Stop Proselytizing About Climate Change And Start Fixing It

Stop Proselytizing About Climate Change And Start Fixing It

By Maria Fotopoulos

Type in “climate change” in Google, and about 1,730,000,000 results are delivered in 0.72 seconds. Probably the only people on the planet who don’t know the term (in English or their native languages) from changement climatique (France) to cambiamento climatico (Italy) and изменение климата (Russia) are probably … well, is there anyone on the planet who doesn’t know the term at this point? 

Climate change messaging is at mass saturation. Those who believe that burning coal, oil and gas for energy are changing weather patterns and temperatures, and causing wildfires in California, are convinced – too many, cultists and true believers – to the point of practicing climate change as a religion. And those who don’t hold that position likely never will. So the time for nonproductive stunts to draw attention to the issue is well past. The lines are drawn; minds committed one way or the other. Climate change activists who vandalize pipelines; glue themselves to famous works of art – a Botticelli, a da Vinci or McCulloch – and to roads and tankers; take over Trafalgar Square or vandalize in other “creative” ways (often using oil-based products in their stunts, an irony perhaps lost on them) need to just stop. Fortunately, on the “stolen childhood” end, the Friday climate change protests of Greta Thunberg and the entire Greta phenomenon seem to have faded, as has, on the octogenarian end, Jane Fonda’s “Fire Drill Fridays” to “stop the climate crisis.” 

Stop Proselytizing About Climate Change And Start Fixing It

These new iterations of pseudo environmental activists are the successors to eco-terrorist groups such as ELF and ALF, who thought setting SUVs on fire at dealerships and burning down new construction were good ways to stop environmental destruction, and destroying university labs was a way to save animals, respectively. If today’s faux green activists continue on their path, if they’re not already, they will be today’s eco-terrorists. Of course, they’ve been useful tools in a political agenda, so, like the ANTIFA and BLM radicals, probably nothing will happen to them, even if they ramp up their terrorism, uh, activism.

A less polarizing and destructive path, and a more productive one, would be to actually do something positive that contributes to a sustainable world. What a concept!

In the documentary, “8 Billion Angels,” Terry Spahr, filmmaker and founder of Earth Overshoot, explores a multitude of problems created by humanity, problems mostly a result of there being too many of us. The “8 billion” is the number of humans on the planet now – a number expected to grow to 9.8 billion by 2050 and 11.2 billion by 2100, according to the United Nations. Looking at oceans, land, air and rivers, and population, a wide range of thoughtful people from academics to those working on the issues via the nonprofit world to businesspeople who care deeply about environmental issues and the kind of planet we will leave for future generations are featured in the film.

“One of the things my mother always taught me, when you borrow something, you give it back in better condition, and we’re not doing that,” says Bill Mook, who tells his story in the film. His Mook Sea Farm in Maine produces about 125 million “oysters on land” each year. The oyster hatchery of Mook, who has been in business for more than 30 years, grew out of seeing increasing water quality degradation and resultant diseases that wiped out oyster populations. With the devastation of oyster beds, Mook says oystermen started to see the value of figuring out “how to do the early stages of oysters on land” and then seeding the natural environment for the oysters to develop. Mook’s oyster hatchery sells to growers from North Carolina to Maine. The small business owner calls this providing environmental services.

Bill Mook with worker at his oyster hatchery.

Not just a tasty treat with a bit of lemon and horseradish, “Oysters in the wild take up a lot of excess nitrogen,” says Mook. “And we’re putting more and more nitrogen in our water; oysters combat the degradation of the water.”

In his free time, Mook works to educate his friends and neighbors to understand the issues. “What I’d like to see are other businesses, whose livelihoods depend on a healthy environment, make the case that having a healthy environment and a thriving, vibrant economy are not mutually exclusive; they are vital to each other.”

Mook’s story is a great example of a direct and positive response to address an environmental issue that helps people, biodiversity and the planet. We need more people like Mook. To have real change, a majority of individuals and businesses will have to work together to have the best practices for living and working to tread lightly on our planet, and ensure the safety and security of biodiversity, ultimately leading to lifestyles and work processes that don’t infringe on individual rights but provide a good quality of life for all.

It’s essential to know what the core problem is as well. Climate change is a symptom. Underpinning our environmental problems are too many people on the planet. We know our numbers can be reduced over the next generations in noncoercive ways by educating and empowering youth, creating better economic opportunities and by ensuring there is contraception education and availability, including in the many areas where there currently are unmet needs.

The pipeline vandals, “just stop oil” folks and other so-called environmental activists who want to destroy the village to save it might take a pause to watch “8 Billion Angels” as a starting point to charting a better path forward. We need solutions, not destructive PR stunts.

Maria Fotopoulos writes about the connection between overpopulation and biodiversity loss, and from time to time other topics that confound her. On FB @BetheChangeforAnimals.

Stop Proselytizing About Climate Change And Start Fixing It

Joe Biden Mansions Show He’s Fake On Climate Change

Joe Biden Mansions Show He’s Fake On Climate Change — Working class Joe Biden’s primary residence is a 6,850-square-foot mansion in Greenville, Del. and a 4,800-square-foot vacation house in Rehoboth Beach. Further he is renting a 12,000 square feet mansion that boasts marble fireplaces, a sauna, five bedrooms, 10 bathrooms, and a gym in McLean, Va.

Joe Biden Mansions Show He's Fake On Climate Change
One of Joe Biden’s planet destroying residences.

You seriously think he seriously believes that global warming is a problem?

My Democrat friends, you are being conned.

Joe Biden Mansions Show He’s Fake On Climate Change

AOC Banning Eric Swalwell?

AOC Banning Eric Swalwell? -- The question of the day is when Congesswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY14)
AOC helping kill cows now!!

AOC Banning Eric Swalwell? — The question of the day is when will Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY14) introduce legislation to ban Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-CA15) and save the world from being destroyed in 12 years.

Below is video of the vile Swalwell destroying the world. Please, think of the children. Stop this man now!!

AOC Banning Swalwell?

Wolf Executive Action Crushing Pa. Economy

Wolf Executive Action Crushing Pa. Economy

By Gregory R. Wrightstone

Pennsylvania governor Tom Wolf’s executive action to impose a Cap and Trade system on carbon dioxide emissions is easily his most harmful act in his two terms as chief executive of the state. As one of the most liberal governors in the nation, his progressive impulses have, until now, been constrained by a GOP-controlled House and Senate. His move to bring the Keystone State into the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) and impose a costly and economically crippling carbon trading system is an attempted end-run around the GOP to implement a tax without legislative approval.

Wolf Executive Action
But he gets to keep his lifestyle.

On Oct. 3, Wolf signed an executive order that began the process of adding Pennsylvania to a group of northeastern states that constitute what has been called the “first mandatory market-based program in the United States to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” It is now up to the Department of Environmental Protection to draft the proposed regulation and then go through possibly two years of a legislative comment period. According to news reports, the legislature does not have veto power, although we expect to hear disagreement on that point.

In short, the program would establish a market through which electricity providers purchase “emission allowances” to offset their CO2 emissions. The current market rate for purchasing these carbon offsets is $5.20 per ton of CO2 emitted. According to the most recent statewide data (2016) from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) these energy providers emitted 82 million metric tons which would have generated about $400 million in revenues.

The overall goal of the plan is to make electricity derived from fossil fuels more expensive and, hence, renewable energy more competitive.

According to the RGGI, the state would “invest” the money generated into “energy efficiency, renewable energy, and other consumer-benefit programs.” That would likely include subsidies for wind and solar projects, home and office weatherizing and expansion of public transportation programs in the state’s largest urban areas to name a few beneficiaries.

That nearly half-billion dollars in costs would not be absorbed by the power generators but would be passed on to consumers in the form of increased energy costs. Not only would this make Pennsylvania a more expensive place to live, it would render the state less competitive for energy intensive businesses compared to neighboring Ohio and West Virginia and other locales that have no plans for artificially inflating electricity costs.

A review of the effects of the RGGI last year revealed that member states saw a 12 percent drop in goods production and a 34 percent drop in production of energy-intensive goods. This is likely attributable to a 64 percent increase in electricity prices in RGGI states between 2007-2015.

Additionally, according to the study, the cost of wind and solar power has averaged two to three times the megawatt-hour rate as compared to existing conventional fuel sources. Any increase of renewable energy supplies would necessarily further the price increases to consumers.

An important but overlooked factor in the decision-making process for the state is just how much or how little effect a reduction in the state’s CO2 emissions would have on future temperature changes. The overarching goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions is to lower the future temperature of the Earth, so how much temperature rise would be averted by eliminating all of Pennsylvania’s CO2 emissions from coal and natural gas-fired sources? Using the calculations for predicting warming from the National Center for Atmospheric Research, if 100 percent of the state’s electricity generation emissions were eliminated, only 0.001 degree Fahrenheit in warming would be averted by the year 2050. This difference is well below our ability to measure global temperature.

This extremely small — and immeasurable — effect should not be overlooked in discussions of whether to impose the significant burdens of Governor Wolf’s proposal on the state and its citizens. How many lost jobs is a reduction in temperature measured in thousandths of a degree worth?

In short, the governor would infringe on the freedoms of people and make them significantly poorer for virtually no advancement of his stated intention to avert global warming. The legislature, the business community and all right-thinking citizens should stand against his economically crippling proposal.

Mr. Wrightstone is the author of Inconvenient Facts: The science Al Gore doesn’t want you to know

Wolf Executive Action Crushing Pa. Economy

Brian Fitzpatrick Carbon Tax Bill

Brian Fitzpatrick Carbon Tax Bill — Brian Fitzpatrick, Pennsylvania’s 1st District Republican congressman, will be introducing a “carbon tax bill” today says the Washington Examiner. It will be similar to Market Choice Act introduced in 2018 by Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-FLA26) which died in committee.

Brian Fitzpatrick Carbon Tax
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa1)

The Curbelo bill imposed a tax of $24 per metric ton on industrial carbon-dioxide emissions, beginning in 2020 and rising annually at a rate of 2 percent above inflation.

In return, federal taxes on gasoline, diesel and aviation fuel would be repealed. The payers would mostly be operators of coal and natural gas power plants.

This means paying more for lighting, air-conditioning and heat, and maybe less for food and transportation.

And of course, coal plants (and mines and their jobs) would soon disappear as natural gas produces much less CO2.

Which would naturally mean less revenue which means someone is going to pound his fist and say we need to bring back the gasoline tax.

The claim that most of carbon tax money will be used to rebuild infrastructure also deserves a big LOL as that is what the gasoline and diesel tax is supposed to do now and obviously doesn’t.

We can’t jump on Fitzpatrick too much. Our wish is to replace all coal and NG plants with nuclear and hydro-electric ones so we give him credit for trying.

Hey Brian, if you really want to fix infrastructure repeal the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931. Studies show it adds 20 percent to the cost of federal projects. Repealing it means 20 percent more work with same amount of money. Infrastructure problem are solved. It’s almost like magic.

And on the other hand there is Pat Toomey.

Pennsylvania RINOs Roam Unchecked
Sen. Pat Toomey (RINO-Pa)

Pennsylvania’s “Republican” senator joined the Democrats in again futilely voting to repeal President Trump’s court-approved use of emergency funds to build the much-needed wall on the Mexican border.

This wall is not anti-immigration. The wall is anti-drug smuggling and anti-child trafficking. If border crossers are forced to use supervised ports of entry it becomes a whole lot harder to bring children here to be molested.

Cartel coyotes no longer abandon customers to die in the desert.

Senator, a whole lot more Pennsylvanians support this wall than KYW and the Philadelphia Inquirer will lead you to believe. This one is going to burn you.

Brian Fitzpatrick Carbon Tax Bill

CEI Debunks Global Warming Panic With Chicken Little List

CEI Debunks Global Warming Panic With Chicken Little List — The Competitive Enterprise Institute has created a fantastic list of article forecasting imminent environmental doom starting in 1967.

The claims ranged from famine to ice ages to the disappearance of entire nations (and New York City’s West Side Highway) due to global warming.

All were made in major establishment media outlets by highly regarded and credentialed men of science.

Check it out here. You will understand we are skeptics of the climate change panic and likely become one yourself.

CEI Debunks Global Warming Panic With Chicken Little List
CEI Debunks Global Warming Panic With Chicken Little List

Michael Mann Must Pay Costs After Refusing To Release Data

Michael Mann Must Pay Costs After Refusing To Release Data — Michael Mann, the Penn State prof who probably more than anyone gave global warming its science cred, has been ordered by a Canadian court to pay all court costs to Dr. Tim Ball, after he refused to surrender his data for court examination.

Ball is an expert on historical climatology.

Mann was trying to use a lawsuit to quiet Ball — as he has with other critics — and had it backfire spectacularly. It is even being speculated that Mann even face criminal charges for using using public funds to commit climate data fraud.

Mann is the creator of the “hockey stick” graph that showed temperatures stable for centuries then rising dramatically about 1910.

Michael Mann Must Pay Costs After Refusing To Release Data
Mann’s phony temperature chart vs Ball’s real one.

Ball pointed out that the best data shows that the temperature was far from stable and was actually far higher in the Middle Ages when there was less people and no industrialization.

Many are global warming skeptics because the proponents’ behavior is anything but scientific. Rather than debate dissenters openly, they smeared them behind the scenes or in media campaigns. When they failed, they used the courts, an avenue that now seems to be closed.

And, of course, their hypocritical private lives did not come close to following their public claims.

Nobody likes pollution. Ever wonder why global warming advocates don’t push for win-win non-controversial ways of cutting CO2 emissions, like telecommuting or planting trees as Ethiopia recently did?

We suspect that it’s because these solutions would not increase their wealth or power.

Yeah, we can safely say the “climate change” movement is a scam.

Michael Mann Must Pay Costs After Refusing To Release Data

Princesses Get Air Conditioners

Princesses get air conditioners regardless how much the globe warms as do princes and kings and dukes and everyone else who is part of the feudal party.

You will never be part of the feudal party no matter how much you kiss their tails.

With the brutal heat wave winding down, it’s just something to think about.

Princesses Get Air Conditioners
Princesses Get Air Conditioners

Black Plague Looms For Los Angeles

Black Plague Looms For Los Angeles — Dr. Drew Pinsky on last night’s (May 30) Ingraham Angle reported that Los Angeles is experiencing medieval diseases such as typhus, typhoid fever, and, notably, the bubonic plague, which killed half of Europe in the 14th century.

Black Plague Looms

“We have a complete breakdown of the basic needs of civilization in Los Angeles,” Pinsky said.

He said airborne disease like tuberculous is exploding.

He said that rat-borne disease is unchecked as L.A. is one of the country’s few major cities that doesn’t have a rodent control program.

There will be a typhus outbreak this summer, he said, and worse.

“I’m hearing from experts that bubonic plague is likely. It’s already here,” he said.

And of course, there is the disease spread by fecal filth in the street like typhoid fever.

“This is not Third World,” he said. “This is medieval. Third World countries would be insulted if they were accused of being like this,

Welcome to the Golden State. Guess that’s what happens in “sanctuary states” that consider unrestricted abortion to be the primary health objective.

Pinsky noted that L.A. is sub-optimally immunized.

“God forbid if measles gets in,” he said.

Questions for all the progressives sneering at the anti-vaxxers: Do unvaccinated illegal immigrants — who exponentially outnumber anti-vaxxers — cause any concern for you?

For laughs, the Los Angeles Times is blaming “climate change” for the looming plague outbreak. Do people really still believe the garbage the establishment media is feeding them?

Black Plague Looms For Los Angeles

Wolf Climate Plan Crushes Pennsylvania Citizens

Wolf Climate Plan Crushes Pennsylvania Citizens

By Gregory R. Wrightstone

On April 29, 2019, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf released the latest version of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s (DEP) Climate Action Plan, announcing that Pennsylvania would join the U.S. Climate Alliance, a coalition of 24 states committed to implementing policies that support the Paris Agreement — an international collaboration from which the U.S. has withdrawn.

According to the governor, “states like Pennsylvania must take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect our communities, economies, infrastructures, and environments from the risks of a warming climate.”

The plan’s primary objective is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by 80% by 2050 in the Keystone State to reduce the temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere and keep future increases to less than 2 degrees Celsius.

Described in the 231-page plan are more than 100 actions intended to reduce GHG emissions, 15 of which are analyzed in detail. Each action involves increased taxation, increased regulation, increased spending or restrictions on citizens’ freedoms.

Some very relevant questions should be answered by the governor and the PA DEP concerning this far-reaching plan that will necessarily have significant negative impacts on the Commonwealth’s citizens and businesses:

  • Once implemented, what effect would this have on global temperature?
  • Are the justifications listed in the proposal supported by the science, facts and data?
  • What costs and negative effects are associated with this plan and are they offset by the alleged benefits?

The overarching goal of the proposal is to lower the Earth’s temperature by reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Pennsylvania. However, nowhere does this hefty document estimate a reduction of temperature.

To obtain an estimate, we used the MAGICC simulator (Model for the Assessment of Greenhouse-gas Induced Climate Change) that was developed by scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research under funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The model estimates how much temperature rise would be averted globally by various reductions of CO2 for the United States.

Calculations using this (Figure 1) assume an 80% reduction in CO2 emissions, a climate sensitivity of 2.0 and the latest estimate of Pennsylvania’s share of U.S. emissions (4.2%) to reveal the following theoretical reductions:

  • 0.0023oF by 2050
  • 0.0061oF by 2100

This extremely small effect should be a very important component in the discussions on whether to impose the significant burdens of the Climate Action Plan on the state and its citizens.

Wolf Climate Plan Crushes Pennsylvania Citizens

Listed on page 14 of the plan is a section titled “Why Does Pennsylvania Need a Climate Action Plan?” It lays out justifications for why the plan is needed, listing 10 climate impacts that were “already occurring and put Pennsylvanians and local industries at risk.” Many of the impacts it described as occurring are, in fact, not happening and in some cases are improving the state’s ecosystems.

We will look at only a few of the most egregious examples of misinformation due to space restrictions, but these should serve to illustrate that this document is more of a political tool than science-based justification for action.
More frequent extreme weather events including drought

Increased risks of injury and death from extreme weather events.

Increased human health risks from air pollution

Increased demand for energy, particularly during warmer summer months

  • There is no mention of the reduced energy demand during the winter months.

Most of what was listed as justification for implementation of this far-reaching plan were projections of what may or may not occur many decades in the future. These projections are based on climate models that over-predict warming by 2.5 to 3 times too much. It is important to separate speculation of what may occur in the future based on failed climate models from the actual events that can be empirically observed.

Recommended Strategies: 
The Plan identified 15 actions that were most impactful for reducing GHG emissions and would require increased taxation, spending and government control, some of which are listed below.
In the Energy sector, the Plan would:

  • Invest in building-scale solar
  • Incentivize renewable energy
  • Maintain current nuclear generation levels (bailouts for Exelon)
  • Tighten regulations on methane emissions
  • Create a Cap & Trade program for electricity sector carbon emissions

Transportation

  • Reduce personal vehicle mileage (no more trips to Home Depot)
  • Incentivize increased electric vehicle use
  • Increase use of public transportation

Please note the repeated use of the terms “invest” and “incentivize” as code for spending more taxpayer dollars. Additionally, the Cap & Trade program that is proposed will be a huge revenue generation scheme that would draw large sums of money into Harrisburg for redistribution to favored programs.
Pennsylvania’s citizens would not only be burdened by new direct taxation, but additional costs of regulation and higher energy costs would be passed on to customers.  While the plan offers no estimates of costs, they surely would run into the millions if not billions of dollars.

According to the Plan itself, the 15 action items would only reduce the state’s GHG emissions by 21%, far less than the 80% targeted. In order to reach the higher targeted goals, ever more onerous and economically crippling actions would be required.

Conclusion
Pennsylvania’s Climate Action Plan will impose huge costs on the Commonwealth’s citizens and businesses while burdening them with additional levels of restrictions and regulations.
Companies will pass these higher costs on to consumers or absorb the costs, which will deter hiring and new investment. A rise in prices means that consumers will buy less, and companies will drop employees, close entirely, or move to other states where the cost of doing business is lower. The consequence means fewer opportunities for Pennsylvania’s workers, less economic growth, lower incomes, and higher unemployment.

The justifications for imposing this plan are flawed, the costs and regulations are economically crippling, and the result is a temperature reduction so low that it is indistinguishable from zero. 

In short, the plan would infringe on the freedoms of people and make them significantly poorer. This plan should be opposed vehemently by the GOP-led House and Senate. 

Mr. Wrightstone is the author of Inconvenient Facts: The science Al Gore doesn’t want you to know

%d bloggers like this: