Greatest energy folly of all time?
No one could have imagined a folly of this scale less than 2 years ago, just before the current Socialist-Green government took over the reins of power at the end of 2021. Other countries may want to avoid the idiotic German path."
President Macron has chosen to dump climate activists in his desperate struggle to save his political skin from the rise of French Conservative Marine Le Pen. .......Macron is now desperate to distance himself from climate issues a little, to prevent more of his working class industrial belt supporters defecting to his rival Marine Le-Pen. France has been rent by widespread protests against pension reforms and cost of living rises. The situation in France is now so unstable, France has cancelled hosting the World Cup Soccer tournament in 2025, claiming they don’t have enough money to support the event – but more likely, Macron is worried football violence could escalate into a popular uprising against his heavy handed incompetence."
New Nature paper: w/extreme yields (everywhere highest today) +current share of feed-food competition (57%, much food to animal production) Organic agriculture can support 4.7 billion Industrial agriculture (w/fossil nitrogen) can support 12 billion nature.com/articles/s4301
The people who say they can control the climate forever if we are forced to buy electric cars and give up a lot of other stuff somehow can't figure out how to have AM radio stations without interference from electric vehicles.......Does anyone think they can solve all the economic and environmentally harmful issues related to electric vehicles? Here is some information about electric vehicles that the complicit media will not be allowed to see. This information is as censored as the stories showing Biden family corruption. ......And the last problem is this. Even if all the predictions were true and we all changed to electric, the temperature would only be reduced by a few 10ths of a degree in 80 years. Anyone who believes that prediction when the weather can't be predicted even for tomorrow should see if they have lost their ability to think.
Why would we spend trillions, greatly destroy our quality of life, and destroy industries that directly and indirectly employ tens of millions to supposedly adjust temperatures by a miniscule amount? "
In combating the global warming (aka, climate change) movement, we fail to understand that the radical left today lives in a value-relative phenomenology shaped by a mixture of postmodernism blended with neo-Marxism. It misses the mark merely to refute the hoax science behind the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s decision to eliminate the use of hydrocarbon fuels.
The sad truth is that government-funded climate scientists know CO2 is not the control knob of Earth’s temperature. The postmodernist mind lives in the John Lennon world where “reimagining” is required to advance us into their carbon-free utopia. In this bizarre world, post-modernism rejects the Enlightenment’s confidence in a fact-based, rule-driven reality anchored by scientific proof that overrides subjective desires. To them, reality is a “language game” (in Wittgenstein’s terms) or, as they say, a “narrative.”......In 2018, the IPCC issued a policy statement requiring governments to limit or discontinue the burning of hydrocarbon fuels to reduce the emission of CO2 to keep the planet from exceeding 1.5°C above preindustrial levels. Politically correct global warming/climate change true believers assume all who love Earth must think we have no choice but to abandon hydrocarbon fuels. The IPCC “scientific consensus” is operative on a normative level, not as an Enlightenment science-tested statement of proven fact."
The true economic, social, and political cost of the measures proposed by governments (in the West only) to destroy their nations' businesses and jobs and to impoverish every household is becoming ever more visible. At last, therefore, a few brave souls in the scientific and academic communities are beginning to question what I shall call — with more than a little justification — the Communist Party line on climate change. ......However, the three equations stand firmly in the way. It is these three equations — simple enough to be explained here for the general reader, yet devastating enough utterly to destroy the official climate change narrative — that will soon lay low the enemies of prosperity, democracy, and liberty who have, until now, gotten away with undermining the West, no less from within than from without, by their childishly apocalyptic climate change narrative. .......Therefore, I said, every $1 billion the world squanders on trying to get to net zero emissions by 2050 would prevent only one 16-millionth of a degree of warming. ..."
In February 2022, Health Physics published a little-noticed study that recently received so much attention, the publisher removed the paywall behind which the article previously hid. The article’s title is mind-numbing: “World Atmospheric CO2, Its 14C Specific Activity, Non-fossil Component, Anthropogenic Fossil Component, and Emissions (1750–2018).” The three authors are all academics in the field of radiology with ties to the University of Massachusetts Lowell According to the study, it is true that CO2 began to increase a bit with the Industrial Revolution. However, the increase in CO2 because of human fossil fuel use has been negligible and could not have caused the climate to change. Here’s the authors’ abstract: .........There are two actual, stubborn facts to note. First, the Earth’s climate has been changing without pause since it came into being. Indeed, the Earth is incredibly dynamic. I live near the South Carolina coast. Although I’m several miles inland from the Atlantic Ocean, there is sand everywhere. That’s because my neck of the woods used to be the bottom of a primeval ocean. In the same way, the Sahara Desert was once a verdant primeval forest. The Earth’s climate changed, and humans adapted because that’s what they do.
Second, plants need CO2. I happen to know some (legal) marijuana growers who pump CO2 into their indoor crop to facilitate its growth. More CO2, not less CO2, is good for human beings.
That leftists are so terrified of something that makes food more, rather than less, available for people across the planet tells you everything you need to know about their long-term agenda for humankind. The favored people will live in comfortable enclaves with good food of the type routinely served at World Economic Forum gatherings. The rest of us will be at the mercy of painfully hot or cold weather and survive on a diet of bugs and lab-grown sludge."
