 672 kroner ($96) annually, based on average emissions of 5.6 tons of CO2 equivalent per cow.
Implementation date: 2030
Initial tax rate: 300 kroner ($43) per ton of CO2 equivalent
Tax rate by 2035: 750 kroner ($108) per ton of CO2 equivalent
Effective tax after 60% tax break: 120 kroner ($17) per ton in 2030, rising to 300 kroner ($43) by 2035
Dairy is one of their country’s largest industries and they are going to help make it more expensive, thus killing the golden goose.
Her relatives love to think how smart they are and tell me how bad the USA is. It’s gems like this that let me chuckle at the chuckleheads. That they both buy the climate lies and self-penalize their economy tells me who’s not really that smart. I don’t even have to say anything when stuff like this comes out.
America’s dirtiest beach revealed: Beautiful coast is making dozens sick due to river pumping in raw sewage in what’s been branded a ‘portable toilet’
California is home to three of the most polluted beaches in the country, according to a new report.
The Surfrider Foundation tested thousands of water samples across the nation, with Imperial Beach in San Diego coming out as the worst.
As part of the group’s survey, they also found that 64 percent of the 567 sites tested had at least one sample with unsafe bacteria levels.
A quarter of the samples came from sites in California, with three beaches in The Golden State among the ten most polluted.
Every sample recovered from Imperial Beach turned up bacteria counts that exceeded the state’s health standard for recreational waters.
More than 100 billion gallons of untreated wastewater have flowed through Mexico ‘s Tijuana River and into the Pacific Ocean, eventually reaching the coastal town
If you search the site for EVs or Electric Vehicles, you’ll find every reason not to buy one, and thankfully, we’re not the only ones pointing it out. EV sales are lousy in the US, which has to be why Democrat states are looking to ban gas-powered cars.
They want you on an EV bus, a bicycle, walking, or better yet – living on an urban heat island confined to quarters. If you live under that yoke, here’s a reminder of why you need to make a change politically – if you still can.
EVs have a short shelf life compared to other vehicles. Whatever the battery warranty is, that’s it. It’s over. No one is going to buy it used; it is almost worthless as a trade-in. Given how much shorter this life span can be compared to a more affordable combustion engine vehicle (assuming you didn’t crash your EV and have to scrap it sooner), you will need another car. If you are an EV-tard, that’ll mean another whole-vehicle carbon footprint before its time and a repeat of what you just went through.
If you buy a used EV and the car is over five years old (Don’t do it!), You can expect to spend two to three times its value to replace the battery pack, which has been losing range rapidly since you bought it. You might get a few years out of it.
In other words, never buy a used EV. Just don’t do it. Here’s an example of the problem and why internal combustion engine vehicles are irreplaceable (disregarding the reality that EV trucks, tractors, and other heavy equipment will never be EV on this technology)
It’s a cult purchase for those who are good sheep or socialists that think somehow they are helping the environment while young children are digging up Cobalt for their batteries half way around the world.
Plus, the sound of a V-8 or a V-12 is a dick hardener for those of us who have a pair and know how a car should sound.
When delta smelt were listed as a threatened species, the biggest cause of their population decline was identified as reduced freshwater flow into the estuary. This makes the water saltier, which leads to dehydration. This is similar to the reason humans shouldn’t drink saltwater when they’re thirsty. Because of this, a recovery plan was made that mandated increased freshwater flow for the smelt, which meant less water for agriculture.
They were willing to cause environmental damage to agriculture for a relatively unremarkable fish, all for political reasons.
Record Rain
The net is a water shortage. It was blamed on global warming, but that just shows the level of lowness they will go to in California for political gain.
Now, with the flooding that happened yesterday, there is an abundance of water, but since it’s regulated against the farmers, it will be diverted away and crops will likely suffer later in the year.
An intense, long-lasting atmospheric river is moving across California — bringing widespread power outages and the potential for mudslides and life-threatening flooding as it dumps heavy rain and snow. Follow our live coverage here. This is what’s happening:
• Rare high flood risk persists: A firehose of rain has parked over Southern California, including Los Angeles, worsening the high risk of flooding throughout Monday. Torrential rainfall and “locally catastrophic” flooding is possible in Orange County through Tuesday, according to the National Weather Service office in San Diego.
In the end, climate change will be blamed for what was government mismanagement and stupidity.
It’s just another step in the climate staircase that is built on government regulations. In fact, if they’d stop laundering money through yet another scare tactic to distract the population, there would be no water shortage since nature took care of it already.
Unfortunately, California is the canary in the coal mines of the US. This craziness needs to be stomped out and put to death before it fully infects the rest of the country.
Cities coast-to-coast grappling with broken-down e-buses that cannot be fixed ..
Between the federal government, states and municipalities, untold billions in taxpayer dollars have been spent adding electric buses to transit fleets across the U.S. in an effort to reduce carbon emissions.
However, cities from coast-to-coast are grappling with broken-down e-buses that cannot be fixed, are too expensive to fix, or they have scrapped their electric fleets altogether.
Officials in Asheville, North Carolina, recently expressed frustration that three of the five e-buses the city purchased for millions in 2018 are now sitting idle due to a combination of software issues, mechanical problems and an inability to obtain replacement parts.
Earlier this month, The Denver Gazette reported two of the four e-buses Colorado Springs’ Mountain Metropolitan Transit acquired in 2021 are not running. They cost $1.2 million a piece, mostly paid for by government grants.
Part of the problem is the manufacturer of the buses, Proterra, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in August. The company, founded in 2004, rose to become the largest e-bus company in the U.S., representing nearly 40% of the market prior to going belly-up.
Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm sat on Proterra’s board until she joined the Biden administration
So we have COP28, where the global elites take private jets to an oil producing nation to both make a ton in fossil fuels and restrict the USA from producing oil, thus becoming economically sound. All the while, China and India are much greater carbon sinners. The difference is that currently, the US is the ATM of both the world and the climate liars.
What confounds me is that people have been brainwashed enough to actually believe in this money laundering hoax. Are they that under educated? It’s the same crying wolf theme every time, if you don’t send money, the world is going to end.
Can you imagine a more hilariously ignoble end to the great push to green the global economy, than for the centrepiece of the green movement to transform into a giant oil and gas market?
Dubai’s climate shambles exposed: UAE energy tsar Sultan Al Jaber secretly used COP28 talks to push his own oil and gas projects, in latest shock revelations about warming meet
The UAE’s Sultan Al Jaber used climate talks to bag oil and gas deals: report
He controversially heads both the UN’s climate meet and the UAE’s main oil firm
“The global environment crisis may demand responses that are comparatively radical…. It will call for … a Strategic Environment Initiative.” (Al Gore, 1989)
Al Gore might be the the slickest of the 70,000 expected at the United Nations’ Conference of the Parties (COP28) climate meeting in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) from November 30th until December 12, 2023. Gore is the world’s #1 climate barker–and has made tens of millions of dollars from his “crisis.” He has one of the highest CO2 footprints on the globe … but he is different, you know.
So what’s new with Al Gore’s pitch? Not much. His crisis in the 1980s is still the crisis of 2023. We are in a “planetary emergency.”We are almost out of time. There is hope with a new energy future….
Mid-course correction not. Sort of like Enron, the climate crusader until its demise.
—————-
Just to document the yawns that 99 percent of the world have toward the never-ending crisis, read excerpts from his Washington Post editorial, “Earth’s Fate Is the No. 1 National Security Issue” (May 14, 1989).
The world is in a crisis–and we are ignoramuses for not seeing what is so clearly obvious (“don’t look up,” they say 34 years later). And an all-of-government (Biden’s phrase) to arrest the ‘crisis’ that only the experts and politicians can see, not us boiling frogs (as one person recently said about us uncleansed).
Our civilization has never experienced any environmental shift remotely similar to this. Today’s climate pattern has existed throughout the entire history of human civilization.
That was Al Gore in 2007. According to Gore, the climate was “shiftless” for thousands of years — a paradigm of stability.
Gore’s quote was a restatement of Michael Mann’s 1998 “hockey stick.” Mann argued that the Earth’s climate held steady for all of human history (the hockey stick handle), until suddenly, in the 1900s, the temperatures increased, representing the upturned blade of the hockey stick.
How is it that the last six great ice ages started with far more CO2 in the atmosphere than we have now?
Is it true, as many experts note, that temperatures drive CO2 levels, and not the other way around?
How does anthropogenic CO2 drive climate when it makes up less than 5% of total CO2 (with most coming from the oceans, volcanoes, decaying vegetation, and forest fires)?
Isn’t the sun the most important cause of climate, and what effects follow from sun spots and solar flares?
If greenhouse gases (GHGs) are the most significant drivers of climate change, then why do we focus on CO2, when water vapor (i.e., clouds) is a far more impactful GHG? (In fact, there have been a flurry of recent published studies on the effects of clouds.)
Instead of trashing the USA and using the climate scam as a shell game to get rich.
It took 10,144,035 tons of Coal, 50,084,600 tons of Quartz, 11,271,150 tons of Charcoal and 5,635,575 tons of Woodchips to build this 345 acre 196,320 panel solar field in China, and that's just the metallurgical-grade silicon, not any copper, steels or plastics. #GreenEnergypic.twitter.com/Tm3IU4t9hp
California has loved to stifle any form of capitalism with overbearing environmental laws has just done this:
A “catastrophic failure” killed 21,000 fish at a UC Davis research facility, the university announced Thursday.
We’ve had to listen to decades of them protecting water against farmers using it so a worthless fish (compared to what they killed) could stand in the way of irrigation.
There is enough water for the state if they would quit mismanaging it.
I could go on about them killing raptors (especially eagles) in favor of turbines, that don’t help their rolling blackouts either.
They don’t really care about the environment as stated. They want to restrict resources to control the population. They have the most private jets flying around the world (to global warming conferences) so don’t give us the argument that this is for the climate. They only care to control money, the goal of climate change anyway.
This is after they protect pet fish also:
The center has made headlines in recent years for assisting with pet fish injured in California wildfires. In 2017, 16 koi fish were rushed to CABA for care after being impacted by the Wine Country wildfires; they recovered and were returned to their grateful owner.
Now I could tie this to the 20 plus food plants that have burned creating a food shortage, something the Soviets did to starve their population, but then that would be conspiratorial. People hate it when I am right on this so I won’t say anything.
There is a pattern here by the left. Using climate issues for control. It’s there for you to see.
One of the areas hit hard by the drought is the state’s farms. This is especially troubling as we enter an era of food scarcity concerns. Commenting on the poor state handling of the drought and its impact on California agriculture, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., blasted for mishandling the problem during his time in office.
“I think Gavin Newsom has failed when it comes to water,” McCarthy, who represents a district in California’s Central Valley, said.
…[F]armers’ yields and, consequently, their businesses, are suffering, said Sam Parnagian, a third generation California Central Valley farmer. Over one-third of the country’s vegetables and two-thirds of its fruits and nuts are grown in California, according to the state Department of Food and Agriculture.
“You’ll go see tens of thousands of acres that used to have nuts, almonds, pistachios, and they’re just bare,” “It’s just all dust.”
This is a grave matter, especially for those who love pasta and french fries. The poor planning and negligence in accommodating agricultural needs mean a looming tomato shortage.
California leads the world in production of processing tomatoes — the variety that gets canned and used in commercial kitchens to make some of the most popular foods. The problem is the worst drought in 1,200 years is forcing farmers to grapple with a water crisis that’s undermining the crop, threatening to further push up prices from salsa to spaghetti sauce.
Note: I’ve edited this to accurately represent what really happened at the Green and Sustainability effort during my tenure at this job. It has died because once the fury of Green passed by, nobody cared about it. That accurately reflects the real position by everyone in the company that I worked with except the executive who got paid for running it. I don’t think he cared either once the assaignment was over because he moved on and it was dropped.
I was given a stretch assignment for Green IT at IBM this year. A stretch assignment means you get another job without the extra pay, or layoffs just happened and a person now has to do the work of 2 since they don’t want to backfill, or the powers that be don’t feel like you have enough to do so they use this as retribution. In this case it’s mostly the second one because they know I can deliver when others can’t, so they dump stuff on me frequently.
I have a lot ahead of me, thus the title of this blog post. The hardest thing about this assignment is that I know that IBM doesn’t really believe in it (and there is only a small faction of nuts in the company trying to get buy in). The entire premise is almost 100% hype for corporate responsibility and image rather than any actual product or offering. I really wasn’t given a choice whether I wanted to do it and I certainly will do my job, but as you can see in the details below, it’s hard to believe in something when it’s based on bullshit. I see through it and I know that TPTB are just being politically correct to avoid the (very small but politically damaging) social justice warrior hostage taking out there.
During the Major Analyst Conference we did in November, I had to get this nonsense into all the Smarter Planet materials to show (SJW and PC) compliance (so as to not get the Jessie Jackson-ish extortion treatment by the Al Gore crowd). It turns out to be a bunch of nonsense that is made up to try to fool the press and analysts into thinking IBM actually does something in the Green space.
It all started out with trying to be politically correct about global warming, since IBM really isn’t and has the carbon footprint of China (or Al Gore’s 2 houses and jet setting around the world). Now, everyone has started shying away from the words “global warming” once the world saw through that as a lie and ineffective, they renamed it Sustainability. That means you wrap up all the things that tangentially have something to do with being sustainable, since it is a nebulous name and concept and voila, you claim sustainability.
Once the word sustainability gets found out as a fraud as part of the global warming and money grabbing hoax, you then call it Smarter Planet or roll it up into that campaign and somehow you are politically correct, even if you aren’t really doing anything different (which IBM isn’t). We had to sell this crock to the press and analysts who wanted so badly to be able to charge extort us for pretending to buy our baloney of offering something in this space that resembled eco-friendliness. They were compliant in our scam as long as there was money.
The worst thing is having to deal with the idiots out there who buy into this Gaia religion like Tom Raftery of Greenmonk and James Governor of Redmonk and Greenmonk. Our executives in a briefing after a different Green Day analyst conference in London actually called James a wanker and Tom a whiner after the event due to their outbursts and views as they interrupted the entire day. Greenmonk has since gone dormant for lack of money, facts and believable content on climate. Their credibility was shot when they wanted a carbon tax at a dollar a pound. James told me the real truth was he wanted to make money while trying pretend that they were doing it to save the planet, making money being the operative words (see the above extortion tactics). I put the Dilbert cartoon in specifically for O’Reilly, Raftery and Governer – the 3 stooges.
The net of it is that IBM is pretending to be a player in this shell game but is a pseudo player. Fortunately, the analysts and press who are pushing it are just bully’s, but know as we all do that the evidence is not there, so they make up new stories when the lack of facts expose the wild goose chase de jour.
Too bad it is all a farce and IBM’s offering is equally a load of hogwash.
THE WORLD IS FLATTER, BUT NOT LIKE YOU THINK.
That is right, the real flat earther’s are the one’s who buy into this farce of “sustainability” like Greenmonk whose job was to suck around for money. Another dissembler Tim O’Reilly, who couldn’t defend global warming with anything other than “climate science is hard” (or I have no real facts so I’ll call you names), while condemning those who don’t believe in it wrong without any proof of his position was another nut I had to deal with. None of either’s positions are based on anything but computer climate predictions of which none have come even close. they based their position on the IPCC report. It now comes out that The IPCC; Never Has So Much Been Made Out of So Little by So Many at So Great A Cost. In other words it was a money transaction that had nothing to do with climate other than earth worshipping. Any other “climate facts” are 50 years in the future, which is an even bigger joke since real meteorologists can barely predict the weather next week. I could be convinced of global warming if there was one little thing called evidence. What I find unfathomable is the lack of backbone by IBM to stand up to this money grabbing extortion theme by these pseudo experts.
As it turns out, I had tweeted in response to Tim’s crisis about the rising tides that I didn’t believe him, but would accept his facts if he had any. Like all good climate warriors, he made ad hominem attacks on me and in a more harmless statement, said that I got all my information from Fox News (I don’t watch any news as my career with the media already told me that the press are biased). The only real facts about the state of Climate issues are found at What’s up with That unlike Tim who had no facts like all climate warriors.
As it turns out, the tides are receding Tim and here is the evidence. The waters on the island of Tuvalu (the tidal benchmark) are receding. This is one of the crisis places of the world that was supposed to be drowned along with the Statue of Liberty. So Tim, your views are biased and calling people flat-Earther’s because they don’t sign up for the pseudo science you have bought into is ridiculous, like your views.
Epilogue:
I got out of this assignment because I couldn’t lie for the company, nor lie to myself by doing something I didn’t believe in and realized was a lie. It’s lost its mojo because both the premise of Sustainability and climate change are based on predictive models that aren’t true. The fact that IBM doesn’t really do anything (other that trying to keep up with the Jones) was too much for me to take, and claim any sense of honesty. My credibility is more important than getting a paycheck for lying. I’d never make it as a politician.
I left the position right before a green conference where Al Gore was the speaker. It was the second time in my IBM career that I made a conscious decision to avoid him so as to not listen to his spew about global warming, nor be disappointed in humanity by seeing so many people being fooled by this scam based on redistribution of money to the climate warriors.
I told James that it was good that Gore wasn’t president on 9/11/2001 as he couldn’t lead a lottery winner to any bank (other than his bank account), let alone a nation in a real crisis. Being a good liberal, he was offended since he knew it was true and couldn’t defend his hero. He, like Biden and Cheney were only impeachment insurance for their respective presidents.
So having to lie to defend Climate anything, especially at IBM when I understood the facts makes it hard to be green. I’ve moved on to something I can be honest about.
The position went away as it became “under the guise of everything is sustainable” – (more lies) that we didn’t need a person babysitting it anymore. The real truth is that it didn’t develop into an issue like diversity that a company could be blackmailed into payment or bad PR due to non-compliance. It just went away as did the fake committment to global warming by my employer.
During the 1980s the global Communist Movement, due to setbacks in Russia and elsewhere, began to exploit and take over the fledging Marxist environmental movements in Europe and the United States. They saw the potential of the movement as a weapon to foment “peaceful” revolutions in democratic western nations.
.jpg)
Delusions of Adequacy 