Climate Change: The New Fear Porn (Consolidated Thread)

[schwartzie]

Climate Change Committee: Public Must Stop Heating Homes at Night to Meet ‘Net Zero’ Goals

Frank BergmanAugust 30, 2023 - 12:44 pm6 Comments



Britain’s Climate Change Committee (CCC) is calling for the public to stop heating homes at evening and night times in order to meet the “Net Zero” goals of the globalist green agenda.



CCC CEO Chris Stark is urging the UK government to crack down on home energy use in order to comply with “Net Zero.”



Stark, head of the CCC, is demanding that ordinary citizens turn off their heaters at night as part of a wider drive to deliver “emissions savings.”



The plan includes a shift away from gas boilers which Stark has admitted to still using himself.



Contained in a document on “behavior change,” the CCC recommended that Britons instead “pre-heat” their houses in the afternoons when electricity use is lower.



The CCC egregiously claims the restrictions would theoretically save families money.



“There is significant potential to deliver emissions savings, just by changing the way we use our homes,” reads the CCC’s sixth “carbon budget” paper.



The paper lays out how the UK should reduce its emissions between 2033 and 2037.



“Where homes are sufficiently well insulated, it is possible to pre-heat ahead of peak times, enabling access to cheaper tariffs which reflect the reduced costs associated with running networks and producing power during off-peak times,” the paper states.




The demand has triggered a widespread backlash from critics.



“The grid is already creaking and daft ideas like this show just how much worse it will become,” Andrew Montford, the director of green agenda watchdog group Net Zero Watch, told The Telegraph.


“It’s clear that renewables are a disaster in the making.



“We now need political leaders with the courage to admit it.”



According to Conservative Party MP Craig Mackinlay, head of his party’s Net Zero Scrutiny group, “It is becoming clear that adherence to judicable Carbon Budgets and edicts coming from the CCC are developing into farce.”



“The Climate Change Act 2008 will require an amendment to free us from madcap and impractical targets foisted upon the population by long-departed politicians.



JOIN THE FIGHT - DONATE TO SLAY NEWS TODAY!

“This latest advice to freeze ourselves on cold evenings merely shows the truth that the dream of plentiful and cheap renewable energy is a sham.



“I came into politics to improve all aspects of my constituents’ lives, not make them colder and poorer,” he told The Telegraph.



The CCC insists that following the advice means “homes will still be warm, but bills can be lowered.”



“This is a demonstration of homeowners benefiting from periods of the day when electricity is cheaper.”



“Using electricity to heat a home opens the prospect of choosing a time when prices are lower, something that’s not possible with a gas boiler,” he continued.



“Smart heating of homes like this also makes the best possible use of the grid and supports greater use of cheap renewable generation.”



As The Telegraph reports:



The advice follows a furore over Government plans to ban the installation of new oil powered boilers from 2026 and force homes into adopting heat pumps.



Downing Street has hinted it is now set to U-turn amid warnings the move would increase rural fuel poverty and put more strain on the struggling electricity grid.



The CCC is an independent body set up by ministers in 2008 to advise the Government on how to hit its climate targets.



In its latest report, the committee criticises No 10 over its “worryingly slow” action on climate.



It states that Downing Street’s support for new oil and coal exploration and the expansion of airports meant Britain was no longer a global green leader.



Last month Stark, the head of the CCC, admitted that he still has a gas boiler at home instead of an electric heat pump.



And he’s not alone, according to the CCC:








“I have a gas boiler,” he told the Commons environmental audit committee.



“I wish I didn’t, but I live in a flat, and heat pumps are a very difficult thing to put in there.



“The gas boiler guy who comes round and fixes my gas boiler – it breaks very often – tells me they will never work.”

link

[schwartzie]

1600 Scientists, Including Nobel Prize Winners, Declare ‘Climate Emergency’ a Hoax

Frank Bergman
August 31, 2023 - 12:57 pm


Over 1600 scientists from around the world have joined forces by signing a declaration stating that claims of a “climate emergency” threatening the Earth are a hoax.



The massive group of scientists, which includes two Nobel Prize winners, signed the World Climate Declaration (WCD).



The WCD dismisses the existence of a “climate crisis” and insists that carbon dioxide is beneficial to Earth.



The declaration directly conflicts with the popular alarmist narrative that claims humans are destroying the planet with their carbon output.



As Slay News has reported, the anti-carbon agenda is part of the “Net Zero” goals pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and other unelected globalist organizations.



However, “Net Zero” has been increasingly dictating government policy in recent years.



“Net Zero” has even become a fundamental part of Democrat President Joe Biden’s agenda.



Biden’s unregulated and unelected “climate czar” John Kerry frequently cites “Net Zero” goals while waging war on the agriculture industry.



Kerry has repeatedly pushed for farmers to drastically reduce food production to meet these globalist goals.



As Slay News has reported, America has now even joined 13 other nations in signing a global pact to crack down on farming to “save the planet” from “carbon emissions.”

However, scientists have been increasingly warning that the green agenda is driven by globalist politics and not science or environmental advocacy.



In an effort to expose the lie to the public, a total of 1,609 scientists and professionals from around the world have now signed the World Climate Declaration, including 321 from the United States.


The WCD was created by the Global Climate Intelligence Group (CLINTEL) and was first published in early August, as Slay News reported at the time.



Since it was published, hundreds of scientists have signed the WCD.



“There is no climate emergency,” the WCD declares.



“Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific.



“Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.”



The coalition points out that Earth’s climate has varied as long as it has existed.



Climate alarmists claim that humans have been contributing to “man-made global warming” since the Industrial Revolution.



However, the planet has experienced several cold and warm phases throughout the centuries.



The Little Ice Age only ended as recently as 1850, they said.



“Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming,” the declaration said.



Warming is happening “far slower” than predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.



“Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools,” the coalition said.



The declaration adds that these models “exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases” and “ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.”



For instance, even though climate alarmists characterize carbon dioxide (CO2) as environmentally damaging, the coalition pointed out that the gas is “not a pollutant.”



Carbon dioxide is “essential” to all life on Earth



CO2 is “favorable” for nature and helps to green the Earth, not destroy it.



Extra CO2 results in the growth of global plant biomass while also boosting the yields of crops worldwide.



CLINTEL also dismissed the narrative of “global warming” being linked to increased natural disasters like hurricanes, floods, wildfires, and droughts.



They stress that there is “no statistical evidence” to support these claims.



“There is no climate emergency,” the scientists assert.



“Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm.



“We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050.



“Go for adaptation instead of mitigation; adaptation works whatever the causes are.”



“To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in,” the WCD states.



“This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central.



“Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science.



“Should not we free ourselves from the naive belief in immature climate models?”



Among the CLINTEL signatories are two Nobel laureates—physicists John Francis Clauser from the United States and Ivan Giaever, a Norwegian-American.



Clauser has made a significant addition to climate models to dismiss the narrative of global warming: the visible light reflected by cumulus clouds which, on average, cover half of the Earth.



Current climate models vastly underestimate this aspect of cumulus cloud reflection, which plays a key role in regulating the earth’s temperature.



Clauser previously told President Biden that he disagreed with his climate policies.



In May, Clauser was elected to the board of directors at the CO2 Coalition, a group focusing on the beneficial contributions of carbon dioxide to the environment.



As Slay News reported, Clauser spoke out to warn the public that the “climate crisis” narrative being pushed by the global elite and their allies in the corporate media is a hoax.



Clauser, who was also awarded the 2010 Wolf Prize in Physics, the second most prestigious physics award after the Nobel, warns that fearmongering climate science is nothing more than “massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience.”



“The popular narrative about climate change reflects a dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world’s economy and the well-being of billions of people,” Clauser said in a May 5 statement.



“Misguided climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience.



“In turn, the pseudoscience has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other unrelated ills.



“It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies, and environmentalists.



“In my opinion, there is no real climate crisis.”



Claims of a “climate crisis” are being promoted around the globe by governments and their media accomplice in an effort to comply with the green agenda goals of the World Economic Forum (WEF), United Nations (UN), the World Health Organization (WHO), and other unelected globalist organizations.



Meeting these goals typically involved plans to slash the quality of life for most of the general public while ramping up taxes to “save the planet.”



Meanwhile, the handful of powerful elites promoting the green agenda will continue to fly around in private jets and eat meat because they are “part of the solution.”



link

[schwartzie]

Bill Gates Pushes Plan to Chop Down 70 Million Acres of Trees to ‘Fight Global Warming’

Frank Bergman
August 31, 2023 - 12:29 pm


Microsoft co-founder is funding a new effort that seeks to chop down a staggering 70 million acres of trees in an effort to allegedly “fight global warming.”



Gates’s organization, Breakthrough Energy, has plowed $6.6 million into the project led by Kodama Systems.



The move will see 70m acres of forests, mostly in the Western United States, cut down.



After the trees have been chopped down, they will be buried.



According to the project organizers, “scientists” say “burying trees can reduce global warming.”



Kodama claims that burying the trees will prevent them from allegedly “spewing” carbon back into the air.



The coordinators of the project are choosing to reap the salable carbon offsets by burying the biomass in dry & oxygen-free “earthenvaults.”



The trees will be buried instead of being used for conventional means, like timber for housing.



WATCH:

Gates has been pushing several controversial schemes that claim to fight “climate change.”



As Slay News previously reported, Gates has been funding efforts to block out light from the Sun to fight “global warming” by cooling the Earth.



The plan involves blocking the Sun’s rays from reaching the Earth using solar geoengineering.


The scheme would lower the planet’s temperature and allegedly combat “global warming.”



Despite the obvious risks with such a plan, the U.S. government is currently investigating stratospheric geoengineering.



Gates previously backed a similar major project at Harvard using balloons to deploy aerosols into the atmosphere to block sunlight.



However, the Gates-funded tests were put on hold after some pushback.



link

[schwartzie]

Climate Scientist Admits Omitting ‘Full Truth’ from ‘Global Warming’ Study to Fit Green Agenda Narrative

Frank Bergman
September 6, 2023 - 12:44 pm


A celebrated climate scientist has admitted to intentionally omitting the “full truth” from a published study paper on “global warming” to make the results align with the globalist green agenda.



Patrick T. Brown made the admission in a Tuesday article in The Free Press.



Brown said that he deliberately omitted the “full truth” from a paper he recently authored in order to increase its chances of publication in a prestigious peer-reviewed journal.



He noted that he left parts out to fit with the current narrative that “man-made global warming” is causing a so-called “climate crisis.”



Brown explained his decision-making in the piece.



He asserts that he knowingly overlooked truths in his work in order to make it more appealing to the leftist editorial biases of leading journals like Nature and Science.



Brown and seven other authors wrote a paper that examined the relationship between “climate change” and wildfire risks in California.



Nature published the paper in August 2023 as wildfires raged in Hawaii and Democrats and the corporate media blamed “climate change.”



Brown stated that scientists hoping to advance their careers by getting published in leading journals are inclined to tailor their findings to align with the biases of editors and reviewers.



He notes that this dynamic “distorts a great deal of climate science research, misinforms the public, and most importantly, makes practical solutions more difficult to achieve.”



“I knew not to try to quantify key aspects other than climate change in my research because it would dilute the story that prestigious journals like Nature and its rival, Science, want to tell,” Brown writes about his study paper.



He asserts that reviewers and “editors of these journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives—even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society.”



Brown further explains that the incentive structure he criticizes induces authors to overlook or downplay practical measures for mitigating climate-related risks.


He revealed that factors such as reasonable forest management policies are ignored to fit the narrative.



Instead, scientists are inclined to exaggerate the problem of greenhouse gas emissions.



This skews scientific analysis and facilitates legislation like Democrat President Joe Biden’s “Inflation Reduction Act.”



Despite its name, Biden’s legislation has nothing to do with the economy and is filled with radical green agenda policies that wouldn’t normally get passed.



However, Brown asserts in the piece that these corrupt tactics are failing to facilitate solutions to the alleged problems.



“In my paper, we didn’t bother to study the influence of these other obviously relevant factors,” Brown writes in The Free Press.



“Did I know that including them would make for a more realistic and useful analysis? I did.



“But I also knew that it would detract from the clean narrative centered on the negative impact of climate change and thus decrease the odds that the paper would pass muster with Nature’s editors and reviewers.”



The corporate media also deserves some blame because reporters often take studies at face value in pursuit of driving traffic, Brown wrote.



“You might be wondering at this point if I’m disowning my own paper. I’m not,” Brown stated in the piece regarding his paper.



“On the contrary, I think it advances our understanding of climate change’s role in day-to-day wildfire behavior.



“It’s just that the process of customizing the research for an eminent journal caused it to be less useful than it could have been.”



link

[schwartzie]

This is a few weeks old, but I don't recall having seen it before:


American Cancer Society: ‘Carbon Footprint’ of Treating Patients Is Too Big

Frank Bergman
July 22, 2023 - 12:20 pm


American Cancer Society (ACS) is warning that treating patients for cancer is contributing to “climate change” because the so-called “carbon footprint” of the procedures is too large.



Since 2020, claims have been emerging that treating cancer has a high “climate impact.”



On May 18, 2020, CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, a journal of the ACS, published a bizarre “science” paper lamenting the vainly imaginative myth that treating cancer in the United States is somehow contributing to “man-made global warming.”



These claims have continued to grow in the little more than three years since that study was published.



However, the United States is now suffering from a mysterious shortage of cancer treatment pharmaceuticals.



According to the ACS in 2020, the “carbon footprint of cancer care” has become too large.



The ACS argues that trying to rid patients of the disease threatens to accelerate allegedly man-made “climate change.”



Now in 2023, either predictively or by design, there is a mysterious lack of the usual drug-based tools that cancer clinicians use to treat patients.



Before the shortage, some cancer clinicians were also complaining that the treatments are damaging the environment.



Is all of this just one big strange coincidence, or was the plan all along to blame modern medicine for planetary warming while simultaneously phasing out cancer care under the guise of there no longer being enough cancer drugs available to treat everyone?



Marc Morano of Climate Depot chimed in on the matter, noting that it is certainly strange, to say the least, that things like anesthesia and cancer drugs are suddenly in the crosshairs for elimination by the “global warming” crowd.



With anesthesia, they are outright trying to ban certain types of it that supposedly impact the climate the worst, but with cancer drugs, there are all of a sudden, not enough of them making it into cancer clinics.



The Lancet recently published a study about the cancer drug shortage and how it affected cancer care.


Chemotherapy drugs, in particular, are in short supply in the United States, reaching three-decade lows.



The shortage is now at the level that experts are calling the situation a “crisis point.”



As many as 100,000 patients are now no longer able access to chemotherapy drugs like they once did.



Corporate media outlets like Politico and PBS News are warning that both doctors and patients are increasingly having to make tough choices about what to do as an alternative.



Hospitals and cancer centers across the country are running out of two major injectable cancer drugs: carboplatin and cisplatin.



Politico, meanwhile, is just about celebrating these shortages by running headlines that state: “Can Hospitals Turn Into Climate Change Fighting Machines? Inside the greening of American health care.”



Since “green” is typically code for anti-human, we can only assume that what they mean by the “greening” of health care is that patients will be left with increasingly fewer treatment options.



More of them will end up dying as a result, which will “green” the planet further by leaving fewer people alive.



There is also a power shift happening as well, thanks to the new allowances by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the importation of cancer drugs from communist China, which increasingly produces drugs for America.



In other words, another American industry is being outsourced to one of the country’s biggest political enemies.



All of this seems to be aimed at further weakening America’s economic status while bolstering that of Communist China.



And it is all being done under the guise of “fighting man-made climate change.”



link

[schwartzie]

Top Climate Scientist Blows Whistle: Wildfires Are Caused by Humans, Not ‘Global Warming’

Frank Bergman
September 10, 2023 - 12:23 pm


A leading climate scientist has spoken out to reveal that “certain narratives” claiming “global warming” is causing an increase in wildfires around the world are false.



Patrick T. Brown, a lecturer at Johns Hopkins University and doctor of Earth and climate sciences, has blown the whistle to warn the public that the majority of devastating wildfires are caused by arson, accidental human ignition, and poor forestry management.



The comments from Brown directly conflict with the narrative pushed by Democrats and their allies in the corporate media who claim the fires are caused by the so-called “climate crisis.”



As Slay News reported earlier, Brown recently revealed that leading academic journals reject papers that contradict the narratives of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) green agenda.



He says journals instead favor “distorted” research which hypes up the alleged dangers of “global warming.”



Brown said editors at Nature and Science – two of the most prestigious scientific journals – select “climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives.”



In an article for The Free Press, Brown likened the approach to the way “the press focus so intently on climate change as the root cause” of wildfires, including the recent devastating fires in Hawaii.



He pointed out that research proves that 80 percent of wildfires are ignited by humans.



According to Brown, most fires are caused by arson while many are ignited accidentally by humans.



In many cases, the wildfires spread quickly due to poor forestry management.



However, Brown admits that he has faked his own studies to get the papers published in prestigious journals.



Brown gave the example of a paper he recently authored titled “Climate warming increases extreme daily wildfire growth risk in California.”



He said the paper, which was published in Nature last week, “focuses exclusively on how climate change has affected extreme wildfire behavior.”


The climate scientist admits that the study ignored other key factors and he intentionally omitted the “full truth” to fit the green agenda narrative.



Brown made the confession in an article titled “I Left Out the Full Truth to Get My Climate Change Paper Published.”



“I just got published in Nature because I stuck to a narrative I knew the editors would like,” the article begins.



“That’s not the way science should work.



“I knew not to try to quantify key aspects other than climate change in my research because it would dilute the story that prestigious journals like Nature and its rival, Science, want to tell,” he wrote of his recently published work.



“This matters because it is critically important for scientists to be published in high-profile journals; in many ways, they are the gatekeepers for career success in academia.



“And the editors of these journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives—even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society.



“To put it bluntly, climate science has become less about understanding the complexities of the world and more about serving as a kind of Cassandra, urgently warning the public about the dangers of climate change.



“However understandable this instinct may be, it distorts a great deal of climate science research, misinforms the public, and most importantly, makes practical solutions more difficult to achieve.”



A spokesperson for Nature said, “all submitted manuscripts are considered independently on the basis of the quality and timeliness of their science.”



“Our editors make decisions based solely on whether research meets our criteria for publication – original scientific research (where conclusions are sufficiently supported by the available evidence), of outstanding scientific importance, which reaches a conclusion of interest to a multidisciplinary readership,” a statement said.



“Intentional omission of facts and results that are relevant to the main conclusions of a paper is not considered best practice with regards to accepted research integrity principles,” the spokesperson added.



Brown opened his missive with links to stories by corporate media outlets including AP, PBS NewsHour, The New York Times, and Bloomberg.



He points out that the articles give the false impression global wildfires are “mostly the result of climate change.”



Much reporting of the wildfires in Maui has said “climate change” contributed to the disaster by helping to create conditions that caused the fires to spark and spread quickly.



Nevertheless, the blazes in Hawaii, which killed at least 115 people, were started by a downed electricity line.



Democrats and the media, meanwhile, insist that “global warming” caused extremely dry conditions on the Hawaiian island.



Conveniently, the same Democrat leadership in Hawaii that pushes the “climate change” narrative is responsible for the failure in forestry management and the fire response that actually caused the wildfires to spread.



Brown said the media operates like scientific journals in that the focus on climate change “fits a simple storyline that rewards the person telling it.”



Scientists whose careers depend on their work being published in major journals also “tailor” their work to “support the mainstream narrative,” he said.



“This leads to a second unspoken rule in writing a successful climate paper,” he added.



“The authors should ignore—or at least downplay—practical actions that can counter the impact of climate change.”



He gave examples of factors that are ignored, including a “decline in deaths from weather and climate disasters over the last century.”



In the case of wildfires, Brown says that “current research indicates that these changes in forest management practices could completely negate the detrimental impacts of climate change on wildfires.”



Poor forest management has also been blamed for a record number of wildfires in Canada this year.



But “the more practical kind of analysis is discouraged” because it “weakens the case for greenhouse gas emissions reductions,” Brown said.



Successful papers also often use “less intuitive metrics” to measure the impacts of climate change because they “generate the most eye-popping numbers,” he said.



He went on to reveal that other papers he’s written that don’t match a certain narrative have been “rejected out of hand by the editors of distinguished journals, and I had to settle for less prestigious outlets.”



“We need a culture change across academia and elite media that allows for a much broader conversation on societal resilience to climate,” Brown concluded.



“The media, for instance, should stop accepting these papers at face value and do some digging on what’s been left out.



“The editors of the prominent journals need to expand beyond a narrow focus that pushes the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.



“And the researchers themselves need to start standing up to editors, or find other places to publish.”



link

[OmegaMan]

Brits who disagree with “climate crisis” to be sent off to PRISON

09/11/2023 // Ethan Huff // 

Tags: big government, Brits, climate alarmism, climate change, climate crisis, climate hysteria, crime, disobey, energy report, enslaved, fascism, freedom, global warming, Globalism, Great Britain, green, green tyranny, jail, outrage, prison, speech police, thought police, Tyranny, United Kingdom



The British parliament sneaked through a sinister piece of legislation this week that would criminalize Brits for disagreeing with the "climate crisis."

As one of its first orders of business following the summer recess, the government of the United Kingdom slipped in a "net zero" bill that, in effect, would make it a crime for someone in the UK to question whether or not man-made climate change is even real.



Known as the Energy Bill, the legislation cleared the Commons following a third reading, driving fear into the hearts of landowners who see that they could end up in prison for denouncing its implications.



According to reports, Brits who fail to adhere to the energy consumption rules outlined in the bill could be jailed for up to a year, as well as be forced to pay fines of up to £15,000 (about $19,000).



"Prosecutions may also occur for providing false information about energy efficiency or obstructing enforcement authorities," one report about the matter states.


British public overwhelmingly wants bills like this to be put up as referendums rather than just forced into law by politicians


Perhaps the most disturbing component of the new energy bill is "the creation of criminal offences" for any "non-compliance with a requirement imposed by or under energy performance regulations."



In other words, whatever the UK government dictates about energy consumption as it relates to the fairy tale notion of "global warming" will be a requirement. All who disobey will face severe punishment.



"It seems the net zero row back from Starmer and Sunak due to public dissatisfaction with the ULEZ (Ultra Low Emission Zone) at the recent byelection was little more than a feint," reports Strange Sounds citing BBC commentator Lois Perry.



"The proposed legislation grants the Government (and it could be either party given the election next year) the power to create new criminal offences and increase penalties in pursuit of their net-zero globalist goals."



In defense of the proposal, the UK government claims it does not have any intention of creating new criminal offenses, but will rather seek to amend existing laws, particularly those stemming from European Union (EU) legislation such as the Energy Performance of Buildings Regulations, which includes Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs).



"These amendments aim to provide stakeholders, including landlords, businesses, and tenants, with information to make informed decisions regarding energy efficiency," reports indicate.



It is a tricky matter, though, because on the surface, the bill could lead to the criminalization of individuals who refuse to comply. The legislation is written in such a way as to leave open the possibility of this, which is why many are vehemently opposed to its passage.



Both in October 2021 and February 2022, the group CAR26 conducted YouGov polls showing that a sizeable percentage of the British public supports the idea of putting net zero bills like this in referendum so people have the chance to vote on it rather than just have the British parliament pass it without input.



"This suggests that there is a desire for a more inclusive and democratic approach to shaping these policies," CAR26 says about the results of these two polls.



"If a referendum is not pursued (both Boris and now Rishi ruled it out so don’t hold your breath) it is essential to demand clear assurances from the Government that they will not enforce net zero targets without explicitly outlining them in an election party manifesto."



What do you think? Should everyday Brits be allowed to vote on energy-related bills that threaten to punish them for non-compliance with the latest "green" agenda? Let us know in the comments below.



There is no climate crisis. Learn more at Climate.news.

link

[schwartzie]

Meeting ‘Net Zero’ Goals Will Cost Taxpayers $75 Trillion, Analysis Shows

Frank Bergman
September 15, 2023 - 12:57 pm



In order to comply with the globalist “Net Zero” climate goals of the World Economic Forum (WEF) and United Nations (UN), taxpayers will need to spend a staggering $75 trillion, a group of leading analysts has revealed.



To put the figure into context, in 2023, it is estimated that the total amount of money in circulation around the world is roughly $40 trillion.



Nevertheless, the public will have to dig even deeper to cover the demands of the global elite to achieve aggressive international “climate change” goals.



The impossible “Net Zero” goals for “carbon emissions” set forth by the United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are expected to be met by 2050.



However, according to a new report from energy consultancy and research firm Wood Mackenzie, investments would need to total $75 trillion to meet the targets.



If the world is to meet the 2050 “Net Zero” carbon emission goals championed by Democrat President Joe Biden’s “climate czar” John Kerry, taxpayers would need to commit a whopping $2.7 trillion annually.



According to the analysis, global oil demand would also need to peak in 2023.



The demand for oil would then need to drop to 30 million barrels per day (BPD) from its current level of about 102 million BPD in order to reach the targets established by the IPCC, according to the report.



According to the UN IPCC’s website, the unelected globalist organization insists that achieving “Net Zero” by 2050 is the best way to keep global temperatures from rising by more than 1.5 degrees Celsius relative to pre-industrial levels.



Global energy-related emissions would also need to peak in 2023 to achieve global “Net Zero” emissions by 2050, according to the analysis.



While the U.S. and Western Europe have embraced expensive efforts to “decarbonize” their energy sectors, China permitted an average of two new coal plants each week in 2022, according to a report by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air.



China is by far the largest polluter in the world, far exceeding any other country.



According to Climate Trade, China releases more “carbon emissions” into the atmosphere than the rest of the top five countries combined.


However, China bizarrely gets a free pass for the globalist “Net Zero” agenda.



Meanwhile, the global demand for energy is set to grow by 50% by 2050 relative to 2020 levels, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.



Yet, according to Wood Mackenzie’s analysis, the share of global power generated by fossil fuels would need to fall from its current level of about 80% to 20% by 2050 to meet the “Net Zero” demands.



In addition, the West would presumably need to overcompensate to account for the failures of countries in the Middle East, Africa, and Southeast Asia which are not subject to meeting the green agenda targets.



The more likely scenario is that the world will not meet the IPCC’s targets, according to Wood Mackenzie’s analysis.



In that base case, the governments of the world are projected to still spend about $2 trillion combined each year toward climate goals.



However, the IPCC’s targets would still be missed, even with the huge investment from taxpayers.



Beyond these considerable changes and expenditures, about 90% of all new vehicle sales worldwide would need to be electric vehicles (EVs) in order to reach the IPCC’s goal of limiting the total global temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius relative to pre-industrial levels, according to the Wood Mackenzie analysis.



Aside from making the unrealistic financial requirements needed to me these unattainable “climate” targets, members of the taxpaying public will also need to drastically reduce their quality of life.



The WEF, UN, and their allies are pushing for the human race to give up private car ownership, the consumption of meat and dairy products, heating their homes, traveling, and physical cash, and surrender all rights to privacy to meet the green agenda targets.



Meanwhile, Kerry and his fellow “climate change” warriors will continue to live in luxury and fly around the world on private jets because they “are the solution” to “global boiling.”



link

[Berean]

Meteorologists, Scientists Explain Why There Is 'No Climate Emergency'


FRIDAY, SEP 15, 2023 - 06:20 PM

Authored by Katie Spence via The Epoch Times 


There's no climate emergency. And the alarmist messaging pushed by global elites is purely political. That's what 1,609 scientists and informed professionals stated when they signed the Global Climate Intelligence Group's "World Climate Declaration."



"Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific," the declaration begins. "Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures."


The group is an independent "climate watchdog" founded in 2019 by emeritus professor of geophysics Guus Berkhout and Marcel Crok, a science journalist. According to its website, the organization's objective is to "generate knowledge and understanding of the causes and effects of climate change as well as the effects of climate policy." And it does so by objectively looking at the facts and engaging in scientific research into climate change and climate policy.



The declaration's signatories include Nobel laureates, theoretical physicists, meteorologists, professors, and environmental scientists worldwide. And when a select few were asked by The Epoch Times why they signed the declaration stating that the "climate emergency" is a farce, they all stated a variation of "because it's true."



"I signed the declaration because I believe the climate is no longer studied scientifically. Rather, it has become an item of faith," Haym Benaroya, a distinguished professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering at Rutgers University, told The Epoch Times.



"The earth has warmed about 2 degrees F since the end of the Little Ice Age around 1850, but that hardly constitutes an emergency—or even a crisis—since the planet has been warmer yet over the last few millennia," Ralph Alexander, a retired physicist and author of the website "Science Under Attack," told The Epoch Times.



"There is plenty of evidence that average temperatures were higher during the so-called Medieval Warm Period (centered around the year 1000), the Roman Warm Period (when grapes and citrus fruits were grown in now much colder Britain), and in the early Holocene (after the last regular Ice Age ended)."



The climate emergency is "fiction," he said unequivocally.


There were 1,609 scientists and informed professionals who signed the Global Climate Intelligence Group's “World Climate Declaration.” (The Epoch Times)


The 'Climate Emergency'

Human activities and the resulting greenhouse gases are the cause of global warming, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Specifically, the IPCC says that in 1750, atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations were 280 parts per million (ppm), and today, the atmospheric CO2 concentrations are 420 ppm, which affects temperature.



The IPCC is the U.N. body for assessing the "science related to climate change." It was created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the U.N. Environment Programme to help policymakers develop climate policies.



Edwin Berry, a theoretical physicist and certified consulting meteorologist, said that one of the IPCC's central theories is that natural CO2 has stayed constant at 280 ppm since 1750 and that human CO2 is responsible for the 140 ppm increase.



This IPCC theory makes human CO2 responsible for 33 percent of today's total CO2 level, he told The Epoch Times.



Consequently, to decrease temperatures, the IPCC says, we must reduce human-caused CO2—thus, the current push by lawmakers and climate activists to forcibly transition the world's transportation to electric vehicles, get rid of fossil fuels, and generally reduce all activities that contribute to human-caused CO2.



That entire premise, according to Mr. Berry, is problematic.



"The public perception of carbon dioxide is that it goes into the atmosphere and stays there," Mr. Berry said. "They think it just accumulates. But it doesn't."



He explained that when you look at the flow of carbon dioxide—"flow" meaning the carbon moving from one carbon reservoir to another, i.e., through photosynthesis, the eating of plants, and back out through respiration—a 140 ppm constant level requires a continual inflow of 40 ppm per year of carbon dioxide, because, according to the IPCC, carbon dioxide has a turnover time of 3.5 years (meaning carbon dioxide molecules stay in the atmosphere for about 3 1/2 years).



"A level of 280 ppm is twice that—80 ppm of inflow. Now, we're saying that the inflow of human carbon dioxide is one-third of the total. Even IPCC data says, 'No, human carbon dioxide inflow is about 5 percent to 7 percent of the total carbon dioxide inflow into the atmosphere,'" he said.



So, to make up for the lack of necessary human-caused carbon dioxide flowing into the atmosphere, the IPCC claims that instead of having a turnover time of 3.5 years, human CO2 stays in the atmosphere for hundreds or even thousands of years.



"[The IPCC is] saying that something is different about human carbon dioxide and that it can't flow as fast out of the atmosphere as natural carbon dioxide," Mr. Berry said. "Well, IPCC scientists—when they've gone through, what, billions of dollars?—should have asked a simple question: 'Is a human carbon dioxide molecule exactly identical to a natural carbon dioxide molecule?' And the answer is yes. Of course!



"Well, if human and natural CO2 molecules are identical, their outflow times must be identical. So, the whole idea where they say it's in there for hundreds, or thousands, of years, is wrong."



Mr. Berry said that means nature—not humans—caused the increase in CO2. And consequently, attempts to decrease human CO2 are pointless.



"The belief that human CO2 drives the CO2 increase may be the biggest public delusion and most costly fraud in history," Mr. Berry said.



He pointed out that in science, the scientific method says that you can't prove that a theory is 100 percent true—only that the data supports it—but you can prove that it's false. Providing an example, Mr. Berry said that Sir Isaac Newton's gravity law was the preeminent theory for a long time, but then Albert Einstein made a correction that disproved Newton's theory.

Continued at link

[ExquisiteGerbil]

Here's The Climate Dissent You're Not Hearing About Because It's Muffled By Society's Top Institutions

SATURDAY, SEP 16, 2023 - 11:20 PM

Authored by John Murawski via RealClear Wire,



As the Biden administration and governments worldwide make massive commitments to rapidly decarbonize the global economy, the persistent effort to silence climate change skeptics is intensifying – and the critics keep pushing back.


This summer the International Monetary Fund summarily canceled a presentation by John Clauser, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist who publicly disavows the existence of a climate “crisis.” The head of the nonprofit with which Clauser is affiliated, the CO2 Coalition, has said he and other members have been delisted from LinkedIn for their dissident views.



Meanwhile, a top academic journal retracted published research doubting a climate emergency after negative coverage in legacy media. The move was decried by another prominent climate dissenter, Roger Pielke Jr., as “one of the most egregious failures of scientific publishing that I have seen” – criticism muffled because the academic says he has been blocked on Twitter (now X) by reporters on the climate beat.



The climate dissenters are pressing their case as President Biden, United Nations officials, and climate action advocates in media and academia argue that the “settled science” demands a wholesale societal transformation. That means halving U.S. carbon emissions by 2035 and achieving net zero emissions by 2050 to stave off the “existential threat” of human-induced climate change.



In response last month, more than 1,600 scientists, among them two Nobel physics laureates, Clauser and Ivar Giaever of Norway, signed a declaration stating that there is no climate emergency, and that climate advocacy has devolved into mass hysteria. The skeptics say the radical transformation of entire societies is marching forth without a full debate, based on dubious scientific claims amplified by knee-jerk journalism.



Many of these climate skeptics reject the optimistic scenarios of economic prosperity promised by advocates of a net-zero world order. They say the global emissions-reduction targets are not achievable on such an accelerated timetable without lowering living standards and unleashing worldwide political unrest.



“What advocates of climate action are trying to do is scare the bejesus out of the public so they’ll think we need to [act] fast,” said Steven Koonin, author of “Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why It Matters.”



“You have to balance the certainties and uncertainties of the changing climate – the risks and hazards – against many other factors,” he adds.



These dissenters don’t all agree on all scientific questions and do not speak in a single voice. Clauser, for example, is a self-styled “climate denialist” who believes climate is regulated by clouds, while Pielke, a political scientist at the University of Colorado in Boulder, and Bjørn Lomborg, the former director of the Danish Environmental Assessment Institute, acknowledge humans are affecting the climate but say there is sufficient time to adapt. The dissenters do, however, agree that the public and government officials are getting a one-sided, apocalyptic account that stokes fear, politicizes science, misuses climate modeling, and shuts down debate.



They also say it is a troubling sign for scientific integrity that they are systematically sidelined and diminished by government funding agencies, foundation grant-makers, academic journals, and much of the media. Delving into their claims, RealClearInvestigations reviewed a sampling of their books, articles, and podcast interviews. This loose coalition of writers and thinkers acknowledges that the climate is warming, but they typically ascribe as much, if not more, influence to natural cycles and climate variability than to human activities, such as burning fossil fuel.



Among their arguments:



• There is no climate crisis or existential threat as expressed in catastrophic predictions by activists in the media and academia. As global temperatures gradually increase, human societies will need to make adjustments in the coming century, just as societies have adapted to earlier climate changes. By and large, humans cannot control the climate, which Pielke describes as “the fanciful idea that emissions are a disaster control knob.”



• Global temperatures are increasing incrementally, and have been for centuries, but the degree of human influence is uncertain or negligible. Climate skeptics themselves don’t agree on how much humans are contributing to global warming by burning fossil fuels, and how much is caused by natural variability from El Niño and other cycles that can take centuries to play out. “The real question is not whether the globe has warmed recently,” writes Koonin, “but rather to what extent this warming is being caused by humans.”



• Rapidly replacing fossil fuels with renewables and electricity by mid-century would be economically risky and may have a negligible effect on global warming. Some say mitigation decrees – such as phasing out the combustion engine and banning gas stoves – are not likely to prevent climate change because humans play a minor role in global climate trends. Others say mitigation is necessary but won’t happen without capable replacement technologies. It’s unrealistic, they say, to force societies to rely on intermittent energy from wind and solar, or wager the future on technologies that are still in experimental stages.



• The global political push to kill the fossil fuel industry to get to “net zero” and “carbon neutrality” by 2050, as advocated by the United Nations and the Biden administration, will erase millions of jobs and raise energy costs, leading to a prolonged economic depression and political instability. The result would be that developing regions will pay the highest price, while the biggest polluters (China and India) and hostile nations (like Russia and Iran) will simply ignore the net-zero mandate. This could be a case where the cure could be worse than the disease.



• Despite the common refrain in the media, there is no evidence that a gradually warming planet is affecting the frequency or intensity of hurricanes, storms, droughts, rainfall, or other weather events. The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has expressed low confidence such weather events can be linked to human activities. Still, “it is a fertile field for cherry pickers,” notes Pielke.



• Extreme weather events, such as wildfires and flooding, are not claiming more human lives than previously. The human death toll is largely caused by cold weather, which accounts for eight times as many deaths as hot weather, and overall weather-related mortality has fallen by about 99% in the past century. “People are safer from climate-related disasters than ever before,” statistician and author Bjørn Lomborg has said.



• Climate science has been hijacked and politicized by activists, creating a culture of self-censorship that’s enforced by a code of silence that Koonin likens to the Mafia’s omerta. In her 2023 book, “Climate Uncertainty and Risk,” climatologist Judith Curry asks: “How many skeptical papers were not published by activist editorial boards? How many published papers have buried results in order to avoid highlighting findings that conflict with preferred narratives? I am aware of anecdotal examples of each of these actions, but the total number is unknowable.”



• Slogans such as “follow the science” and “scientific consensus” are misleading and disingenuous. There is no consensus on many key questions, such as the urgency to cease and desist burning fossil fuels, or the accuracy of computer modeling predictions of future global temperatures. The apparent consensus of imminent disaster is manufactured through peer pressure, intimidation, and research funding priorities, based on the conviction that “noble lies,” “consensus entrepreneurship,” and “stealth advocacy” are necessary to save humanity from itself. “One day PhD dissertations will be written about our current moment of apocalyptic panic,” Pielke predicts.



• The warming of the planet is a complicated phenomenon that will cause some disruptions but will also bring benefits, particularly in agricultural yields and increased vegetation. Some climate skeptics, including the CO2 Coalition, say CO2 is not a pollutant – it is “plant food.”



Curry, the former Chair of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, expresses a common theme among the climate refuseniks: that they are the sane, rational voices in a maelstrom of quasi-religious mania.



“In the 1500s, they used to drown witches in Europe because they blamed them for bad weather. You had the pagan people trying to appease the gods with sacrifices,” Curry said. “What we’re doing now is like a pseudoscientific version of that, and it’s no more effective than those other strategies.’



The climate change establishment occasionally concedes some of these points. No less an authority than the newly appointed head of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has urged the climate community to cool its jets: “If you constantly communicate the message that we are all doomed to extinction, then that paralyzes people and prevents them from taking the necessary steps to get a grip on climate change,” Jim Skea recently said to German media. “The world won’t end if it warms by more than 1.5 degrees [centigrade]. It will however be a more dangerous world.”



In testimony before the Senate Budget Committee in June, Pielke said human-caused climate change is real and “poses significant risks to society and the environment.” But the science does not paint a dystopian, catastrophic scenario of imminent doom, he added.



“Today, there is general agreement that our current media environment and political discourse are rife with misinformation,” Pielke testified. “If there is just one sentence that you take from my testimony today it is this: You are being misinformed.”



Still, the overwhelming impression conveyed is one of impending disaster, with the menace of global warming rhetorically upgraded in July by U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres to “global boiling.” Climate scientists announced in July that the planet is the hottest it’s been in 120,000 years, an old claim that gets recycled every few years. Meanwhile, three vice-chairs of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned of mass starvation, extinction, and disasters, saying that if the temperature rises 1.5℃ above pre-industrial levels, “children under 12 will experience a fourfold increase in natural disasters in their lifetime, and up to 14% of all species assessed will likely face a very high risk of extinction.”



Many of these predictions are based on computer models and computer simulations that Pielke, Koonin, Curry, and others have decried as totally implausible. Koonin’s book suggests that some computer models may be “cooking the books” to achieve desired outcomes, while Pielke has decried faulty scenarios as “one of the most significant failures of scientific integrity in the twenty-first century thus far.” Curry writes in her book that the primary inadequacy of climate models is their limited ability to predict the kinds of natural climate fluctuations that cause ice ages and warming periods, and play out over decades, centuries, or even millennia.



Another critique is the use of computer models to correlate extreme weather events to multi-decade climate trends in an attempt to show that the weather was caused by climate, a branch of climate science called climate attribution studies. This type of research is used to bolster claims that the frequency and intensity of heat waves, floods, hurricanes, and other extreme weather events could not have happened without climate change. An example is research recently cited by the BBC in an article warning that if the global temperature rises another 0.9 centigrade, crippling heat waves that were once exceedingly rare will bake the world every two-to-five years.



One question looms: Does a warming climate contribute to heat records and heat waves, such as those that were widely reported in July as the hottest month on record and taken as overwhelming proof that humans are overheating the planet? The United States experienced extreme heat waves in the 1930s, and the recent spikes are not without precedent, climate dissenters say. Pielke, however, concedes that IPCC data signal that increases in heat extremes and heat waves are virtually certain, but he argues that the societal impacts will be manageable.



Koonin and Curry say that the global heat spikes in July were likely caused by a multiplicity of factors, including an underwater Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai volcanic explosion last year that increased upper atmosphere water vapor by about 10%, a relevant fact because water vapor acts as a greenhouse gas. Another factor is the warming effect of the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, which has shifted to an active phase recently.



Koonin says that greenhouse gas emissions are a gradual trend on which weather anomalies play out, and while it’s tempting to confuse weather with climate, it would be a mistake to blame July’s heat waves on human influence.



“The anomaly is about as large as we’ve ever seen, but not unprecedented,” Koonin explained on a podcast. “Now, what the real question is, why did it spike so much? Nothing to do with CO2 – CO2 is … the base on which this phenomenon occurs.”



Climate dissent comes with the occupational hazard of being tarred as a propagandist and stooge for “Big Oil.” Pielke was one of seven academics investigated by a U.S. Congressman in 2015 for allegedly failing to report funding from fossil fuel interests (He was cleared). A New York Times review of Lomborg’s 2020 book, “False Alarm,” described it as “mind pollution.”



Climate advocates see climate skepticism as so dangerous that Ben Santer, one of the world’s leading climate scientists, publicly cut ties with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory two years ago after the federal research facility invited Koonin to discuss his skeptical book, “Unsettled.” Santer, a MacArthur “genius” grant recipient, said allowing Koonin’s views to go unchallenged undermined the credibility and integrity of climate science research. For similar reasons, the IMF postponed Clauser’s July presentation so that it could be rescheduled as a debate.



Another critique: scientists arbitrarily forcing the facts to fit a prescribed catastrophic narrative, often by ignoring plausible alternative explanations and relevant factors. That’s what climate scientist Patrick Brown said he had to do to get published in the prestigious journal Nature, by attributing wildfires to climate change and ignoring other factors, like poor forest management and the startling fact that over 80% of wildfires are ignited by humans. Brown publicly confessed to this sleight-of-hand in a recent article in The Free Press.



“This type of framing, with the influence of climate change unrealistically considered in isolation, is the norm for high-profile research papers,” Brown wrote. “When I had previously attempted to deviate from the formula, my papers were rejected out of hand by the editors of distinguished journals, and I had to settle for less prestigious outlets.”



These frustrations serve as a reminder that the world has entered what the United Nations and climate advocates call the make-or-break decade that will decide how much the Earth’s temperature will rise above pre-industrial levels. This decisive phase is “unfolding now and will intensify during the next several years,” according to Rice University researchers. “Accordingly, what happens between now and the late 2020s, in all likelihood, will fundamentally determine the failure or success of an accelerated energy transition.”



In response to this call for global action, political leaders in Europe and North America are vowing to reengineer their societies to run on wind, solar, and hydrogen. In this country, California is among a dozen states that have moved to ban the sale of new gasoline-engine cars in 2035, while states like Virginia and North Carolina have committed to carbon-free power girds by mid-century.



In the most detailed net-zero roadmap to date, the International Energy Agency in 2021 identified more than 400 milestones that would have to be met to achieve a net-zero planet by mid-century, including the immediate cessation of oil and gas exploration and drilling, and mandated austerity measures such as reducing highway speed limits, limiting temperature settings in private homes, and eating less meat.



In the IEA’s net zero scenario, global energy use will decline by 8% through energy efficiency even as the world’s population adds 2 billion people and the economy grows a whopping 40%. In this scenario, all the nations of the world – including China, India, Russia, and Saudi Arabia – would have to commit to a net-zero future, generating 14 million jobs to create a new energy infrastructure. Nearly half the slated emissions reductions will have to come from experimental technologies currently in demonstration or prototype stages, such as hydrogen, bioenergy, carbon capture, and modular nuclear reactors. Reading this bracing outlook, one could almost overlook the IEA’s caveat that relying on solar and wind for nearly 70% of electricity generation would cause retail electricity prices to increase by 50% on average and destroy 5 million jobs, of which “many are well paid, meaning structural changes can cause shocks for communities with impacts that persist over time.”



A critique of the IEA’s scenario issued this year by the Energy Policy Research Foundation, a think tank that specializes in oil, gas, and petroleum products, warned of “massive supply shocks” if oil supplies are artificially suppressed to meet arbitrary net zero targets. The report further stated that “if the world stays committed to net zero regardless of high costs – the recession will turn into an extended depression and ultimately impose radical negative changes upon modern civilization.” (Disclosure: The report was commissioned by the RealClearFoundation, the nonprofit parent of RealClearInvestigations.)



Already, societies have fallen behind their emissions reduction targets, and it’s widely understood that fast-tracking net zero is an unattainable goal. Transforming existing energy infrastructures within several decades would require installing the equivalent of the world’s largest solar farm every day, according to the International Energy Agency. Carbon-free energy accounts for only 18% of total global consumption, and fossil fuels are still increasing, according to a recent analysis. The IEA reported this year that investments in oil exploration and drilling have rebounded to pre-pandemic levels, while global coal demand reached an all-time high last year. Globally nations are spending more on clean energy than on fossil fuels, but fossil fuels are still vital to economic growth; for instance, the IEA noted that 40 gigawatts of new coal plants were approved in 2022, the highest figure since 2016, almost all of them in China.



“We live in this world of exaggerated promises and delusional pop science,” Vaclav Smil, the University of Manitoba environmental scientist and policy analyst, told The New York Times last year. “People don’t appreciate the magnitude of the task and are setting up artificial deadlines which are unrealistic.”



A government push to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by cutting back on livestock farming has led to public protests in the Netherlands, a conflict over resources that Time magazine predicts will spread elsewhere: “This may be just the beginning of much wider global unrest over agriculture. Scientists say dealing with climate change will require not just gradual reform, but a rapid, wholesale transformation of the global food system.”



Climate dissidents say what happened in the Netherlands is a foretaste of the political backlash that is inevitable when net-zero policies start becoming implemented and people have to travel across state lines to buy a gasoline-powered car.



“The urgency is the stupidest part of the whole thing – that we need to act now with all these made-up targets,” Curry said. “The transition risk is far greater than any conceivable climate or weather risk.”



To Koonin, these challenges indicate that the catastrophic climate narrative will collapse when put to the test of practicality and politics. The more sensible route, he said, is a slow-and-steady approach.



“There’s going to be a deep examination of science and the cost-benefit issues,” he said. “We will eventually do the right thing, but it’s going to take a decade or so.”



John Murawski reports on the intersection of culture and ideas for RealClearInvestigations. He previously covered artificial intelligence for the Wall Street Journal and spent 15 years as a reporter for the News & Observer (Raleigh, NC) writing about health care, energy and business. At RealClear, Murawski reports on how esoteric academic theories on race and gender have been shaping many areas of public life, from K-12 school curricula to workplace policies to the practice of medicine.



link

[schwartzie]

California Sues Big Oil for ‘Lying about Climate Change’

Frank Bergman
September 18, 2023 - 2:07 pm


The State of California has filed a lawsuit against America’s largest gas and oil companies for allegedly “wreaking havoc on our planet.”



Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom announced the lawsuit in a statement, accusing Big Oil of “lying about climate change.”



In a recent press release from Newsom’s office, the governor accused Exxon Mobil, Shell, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP, and the American Petroleum Institute of “decades of deception.”



Newsom claims that the companies have “intentionally suppressed” the “dangers of the fossil fuels they produce” to “protect their profits.”



The press release linked “fossil fuel consumption to rising global temperatures and damage to our air, land, and water.”



Newsom claimed: “For more than 50 years, Big Oil has been lying to us – covering up the fact that they’ve long known how dangerous the fossil fuels they produce are for our planet.



“It has been decades of damage and deception. Wildfires wiping out entire communities, toxic smoke clogging our air, deadly heat waves, record-breaking droughts parching our wells.



“California taxpayers shouldn’t have to foot the bill.



“California is taking action to hold big polluters accountable.”

The state’s lawsuit was filed by State Attorney General Rob Bonta.



In the filings, Bonta claims that the big five oil and gas companies are pushing “disinformation” campaigns to hide the climate impacts of their products.



According to the complaint, the defendants aimed to “use disinformation to plant doubt about the reality of climate change in an effort to maintain consumer demand for their fossil fuel products and their large profits.”

In a statement regarding the lawsuit, Bonta said, “Oil and gas companies have privately known the truth for decades — that the burning of fossil fuels leads to climate change — but have fed us lies and mistruths to further their record-breaking profits at the expense of our environment.



“Enough is enough.”



Newsom’s office also alleges that Big Oil’s “deception continues today.”



“Oil companies promote fossil fuel products as ‘clean’ or ‘green’ or ‘low-emissions’ that still produce carbon pollution, and they tout their renewable fuel products that actually make up a fraction of a percent of their earnings,” the governor’s press release added.



According to California officials, the oil giants are directly responsible for “ongoing climate disasters” in the state, including “extreme heat,” “drought and water shortages,” “extreme wildfire,” “public health injuries,” “extreme storms and flooding,” “damage to agriculture,” “sea level rise, coastal flooding and coastal erosion,” and “ecosystem, habitat, and biodiversity disruption,” which have allegedly racked up “billions of dollars of costs” for residents.



Conveniently, many of the issues listed in the lawsuit, such as water shortages and wildfires, are the responsibility of California’s Democrat leadership.



The lawsuit seeks damages and the creation of a nuisance abatement fund that would cover the costs of alleged “climate-related disasters” caused by fossil fuels.



It also seeks to prevent the oil giants from engaging in further pollution and making misleading statements about the impact of their products on the planet.



On Sunday, Chevron stated, “Climate change is a global problem that requires a coordinated international policy response, not piecemeal litigation for the benefit of lawyers and politicians.”



API senior vice president and general counsel Ryan Meyers said, “The record of the past two decades demonstrates that the industry has achieved its goal of providing affordable, reliable American energy to U.S. consumers while substantially reducing emissions and our environmental footprint.”



Meyers added, “This ongoing, coordinated campaign to wage meritless, politicized lawsuits against a foundational American industry and its workers is nothing more than a distraction from important national conversations and an enormous waste of California taxpayer resources.



“Climate policy is for Congress to debate and decide, not the court system.”



Shell told KPIX-TV, “The Shell Group’s position on climate change has been a matter of public record for decades.



“We agree that action is needed now on climate change and we fully support the need for society to transition to a lower-carbon future.



“As we supply vital energy the world needs today, we continue to reduce our emissions and help customers reduce theirs.”



“Addressing climate change requires a collaborative, society-wide approach,” Shell continued.



“We do not believe the courtroom is the right venue to address climate change but that smart policy from government and action from all sectors is the appropriate way to reach solutions and drive progress.”


link

[schwartzie]

Phoenix Mayor Moves to Enforce WEF’s Ban on Meat, Dairy, Private Car Ownership

Frank Bergman
September 19, 2023 - 12:44 pm


The Democrat mayor of Phoenix, Arizona, Kate Gallego, has taken steps toward enforcing the globalist agenda of the World Economic Forum (WEF) by moving to ban meat and dairy consumption and private car ownership in an effort to meet the radical claim goals of the green agenda.



Gallego is reportedly laying the groundwork to usher in WEF founder Klaus Schwab’s 2030 Agenda in Phoenix.



The mayor has been working with the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group.



As Slay News recently reported, c40 Cities is a collective of American cities that signed a pact to meet the WEF’s “climate” before 2030.



Globalist leaders around the world have agreed to ban the public from obtaining meat, dairy, and private vehicles by 2030.



C40 Cities also requires limits on the number of items of clothing individuals can purchase each year and will restrict members of the public to only travel by air once every three years.



The organization is headed by billionaire globalist Democrat Mike Bloomberg.



Much of the funding comes from Bloomberg Philanthropies.



As of August 4, 2023, C40 has a membership with “mayors of nearly 100 world-leading cities collaborating to confront the climate crisis,” according to the group’s website.



So far, 14 U.S. cities have signed the pact and agreed to meet the radical green agenda goals before 2023, as Slay News reported.



The organization’s webpage advocates for a “Global Green New Deal” that “lays out a set of principles to be adopted by cities worldwide and takes a collaborative approach to climate action.” These include:



Principles of the Global Green New Deal

We recognise the global climate emergency.

We are committed to keeping global heating below the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement by curbing emissions in the sectors that are the most significant contributors to the climate crisis: transportation, buildings, and waste.

We are committed to putting inclusive climate action at the centre of all urban decision-making to create thriving and equitable communities for everyone.

We invite our partners – political leaders, CEOs, trade unions, investors, and civil society – to join us in recognising the global climate emergency and help us deliver on science-based action to overcome it.


Phoenix Mayor Gallego, a member of C40 since 2020, now serves as “Vice Chair of the C40 Steering Committee,” which” provides strategic oversight to ensure C40’s mission and mandate are directly driven by and responsive to the needs of C40 cities.”



Their mission and mandate include a Race to Zero global campaign to reach net-zero carbon emissions in 1,000 cities worldwide and “sustainable food policies” that support “an overall increase of healthy plant-based food consumption in our cities by shifting away from unsustainable, unhealthy diets,” A.K.A. carnivorous diets.


This also comes as Arizona’s Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs recently declared a “heat state of emergency,” mainly in Phoenix.



Many argue that the move from Hobbs is likely meant to accelerate the implementation of these radical “climate” policies.



Jeff Caldwell with EZAZ.org published more on his research into the City of Phoenix and Mayor Kate Gallego’s agenda “to reduce meat consumption” in Arizona.

Arizona Patriots showed up to give Public Comment at a recent Phoenix City Council meeting and reportedly “told the mayor they do not support policies banning meat.”



Later that day, the nervous Phoenix mayor posted a bizarre photo on Twitter/X.



In the post, Gallego claimed she is not working to ban meat or milk.



In the poorly staged propaganda photo, Gallego is seen pouring milk into a bowl and seemingly “enjoying cereal” with a knife.

link

[schwartzie]

Bill Clinton & Pope Francis Vow to End ‘Climate Change Catastrophe’

Frank Bergman
September 23, 2023 - 12:57 pm


Democrat former U.S. President Bill Clinton and Pope Francis have joined forces to launch a new effort to promote the globalist green agenda.



The pope held talks with Clinton this week to lay out their plans for meeting the “Net Zero” goals of the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the United Nations (UN).



However, the two unelected figures invoked powerful bureaucrat UN Secretary-General Antonio Gutteres by turning up the heat on green agenda language.



No longer content with declaring an “emergency” or a “crisis,” Clinton and Francis upped the ante and vowed to fight the “climate change catastrophe.”



Similarly, Gutteres recently declared that globalists are now tackling “global boiling,” as Slay News reported.



During a doom-loaded speech in July, Guterres claimed that the Earth has now become “unbreathable” and “the heat is unbearable.”

If these guys think the heat is unbearable now, wait until they get to the place where every day is "Fry Day!" 😉😄


The UN chief claims that these alleged conditions on Earth are due to “man-made climate change.”



“The Earth is unbreathable,” Guterres during a speech at the UN headquarters in New York City.



“The heat is unbearable and the level of fossil fuel profits and climate inaction is unacceptable.”



Guterres then unveiled the new narrative of the climate alarmist elite.



“The era of global warming has ended,” Guterres declared.



“The era of global boiling has arrived.”



WATCH:

Stressing the urgency of addressing the climate change “catastrophe,” the pope and ex-POTUS vowed to fight global boiling “before it’s too late.”



“It is time to work together to stop the ecological catastrophe before it’s too late,” the pontiff told Clinton at a meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI).



“Let us stop while there is still time, please.”


Francis reiterated his intention to release a second document on the “climate catastrophe” later this month.



The move comes eight years after the publication of his encyclical “Laudato Sì” on the same theme.



In late August, Francis said it is time for world leaders to “listen to science and institute a rapid and equitable transition to end the era of fossil fuel.”



It is “absurd to permit the continued exploration and expansion of fossil fuel infrastructures,” he declared in his message for the September 1 Feast of Creation.



“Let us raise our voices to halt this injustice towards the poor and towards our children, who will bear the worst effects of climate change.”



“The unrestrained burning of fossil fuels and the destruction of forests are pushing temperatures higher and leading to massive droughts,” the pope stated.



He claimed that the alleged “catastrophe” is a product of “consumerist greed, fueled by selfish hearts.”



Francis then suggested communist-like policies to address “climate change.”



“Richer nations have contracted an ‘ecological debt’ that must be paid” to poorer nations, he declared.



“Let us heed our call to stand with the victims of environmental and climate injustice, and to put an end to the senseless war against creation,” he said.

link

[schwartzie]

‘Green’ Energy Push Exposes 23 Million People to Toxic Waste

David Lindfield
September 23, 2023 - 12:20 pm


A bombshell new study has revealed that tens of millions of people have been exposed to toxic waste as a result of the push to transition to “green” energy.



23 million people, more than the population of Florida, are now exposed to toxic water runoff from metal mining.



The report warns of the devastating impacts of the reckless transition to “green” energy.



The demand for mining for minerals needed for electric-powered vehicle batteries has polluted 500,000km of rivers and destroyed 16 million acres of farmland.



The researchers found that 23 million people worldwide, as well as 5.72 million in livestock, over 16 million acres of irrigated farmland, and over 297,800 miles worth of rivers, have been contaminated by mining’s toxic byproducts seeping into the water.



This metal mining includes many so-called “rare earth elements” essential to the manufacture of high-tech solar cells, wind turbines, and the batteries needed to store sustainable “green” energy.



While the new study focuses on environmental impacts, global metals mining has recently faced shocking lawsuits against major tech firms, including Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Tesla.



The companies have been accused of supporting child slavery in the Congo, where 70 percent of the industry’s cobalt is sourced.



“Rapid growth in global metal mining is crucial if the world is to make the transition to green energy,” noted Chris Thomas, a zoologist at the University of Lincoln whose specialty is in spatial ecology and threats to the global water supply.



Thomas led the analysis and modeling work for the new study, which was published today in Science.



Thomas and his colleagues have developed a new database, supported by on-the-ground testing, which now maps the hundreds of square miles’ worth of rivers and floodplains contaminated by these industrial processes across the globe.


The devastation wrought by this contamination, they found, was widespread, affecting approximately 297,800 miles (479,200 km) of river systems total and over 63,000 square miles (164,000 sq-km) of floodplains worldwide.



But, North America stands out as the most affected.



The United States and Canada have 123,280 miles of tainted river systems and approximately 10.7 million acres of polluted floodplains.



But the damage was not much better in South America with 50,766 miles of rivers and over 9.5 million acres of floodplain impacted.



In Asia, the continent has about 37,842 river miles and about 8.3 million acres of floodplain polluted by metal mining waste.



Mark Macklin, director of the university’s Lincoln Centre for Water and Planetary Health, who led the international team behind the new research, said he anticipates the new study’s maps and modeling tools will help prevent future reckless mining.



“We expect that this will make it easier to mitigate the environmental effects of historical and present mining,” Macklin said.



“Our new method for predicting the dispersal of mine waste in river systems provides governments, environmental regulators, the mining industry, and local communities with a tool that, for the first time, will enable them to assess the offsite and downstream impacts of mining on ecosystem and human health.”



Concerns over just how bad the ecological impact of metal mining for sustainable technology might be are complicated by the diverse variety of resources involved, which can lead to “apples to oranges” comparisons.



According to the MIT Environmental Solutions Initiative, green energy technologies like wind turbines and electric cars often do require many more mined minerals than the present fossil fuels infrastructure.



One electric car, for example, requires six times more metallic and mineral materials than a combustion engine car, MIT’s university team reports.



A wind power plant, meanwhile, requires nine times more of these mined compounds than a traditional gas-fired plant.

link

[schwartzie]

Bill Gates Admits ‘Climate Crisis’ Narrative Is a Hoax

Frank Bergman
September 24, 2023 - 12:57 pm


Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has admitted that “climate crisis” prophecies of doom are a hoax.



In a major U-turn, climate alarmist Gates backtracked and confessed that “global warming” does not have apocalyptic consequences.



Gates reportedly told a group of his fellow globalist green agenda advocates that the “climate doom” narrative has now become so exaggerated that the public now sees right through the charade.



The admission from Gates is a major shift for the billionaire who has been a leading proponent of the “climate emergency” narrative.



For years, Gates has been championing the “Net Zero” goals of the unelected bureaucratic and corporate elite.



The “Net Zero” targets, as dictated to global governments by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and United Nations (UN), seek to strip the public of their quality of life in order to eliminate so-called “carbon emissions” by 2050.



However, as Slay News has reported, analysts warn that meeting these unrealistic goals will cost the taxpaying public $75 trillion.



Even after spending $75T, the world will still likely fall far short of the targets by 2050 and the globalists behind the policies will be long gone.



In 2021, Gates previously warned of apocalyptic consequences if the world fails to achieve “zero net carbon emissions” by the year 2050.



He warned the then-host of “Fox News Sunday” Chris Wallace in February 2021:



“The migration that we saw out of Syria for their civil war, which was somewhat weather dependent, we’re going to have 10 times as much migration because the equatorial areas will become unlivable.



“We won’t be able to farm or go outside during the summer.



“Wildfires, even the farming productivity in the south of the U.S. – the droughts – will reduce productivity in the area dramatically.”



Gates went on to say that the loss of life would be greater than even the worst part of the coronavirus pandemic.



“The instability overall will be five times as many deaths at the peak of the pandemic and going up every year,” he said.



“If we wait 10 more years it’s not as bad as if we wait 20 or we wait 30, because the temperature just keeps going up,” he said.


Gates also promoted this narrative in his fearmongering book, “How to Avoid a Climate Disaster.”



In his book, Gates warns that it is imperative that the world complies with “Nero Zero” goals before 2025 to avoid “catastrophe.”



However, while speaking at a New York Times event in NYC this week, Gates made a sudden U-turn on his climate doom narrative.



During the live event at The Times Center in New York, Gates admitted that “No temperate country is going to become uninhabitable” due to “global warming.”



He continued by admitting that the aggressive fear tactics are no longer working on the public.



Gates warned his globalist allies: “If you try to do climate brute force, you will get people who say, ‘I like climate but I don’t want to bear that cost and reduce my standard of living.'”



The billionaire also weighed in on his controversial plans to chop down trees to “fight climate change.”



As Slay News reported, Gates is funding a new effort that seeks to chop down a staggering 70 million acres of trees in an effort to allegedly “fight global warming.”



Gates’s organization, Breakthrough Energy, has plowed $6.6 million into the project led by Kodama Systems.



The move will see 70m acres of forests, mostly in the Western United States, cut down.



After the trees have been chopped down, they will be buried.



According to the project organizers, “scientists” say “burying trees can reduce global warming.”



Kodama claims that burying the trees will prevent them from allegedly “spewing” carbon back into the air.



Commenting on such plans, Gates even dismissed the idea of planting trees to save the planet.



“Are we the science people or are we the idiots?” he said in response to those who suggest planting more trees is good for the environment.



“Which one do we want to be?”

Gates’s U-turn comes as BlackRock CEO Larry Fink abandoned the term “ESG” (environment, social, and governance).



Fink also warns that the “green bubble” is imploding.



Gates’s shift doesn’t appear to have fully resonated with all of his fellow green agenda advocates just yet, however.



As Slay News reported earlier, Gates’s fellow globalists Bill Clinton and Pope Francis held talks this week to discuss ending the “climate change catastrophe.”



Stressing the urgency of addressing the alleged “catastrophe,” the pope and ex-POTUS vowed to fight global warming “before it’s too late.”



“It is time to work together to stop the ecological catastrophe before it’s too late,” the pontiff told Clinton at a meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI).



“Let us stop while there is still time, please.”



In late August, Francis said it is time for world leaders to “listen to science and institute a rapid and equitable transition to end the era of fossil fuel.”



It is “absurd to permit the continued exploration and expansion of fossil fuel infrastructures,” he declared in his message for the September 1 Feast of Creation.



“Let us raise our voices to halt this injustice towards the poor and towards our children, who will bear the worst effects of climate change.”



“The unrestrained burning of fossil fuels and the destruction of forests are pushing temperatures higher and leading to massive droughts,” the pope stated.



He claimed that the alleged “catastrophe” is a product of “consumerist greed, fueled by selfish hearts.”



Francis then suggested communist-like policies to address “climate change.”



“Richer nations have contracted an ‘ecological debt’ that must be paid” to poorer nations, he declared.



“Let us heed our call to stand with the victims of environmental and climate injustice, and to put an end to the senseless war against creation,” he said.



link

[schwartzie]

BBC Host Calls on Climate Activists to ‘Break the Law’ to Fight ‘Global Warming’

Frank Bergman
September 24, 2023 - 11:01 am


British TV host Chris Packham has called on his fellow climate activists to “break the law” in order to fight “global warming.”



Packham, a longtime host of the UK’s BBC and Channel 4 networks, made the call in a promo for his new eco-documentary titled “Is It Time to Break the Law?”



In the video, Packham urges green agenda mobs to “break the law” by claiming that it is “ethically responsible” for others to commit crimes to advance the “climate change” narrative.



Packham concludes that criminal acts may be necessary to make people listen to climate propaganda.



“It’s time to make up my own mind and decide if I think it’s time to break the law,” said Packham.



“No government, no major political party has ever significantly addressed the issue.”



“They haven’t been listening to us, the climate activists.



“If you’re an activist that’s already made the decision, that yes, you’re going to break the law – so long as no one is hurt, and there’s no lasting environmental damage – then you’ll have my support.”



“And personally, I think I’ve reached a point where I now consider it the ethically responsible thing to do.”



WATCH:

The irony of Packham using a state-owned outlet for his pro-crime campaign was not lost on many.

Many users on Twitter/X highlighted the hypocrisy in Packham’s message.



X user Bo called out Packham’s intentionally ambiguous comments.



“Genuine question, Chris – why do you never criticise companies like Pfizer or Unilever, all the Blackrock and Vanguard-owned companies that tip bns gallons of chemicals into our waters and seas, and use bns gallons of water to produce what they make,” Bo replied to Packham’s message.



“Why do you never criticize China India and Indonesia? The Cotton industry?



“The meat-free industry, that encourages the import of cashews, soy, coconut, grains, avocados and quinoa, decimating rainforest and displacing indigenous people and animals?



“Why don’t you call out the mining in Indonesia and the Congo done to create electric cars and energy alternatives?



“Why aren’t you down the Chinese embassy and the Indian embassy or calling for a boycott of all imports from these countries?



“This is the problem with your thinking.



“It’s one-sided and hypocritical,” Bo noted.



“You’re all like Mao’s 4 Pests campaign.



“You want things installed to solve a problem, without realizing your solutions are actually causing more problems for the environment and the planet.”

[schwartzie]

WEF: ‘Pandemic Emotions’ Create ‘Opportunity’ to Push Climate Fear

Frank Bergman
September 28, 2023 - 12:57 pm


Members of the World Economic Forum (WEF) have gloated that the “emotions” people felt during the pandemic have created an “opportunity” to advance the globalist green agenda by pushing “climate crisis” fear onto the public.



During a recent WEF panel discussion, members of Klaus Schwab’s unelected organization discussed methods of persuading the public to comply with unpopular green agenda policies.



The group lamented that installing WEF Young Global Leaders in government positions can only go so far if the majority of the world’s population doesn’t support radical climate policies.



The WEF panel included “Climate Czar” John Kerry’s daughter Vanessa Kerry.



Vanessa Kerry is the World Health Organization’s (WHO) “Director-General Special Envoy for Climate Change and Health.”

She is also listed as a WEF member.



During the discussion, Kerry and the other panelists spoke with WEF agenda contributor Jemilah Mahmood about pushing the ailing “global warming” narrative onto the public.



They complained that people are not so willing to comply with the green agenda because they don’t feel threatened enough by “climate change.”



However, Mahmood then praised the Covid pandemic for creating “an opportunity” to push climate propaganda.



She explained to the panelists that globalists can leverage the “emotions” that people felt during the pandemic.



Mahmood, a Malaysian medical professional and former government health official, excitedly described how the same fear tactics can be used to push the “climate crisis” narrative through “storytelling.”



WATCH:

TRANSCRIPT:



Mahmood: “The pandemic was an opportunity, I think all over the world, people realize how important health was…..how now do we take that emotion…of the health factors so critical but guess what guys, the climate crisis is creating more health issues than you can ever imagine, but no one has been able to make that link in the past.



“I think we are living in an age now, a time now, where we need to grasp this opportunity and work together and really build on that, right?”



Kerry: “And I want to ask you a question about that for a moment though…because you’re right…



JOIN THE FIGHT - DONATE TO SLAY NEWS TODAY!

“I feel the same way about Covid taught us all these lessons learned and we should be incorporating that….and the climate crisis is going to be so much worse.



“But I believe we were talking a little before we started the panel that people have forgotten….”



Mahmood: “People have forgotten.”



Kerry: “…that people have forgotten and don’t care.





“How do we keep that front and center?”



(Crosstalk)



Mahmood: “Absolutely right and we were just talking about it earlier: ‘Have people forgotten about Covid?’



“So I think it’s about the storytelling element.



“I think that a lot of the things we see on health are very doom and gloom very very much, even on the climate issue, right, the extent that people feel ‘I can’t deal with this anymore …I can’t do this.’



“But telling, you know, really inspiring stories about what is possible if we work together.”



FULL VIDEO:
 


link

[schwartzie]

WEF Demands Criminalization of ‘Climate Inaction,’ Punishable Up to Death

Frank Bergman
September 30, 2023 - 12:57 pm


The World Economic Forum (WEF) is calling on governments around the globe to criminalize so-called “climate inaction” with severe penalties for offenders.



In a recent article from Klaus Schwab’s unelected organization, the WEF demands that failing to comply with the globalist green agenda should be classed as a “human rights violation.”



In most civilized nations around the world, human rights violations are serious crimes that carry harsh punishments.



In the United States, punishments for human rights violations vary from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, according to the FBI.



If bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, offenders are fined or imprisoned for up to ten years or both.



If a human rights violation results in death, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, a person can be sentenced to imprisonment for any term of years or for life or may be sentenced to death, the FBI states.



Notably, green agenda advocates, Democrats, and their allies in the corporate media are repeatedly pushing the narrative that the so-called “climate crisis” is “killing people.”



By making “climate inaction” a human rights violation, those found guilty of “denying” so-called “global warming” could be sentenced to the death penalty.



According to the WEF, this would be the appropriate way to advance the green agenda.



“Is climate inaction a human rights violation?” the WEF asks in an article posted on its website.



In the article, the WEF suggests that there will be an increasing number of climate-related lawsuits in the coming years.



“Climate-related litigation generally seems poised for expansion,” the article states.



The WEF goes on to argue that “climate deniers” are responsible for the “record-breaking number of heat-related deaths.”


According to the Global Climate Change Litigation database, there have been over 130 cases worldwide that have brought human rights-based claims against governments.



Furthermore, a legal advocate for climate litigation, Clémentine Baldon, told the WEF last year that there is a strong expectation that human rights-related climate claims “will continue to increase.”



On Wednesday, a lawsuit went to the European Court of Human Rights, brought forth by six young individuals against 32 European countries.



The six individuals are alleging that the countries have failed to address the “climate crisis” allegedly caused by human activities.



“It’s being described as ‘unprecedented’ in terms of potential impact,” the WEF claims.



“A win could push some of the wealthiest countries in the world to ramp up their responses to a changing climate; a loss could affect the numerous other legal efforts now underway to target inaction.”



Last year, Norwegian Finance CEO and WEF speaker Kjerstin Braathen said that people should be prepared to suffer “pain,” inflation, and “energy shortages” in order to advance the green agenda of the WEF and United Nations (UN).



“We need to accept that there will be some pain in the process,” Braathen said.



“The pace that we need [to end climate change] will open up for missteps.



“It will open up for shortages of energy.



“It will create inflationary pressures, and maybe we need to start talking about that — that that pain is actually worth it.


link

[schwartzie]

Greenpeace Co-Founder: ‘Climate Alarmism Is 100% Untrue’

Frank Bergman
October 3, 2023 - 12:57 pm


One of the co-founders of the global environmental group Greenpeace has blown the whistle to warn the public that “climate alarmism… is 100% untrue.”



Environmentalist Patrick Moore is the former president of Greenpeace Canada and helped found the international organization in 1971.



After leaving the group in 1986, Moore has tried to warn the public that environmental activism has been hijacked to push political agendas.



In a new interview with podcast host Dan Proft, Moore warns that the entire “climate crisis” narrative is a hoax.



Moore highlights how, in recent years, green agenda advocates have been using changes in the weather to suggest that the planet is being destroyed by global warming.



“They said it was the hottest year in the history of the earth the other day, and it’s not,” Moore told Proft on the “Counterculture” podcast.



“That’s just, period, a lie.



“The whole climate alarmism – ‘climate catastrophe’ – is 100% untrue,” Moore declared.



“We are not in a climate crisis.”



Moore told Proft that “there is nothing really that radical happening” with the climate.



He noted that it’s essential to “seek the truth” and “sort out what is true and what isn’t.”



WATCH:





Moore is currently leading the CO2 Coalition, a non-partisan foundation that educates policy leaders and the public about the important contributions of carbon dioxide to our lives and the economy.



He has previously spoken out to warn the public that the anti-carbon dioxide narrative is also a hoax, as Slay News reported.



Moore, an ecologist and environmental activist for more than 50 years, argues that an increased level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is beneficial.



According to Moore, claims that climate change is “human-caused” are “propaganda” which he describes as “dangerous.”



The comments from Moore, a leading expert in environmentalism, directly conflict with the green agenda being pushed by Democrat President Joe Biden’s administration and globalist groups such as the United Nations (UN) and World Economic Forum (WEF).



Green agenda advocates are demanding that the public must slash their “carbon footprints” to “save the planet.”



The farming industry has recently emerged as one of the key targets for the anti-carbon narrative.



As Slay News recently reported, Biden’s “climate czar” John Kerry is calling for farmers to stop growing food in order to meet the administration’s radical “Net Zero” goals for lowering “emissions.”



Meanwhile, indications have been emerging that the tide could be turning on the globalist green agenda.



Bill Gates, one of the world’s most prominent climate alarmists, recently admitted that the “climate crisis” narrative is a hoax, as Slay News reported.



Gates reportedly told a group of his fellow globalist green agenda advocates that the “climate doom” narrative has now become so exaggerated that the public now sees right through the charade.



while speaking at a New York Times event in NYC this week, Gates made a sudden U-turn on his climate doom narrative.



During the live event at The Times Center in New York, Gates admitted that “No temperate colinkuntry is going to become uninhabitable” due to “global warming.”



He continued by admitting that the aggressive fear tactics are no longer working on the public.



Gates warned his globalist allies: “If you try to do climate brute force, you will get people who say, ‘I like climate but I don’t want to bear that cost and reduce my standard of living.’”



The billionaire also weighed in on his controversial plans to chop down trees to “fight climate change.”



Gates is funding a new effort that seeks to chop down a staggering 70 million acres of trees in an effort to allegedly “fight global warming.”



Gates’s organization, Breakthrough Energy, has plowed $6.6 million into the project led by Kodama Systems.



The move will see 70m acres of forests, mostly in the Western United States, cut down.



After the trees have been chopped down, they will be buried.



According to the project organizers, “scientists” say “burying trees can reduce global warming.”

[schwartzie]

Top Climate Scientist Blows Whistle, Admits ‘Crisis’ Is a Hoax

Frank Bergman
October 5, 2023 - 12:57 pm


One of the world’s most respected climate scientists has blown the lid off the green agenda narrative that the Earth is facing a “crisis” due to “global warming.”



Dr. Judith Curry is a climatologist who has published more than 140 scientific books and papers.



Curry, who served as former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, has also admitted to pushing fake “climate change” propaganda herself.



As Slay News previously reported, Curry recently came forward to confess to fabricating her studies concluding that “climate change” is causing more frequent and more severe hurricanes around the world.



For years, Curry has been one of the leading voices warning that the Earth is facing an “emergency” due to allegedly “man-made climate change.”



Her work has frequently been cited by those promoting climate alarmism.



Curry said she became the darling of the liberal corporate media after she published a study that seemed to show a dramatic increase in hurricane intensity.



“We found that the percent of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes had doubled,” says Curry.



The study was published around the time of Hurricane Katrina.



“This was picked up by the media,” and then climate alarmists realized, “Oh, here is the way to do it,” she said.



“Tie extreme weather events to global warming!”



The “more intense” hurricanes reported in her findings rapidly gave the alarmists fuel.



However, when her work gave her worldwide recognition after it was linked to “climate change,” Curry admits that she enjoyed the green agenda ride.


“I was adopted by the environmental advocacy groups and the alarmists and I was treated like a rock star,” Curry recounts.



“Flown all over the place to meet with politicians.”



But then some researchers pointed out gaps in her research by highlighting the years with low levels of hurricanes.



“Like a good scientist, I investigated,” says Curry.



“Part of it was bad data,” she admitted.



“Part of it is natural climate variability.”



Curry says that she decided to speak out after her own work was exposed.



Her own experience made Curry realize that there is a “climate-change industry” set up to reward alarmism.



“The origins go back to the . . . UN environmental program,” says Curry.



Some United Nations officials were motivated by “anti-capitalism,” she revealed.



“They hated the oil companies and seized on the climate change issue to move their policies along,” Curry explains.



In 1988, the UN created the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).



“The IPCC wasn’t supposed to focus on any benefits of warming,” Curry explains.



“The IPCC’s mandate was to look for dangerous human-caused climate change.”



“Then the national funding agencies directed all the funding . . . assuming there are dangerous impacts.”



The researchers quickly figured out that the way to get funded was to make alarmist claims about “man-made climate change.”



This is how “manufactured consensus” happens.



In a new interview with commentator John Stossel, Curry has further exposed the globalist “climate crisis” narrative that seeks to usher in the “Net Zero” goals of the UN and World Economic Forum (WEF) before 2030.



The video begins with alarmist statements from radical Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and “global warming” activist Greta Thunberg, who both claim, without evidence, that “people are dying!”



Also among the propaganda is the claim that Earth has until 2030 to avoid a “climate catastrophe.”



WATCH:

Curry also spoke about Climategate, which revealed so-called climate scientists were concealing information, warping study results, and bullying editors.



Extremists, including those at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, decided on a war against oil companies and capitalism, and put the “policy cart” far ahead of the “science horse,” she said.



Curry said much of the false study results came from the bias in funding.



She explains that scientists looking neutrally at such issues couldn’t get funded and, eventually, they were smeared as “climate deniers.”



Curry said the scientific community likely began the “cancel culture” because of these issues.



Today, she charged, climate change arguments are being used to ignore the real problems that need to be addressed.



She notes that real issues such as poverty, lifestyle, poor government, poor land use, poor city planning, and more and simply blamed on “climate change.”



Curry is not the first renowned scientist to come forward recently, however.



As Slay News reported in August, over 1600 scientists from around the world joined forces by signing a declaration stating that claims of a “climate emergency” threatening the Earth are a hoax.



The massive group of scientists, which includes two Nobel Prize winners, signed the World Climate Declaration (WCD).



The WCD dismisses the existence of a “climate crisis” and insists that carbon dioxide is beneficial to Earth.



The declaration directly conflicts with the popular alarmist narrative that claims humans are destroying the planet with their carbon output.



These views are also echoed by renowned environmentalist Dr. Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace.



As Slay News reported earlier this week, Moore is also warning the public that the anti-carbon dioxide narrative is a scam.



Moore, an ecologist and environmental activist for more than 50 years, is warning the public that “climate alarmism… is 100% untrue.”



In a new interview with podcast host Dan Proft, Moore warns that the entire “climate crisis” narrative is a hoax.



Moore highlights how, in recent years, green agenda advocates have been using changes in the weather to suggest that the planet is being destroyed by global warming.



“They said it was the hottest year in the history of the earth the other day, and it’s not,” Moore told Proft on the “Counterculture” podcast.



“That’s just, period, a lie.



“The whole climate alarmism – ‘climate catastrophe’ – is 100% untrue,” Moore declared.



“We are not in a climate crisis.”



Moore told Proft that “there is nothing really that radical happening” with the climate.



He noted that it’s essential to “seek the truth” and “sort out what is true and what isn’t.”



WATCH:



Claims of a “climate crisis” are being promoted around the globe by governments and their media accomplice in an effort to comply with the green agenda goals of the World Economic Forum (WEF), United Nations (UN), the World Health Organization (WHO), and other unelected globalist organizations.



Meeting these goals typically involved plans to slash the quality of life for most of the general public while ramping up taxes to “save the planet.”



Meanwhile, the handful of powerful elites promoting the green agenda will continue to fly around in private jets and eat meat because they are “part of the solution.”


link

[schwartzie]

UN Calls for Public to Live in Mud Huts to Meet ‘Net Zero’ Goals

Frank Bergman
October 10, 2023 - 12:57 pm


Unelected bureaucrats at the United Nations (UN) are calling for the public to start living in huts made from mud and straw in order to meet the globalist agency’s “Net Zero” goals before the year 2050.



The UN has just released a new report that lays out extreme measures citizens in Western nations will need to endure to comply with the corporate elite’s green agenda.



To meet the target of reaching “zero carbon emissions” before 2050, as dictated by the UN and the World Economic Forum (WEF), the public will need to significantly slash their quality of life and begin to align with the globalist vision of collectivism.



The UN insists that traditionally built homes are no longer acceptable and people will need to start living in huts made from building materials consisting of mud bricks, bamboo, and forest “detritus.”



According to the UN, the world needs to switch to “regenerative material practices.”



These practices involve using “ethically produced” low-carbon earth and bio-based building materials.



Examples include mud bricks, timber, bamboo, and agricultural and forest detritus.



The report harks back to the middle of the last century when the vast majority of cultures built large buildings and cities out of indigenous earthen, stone, and bio-based materials, including timber, cane, thatch, and bamboo.



Contrasting modern concrete, steel, and glass buildings, the United Nations asserts that “massive mud buildings have been maintained for centuries with their structures intact.”



The UN lays out the plans in a recently published report titled “Building Materials and the Climate: Constructing a New Future.”



The report draws on a wide variety of international authors.



The UN worked alongside Yale University and the Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction (GABC) to prepare the report.



GABC received financial funding from the green activist Laudes Foundation and the British Government.



Slay the latest News for free!

Email Address *

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.



The report is one of a number that have appeared recently that have started to lay out the hard changes that will need to be made to meet the globalist “Net Zero” goals.



Under Net Zero, 80% of the world’s energy produced by fossil fuels will be banned in less than 30 years.



The construction sector is said to account for 37% of “human-caused emissions” of gases such as carbon dioxide.



Making progress on reducing this will require drastic measures with the report stating that materials such as concrete, steel, and aluminum will be used only when “absolutely necessary.”



JOIN THE FIGHT - DONATE TO SLAY NEWS TODAY!

However, as Slay News previously reported, experts are warning that meeting these targets will cost taxpayers a staggering $75 trillion.



Unsurprisingly, the unelected UN demands legislative action in its buildings report and suggests taxpayer money must be used to enforce its green agenda schemes.



Government “incentives, awareness campaigns, and legal and regulatory frameworks” will be needed to push the UN’s mud huts plans, the report notes.



“Recycling systems for building materials tend to require similar kinds of support across countries,” the report states.



“Far more investment” is required for the measures due to the complexity of what is being proposed, according to the UN.



“Regulation and synergistic enforcement is required across all phases of the building life cycle, from extraction through to end-of-use,” the report adds.



Meanwhile, bureaucrats installed in Democrat President Joe Biden’s administration have been pushing more measures that will drastically slash the quality of life for most Americans to meet “Net Zero.”



As Slay News recently reported, Biden’s “climate czar” John Kerry led the United States in signing a pact with several other major food-producing nations that seeks to crack down on farming.



America joined twelve other nations from around the world in an agreement to crack down on the agriculture industry to fight “global warming.”



International governments have agreed to sign a pact pledging to target food production by shutting down farms to reduce “methane emissions.”



The thirteen nations signing the Global Methane Pledge are:



Argentina

Australia

Brazil

Burkina Faso

Chile

Czech Republic

Ecuador

Germany

Panama

Peru

Spain

The United States

Uruguay

The move seeks to drastically cut meat and dairy supply around the world to allegedly “save the planet” from “climate change.”



The U.S., Australia, Brazil, and Argentina, nations that are signing the pact, are among the world’s largest producers of meat.



Meanwhile, major American cities are putting drastic measures in place in order to comply with “Net Zero” targets.



As Slay News reported, 14 U.S. cities have set a “target” to comply with the green agenda goals of the UN and WEF by banning meat, dairy, and private car ownership by 2030.



The U.S. cities have formed a coalition called the “C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group” (C40).



The C40 has established an “ambitious target” to meet the WEF’s goals by the year 2030.



To fulfill the “target,” the C40 Cities have pledged that their residents will comply with the following list of mandatory rules:



“0 kg [of] meat consumption”

“0 kg [of] dairy consumption”

“3 new clothing items per person per year”

“0 private vehicles” owned

“1 short-haul return flight (less than 1500 km) every 3 years per person”

The C40 Cities’ dystopian goals can be found in its “The Future of Urban Consumption in a 1.5°C World” report.



The American city members of C40 include:



Austin

Boston

Chicago

Houston

Los Angeles

Miami

New Orleans

New York City

Philadelphia

Phoenix

Portland

San Francisco

Washington, D.C.

Seattle

Phoenix is leading the charge on the push, as Slay News reported.



The Democrat mayor of Phoenix, Arizona, Kate Gallego, has taken steps toward enforcing the globalist agenda by moving to ban meat and dairy consumption and private car ownership.



Gallego, a member of C40 since 2020, now serves as “Vice Chair of the C40 Steering Committee,” which” provides strategic oversight to ensure C40’s mission and mandate are directly driven by and responsive to the needs of C40 cities.”



Their mission and mandate include a Race to Zero global campaign to reach net-zero carbon emissions in 1,000 cities worldwide and “sustainable food policies” that support “an overall increase of healthy plant-based food consumption in our cities by shifting away from unsustainable, unhealthy diets,” A.K.A. carnivorous diets.



C40 Cities also requires limits on the number of items of clothing individuals can purchase each year and will restrict members of the public to only travel by air once every three years.

link

[schwartzie]

Pope Francis Blames Humans for Earthquakes, Claims ‘Carbon Emissions’ Cause Natural Disasters

Frank Bergman
October 14, 2023 - 11:50 am


Pope Francis has issued a new climate alarmist letter in which he claims that humans are causing earthquakes by emitting “carbon emissions.”



At one point, Francis suggests humans are causing “seaquakes” by ignoring the green agenda.



He continues by alleging that the world is “collapsing and may be nearing the breaking point” due to “climate change.”



The pope’s latest warnings about “global warming” are contained in an “Apostolic Exhortation” titled Laudate Deum.



It is a follow-up to an earlier doom-ridden encyclical letter in 2015 when he referred to CO2 as highly polluting.



The latest letter is full of emotional errors, unsubstantiated scientific opinions, and a cold condescension for the growing number of scientists who dispute the political narrative of a climate emergency.



At one point, these scientists are said to bring up “allegedly solid scientific facts.”



Francis doesn’t provide any evidence to support these “scientific facts,” however.



Francis is on very shaky ground with his contention that humans somehow cause submarine earthquakes.



The claims from the pope are the latest in a long line of fearmongering allegations about the climate that don’t stand up to scrutiny.



A recent article in the Conversation noted “evidence” that the loss of surface ice in Scandinavia triggered numerous earthquake events around 7,000-11,000 years ago.



However, further inquiry showed that there was no tectonic plate action during the period claimed.



Seaquakes would appear to be a new field of climate alarm, suggesting Francis is well ahead of the game on this one.




The pope is also leading the pack with his contention that the melting of the continental ice sheets at the poles will not be reversed for hundreds of years.



What melting of the ice sheet in Antarctica Francis is referring to is not immediately clear.



According to Singh and Polvani, warming has been “almost non-existent” for at least 70 years.



NASA, meanwhile, reports the ice loss is 0.0005% a year.



In 2021, the South Pole recorded its coldest winter since records began in 1957.



Meanwhile in the Arctic, a small, little publicized, cyclical recovery in sea ice has been underway for over a decade.



In his letter, Francis declares that it is “verifiable that specific climate changes provoked by humanity are notably heightening the probability of extreme phenomena that are increasingly frequent and intense”.



Despite all attempts to deny, conceal, gloss over, or relativize the issue, the signs of climate change are here and increasingly evident, Francis insists.



The pope argues that no one can ignore recent extreme weather events such as droughts, floods, and unusual heat, which, according to Francis, are caused by “manmade climate change.”



Why a man of God would claim that there were no extreme weather events prior to the Industrial Revolution wasn’t explained in Francis’s letter, however.



“I feel obliged to make these clarifications, which may appear obvious, because of certain dismissive and scarcely reasonable opinions that I encounter, even within the Catholic Church,” states Francis.



In a 2020 encyclical letter, Francis spoke of the possibility of a single world authority “equipped with the power to provide for the global common good.”



The one world government should be given “real authority in such a way as to provide for the attainment of certain goals,” he argued.



In this way, there could come about a multilateralism that is not dependent on changing political conditions or the interest of a certain few, and possesses a stable efficacy, he concluded.


 link

[schwartzie]

WEF’s ‘Carbon Passports’ Restrict Public Travel to Fight ‘Global Warming’

Frank Bergman
October 17, 2023 - 12:57 pm


A new push is emerging from the World Economic Forum (WEF) that seeks to fight “global warming” by placing travel restrictions on the public.



Climate alarmists are pushing a new technology in the form of digital “carbon passports.”



Much like the digital IDs pushed by unelected globalist organizations such as the WEF, “carbon passports” will track individuals’ movements and use the information to set limits on their travel.



The new technology was revealed in a recently published report from Intrepid Travel and the WEF’s Future Laboratory.



Irakli Kashibadze, the CEO and founder of Future Laboratory, is listed as one of the architects of the WEF’s agenda.



Dubbing these restrictions as “personal carbon allowances,” the report portends they would serve as determinants compelling individuals to conform to the “global carbon budget.”



With imposed limitations on yearly travel anticipated by as soon as 2040, travelers might be forced to relinquish the horizon-expansion privileges, usually afforded by contemporary tourism.



The report highlights the alleged repercussions of “climate change” on popular summer destinations like Greece and Majorca.



These nations are now supposedly deemed too hot for humans due to so-called “global boiling.”



The introduction of carbon passports could raise serious privacy concerns about the level of surveillance exercised over individuals’ movements and behavior.



Meanwhile, another technology pushed by the WEF will be rolled out nationally in Austria this year.



The Austrian government will be mandating digital IDs for all citizens in December.



By December 5, all Austrians will be expected to be enrolled in a new national digital ID system called ID Austria.


The scheme claims to be secure and seamless access to various government services.



The new system will supersede the Handy-Signatur, the digital ID platform currently in use by Austrians.



It effectively pushes about 2.8 million people to adjust to ID Austria.



According to The Local, the government is forcing everyone to comply with ID Austria as citizens will otherwise be barred from a wide range of essential government services.



The government is pushing everyone aged 14 and over to enroll in the system.



The transition, spearheaded by the Federal Ministries of Finance and Interior, is aimed at providing users with highly secure access to an array of government and commercial services.



The ID Austria is also promised to be usable throughout the European Union (EU) soon.



The ties to the EU suggest the far-reaching blueprint could be replicated elsewhere after a successful rollout in Austria.



The WEF frequently touts the “benefits” of being able to control the public through mandatory digital IDs.



These measures will undoubtedly act as precursors to overreaching surveillance and the tracking of individuals’ carbon footprints.



As governments and corporations scramble to tackle “climate” issues, the thin line between necessary action and privacy invasion continues to blur dangerously.



These policies disguise themselves as a necessary evil for “the greater good.”



However, they will surely impact individual liberty and confidentiality.



It’s crucial to ensure global responses don’t sideline privacy rights and morph into invasive practices at their core.



The rush for digitalization should never come at the expense of individuals’ rights to their personal freedom.



link

[schwartzie]

WEF: Pushing ‘Coming Water Crisis’ Will Advance Globalist Agenda

Frank Bergman
October 3, 2023 - 12:35 pm


A World Economic Forum (WEF) official has declared that a coming water crisis will be used to control the public and advance the globalist agenda of the unelected corporate elite.



WEF spokesperson Professor Mariana Mazzucato argues that a crisis centered around “water” will “deliver” where “Covid” and “climate change” both “failed.”



“You need water,” Mazzucato asserted during a panel discussion before an audience of salivating globalists.



Mazzucato made the call during WEF’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland last year.



However, her comments appeared to slip under the radar until a video of the panel discussion recently emerged on social media.



During the discussion, Mazzucato, who is listed as one of the WEF’s “agenda contributors,” was lamenting how Covid and “climate change” failed to usher in a world government.



She then laid out her case for how a water crisis will be the catalyst that imposes a world government upon humanity.



“Did we actually manage to vaccinate everyone in the world? No,” Mazzucato, founding Director of the UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose, said during a WEF forum on the “Economics of Water.”



“So highlighting water as a global commons and what it means to work together and see it both out of a global commons perspective but also the self-interest perspective, because it does have that parallel, is not only important, but it’s also important because we haven’t managed to solve those problems which had similar attributes.



“And water is something that people understand.



“Climate change is a bit abstract,” she said, waving her arms in the air.



“Some people understand it really well, some understand it a bit, some just don’t understand it.”



“Water, every kid knows how important it is to have water.


“When you’re playing football and you’re thirsty, you need water,” she noted.



“So there’s also something about really getting citizen engagement around this and really in some ways experimenting with this notion of the common good.”



“Can we actually deliver this time in ways we have failed miserably other times?” she added.



“And hopefully we won’t keep failing on the other things, but anyway.”



A clip of Mazzucato’s comments was shared online by the popular Twitter/X account Wide Awake Media.



The caption of the video states:



“World Economic Forum ‘agenda contributor,’ Mariana Mazzucato: Our attempt to vaccinate the entire planet failed, ‘climate change’ is ‘too abstract’ for people to understand, but the coming water crisis is something that everyone will get on board with.”



WATCH:



World Economic Forum "agenda contributor", Mariana Mazzucato: Our attempt to vaccinate the entire planet failed, "climate change" is "too abstract" for people to understand, but the coming water crisis is something that everyone will get on board with.

According to the WEF’s description, the purpose of the discussion was to formulate a “2-year initiative to transform the Economics of Water.



“The report and action plan will reshape how we talk about, value, and manage water in the rest of the 21st century,” the unelected organization states.



FULL VIDEO:




link

[schwartzie]

John Kerry: Earth’s Greatest ‘Threat’ Is ‘Humanity Itself’

Frank Bergman
October 21, 2023 - 12:57 pm


Democrat President Joe Biden’s unelected and unregulated “Climate Czar” John Kerry has declared that the greatest “threat” facing planet Earth is “humanity itself.”



Kerry, the U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, recently addressed the Scottish Global Dialogues about the so-called “climate crisis.”



Kerry’s extreme globalist views were welcomed by the Scottish First Minister Humza Yousaf.



In introducing Kerry at the Scottish Global Dialogues, Yousaf said:



“Scotland … will always value and welcome the efforts of people such as Secretary Kerry.



“Secretary Kerry, it is my genuine honor, my genuine pleasure, to welcome you here today.



“All of us are looking forward to what you have to say.”



Kerry opened his statement by saying:



“I see a number of familiar faces.



“It’s great to be among friends, both old and new.”



He then proclaimed James Hutton as “the world’s first climate scientist.”



Hutton was a Scottish geologist, agriculturalist, chemical manufacturer, naturalist, physician, and philosopher who played a key role in establishing geology as a modern science.



He was an important contributor to the Scottish Enlightenment.


Hutton enjoyed the company of notable figures such as Sir James Hall of Dunglass, James Watt, Adam Smith, and Joseph Black.



“The Enlightenment transformed thinking to win acceptance of the principle that science-based evidence, not vested power promulgating its own tradition, is the foundation of the laws of the universe,” Kerry said.



According to the U.S. State Department transcript of his remarks, Kerry said:



“Despite a vast array of empirical facts beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt, despite thousands of scientists’ lifetime work accumulating hard data, and without a single piece of peer-reviewed, documentation to the contrary, we are again witnessing another moment in which the persuasive force of evidence and with it, Earth’s future hangs in the balance.



“All because some extremist political voices, holdout nations, and vastly vested interests have declared war on facts and science.



“All because they distort for political or personal gain what science and common sense dictate we humans must do to put our house in order.



“They incite a movement against what they falsely label ‘climate change fanaticism,’ as they conveniently forget that the dictionary definition of a cult is the dismissal of facts in devotion to a lie.



“While they refuse to accept the facts behind the increasingly obvious damages of the climate crisis, they lash out at the truth-tellers and label indisputable evidence as hysteria.



“They compound the already difficult challenge of the climate crisis by promising to do more of exactly what created the crisis in the first place.”



Kerry then underscored his globalist anti-human agenda by declaring: “So now, humanity is inexorably threatened by humanity itself.”



WATCH:







Kerry’s comments invoked The Club of Rome’s 1991 publication which dishonestly claimed “the common enemy of humanity is man.”



The book published by the globalist think-tank Club of Rome in 1991 was titled “The First Global Revolution.”



It followed up the earlier 1972 depopulation report from the Club of Rome titled “The Limits to Growth.”



“The Limits to Growth” was co-authored by World Economic Forum (WEF) agenda architect Dennis Meadows.



As Slay News has previously reported, Meadows has called for an 86% reduction in the global population in order to allegedly “fight climate change.”



“The First Global Revolution” was released shortly after the collapse of communism.



In it, President Emeritus of the Club of Rome Alexander King and Secretary General Bertrand Schneider described the world’s problems, as they saw it, and an approach to a possible solution.



Topics covered by the book included “the need for the world to convert from a military to a civil economy, the recognition of the disastrous short-term effects of exploitation by First World countries of Third World poverty and need, and the containment of global warming: the need to reduce global emissions of carbon dioxide, to encourage reforestation, to conserve traditional forms of energy and develop alternatives.”



Most importantly, the book declared “global warming” as the new pretext to wage war on humanity.



The book notes that the anti-human agenda can be promoted under the guise of “saving the planet.”



The following is an extract from page 115 of “The First Global Revolution“:



THE PROBLEMATIQUE: THE VACUUM



The need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor. States have striven to overcome domestic failure and internal contradictions by designating external enemies. The scapegoat practice is as old as mankind itself. When things become too difficult at home, divert attention by adventure abroad. Bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose. [pg. 108]



Can we live without enemies? Every state has been so used to classifying its neighbours as friend or foe that the sudden absence of traditional adversaries has left governments and public opinion with a great void. New enemies, therefore, have to be identified, new strategies imagined, new weapons devised. The new enemies may have changed in nature and location, but they are no less real. They threaten the whole human race and their names are pollution, water shortage, famine, malnutrition, illiteracy, unemployment. However, it appears that awareness of the

new enemies is, as yet, insufficient to elicit world cohesion and solidarity for the fight. [pg.108]



The Common Enemy of Humanity Is Man



In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.



The comments from the “Climate Czar” come as Kerry has been leading the charge in the war against America’s food supply.



As Slay News reported, Kerry is calling for farmers to stop growing food in order to meet the administration’s radical “net zero” goals for lowering “emissions.”



Kerry issued the warning during a green agenda conference in Washington D.C. in May.



During the Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) AIM for Climate Summit, Kerry told the audience that “we can’t get to net zero, we won’t get this job done, unless agriculture is front and center as part of the solution.”



He warned attendees that his and other world leaders’ “lives depend” on farmers ceasing their operations.



Kerry, a multibillionaire, argued that the world’s population must slash meat consumption.



However, the overall message delivered by Kerry appeared to be that eating meat should be a luxury that is limited to wealthy elitists like himself.



Essentially, the masses must stop eating meat to meet the goals of the elite.



“Food systems themselves contribute a significant amount of emissions just in the way in which we do the things we’ve been doing,” Kerry asserted.



“With a growing population on the planet – we just crossed the threshold of eight billion fellow citizens around the world – emissions from the food system alone are projected to cause another half a degree of warming by mid-century.”



Kerry called on world leaders from all around the world to massively scale back their citizens’ farming operations.



He argued that doing so is vital in order to keep the planet cooler as we move into the future.



Shortly after the fearmongering speech, several major meat-producing nations, including the United States, signed a pact championed by Kerry.



As Slay News reported, thirteen nations from around the world signed an agreement to crack down on the agriculture industry to fight “global warming.”



International governments signed the Global Methane Pledge that seeks to target food production by shutting down farms to reduce “methane emissions.”



The thirteen nations signing the Global Methane Pledge are:



Argentina

Australia

Brazil

Burkina Faso

Chile

Czech Republic

Ecuador

Germany

Panama

Peru

Spain

The United States

Uruguay

The move seeks to drastically cut meat and dairy supply around the world to allegedly “save the planet” from “climate change.”



The U.S., Australia, Brazil, and Argentina, nations that are signing the pact, are among the world’s largest producers of meat.


link