Another day, another dire warning about global warming. The press and its taskmasters could essentially Xerox a copy of what they printed for the public in the Washington Post in 1922, or a UN report in 1989, or a UN report in 2019 for this report here:
U.N. climate report likely to deliver stark warnings on global warming
As always, journalists just print and repeat these ever-ending reports to scare the public into submission with no questions asked.
For decades, journalists, educators, scientists, bureaucrats, and other Democrats have colluded to spread these dire warnings, (misinformation) without scientific evidence, to scare and control the public.
We are repeatedly have been told that we only have a few years left to solve the problem.
The end date always evolves. No matter how wrong these dire predictions are they just repeat them and say the science is settled to cut off debate. Why are people who are always so wrong considered experts?
Many CEOs, Republicans, and others repeat the same claims without evidence because it is so much more pleasant to go along instead of being called anti-science, or worse still, “deniers.”
In D.C., and throughout the country, politicians are using these dire forecasts to pass policies to destroy thousands of industries and millions of jobs.
Joe Biden and his administration have been in office for seven months and are working as fast as they can to remake and destroy America.
He has signed executive orders to stop a pipeline, stop drilling and force people to buy vehicles powered by the poisonous, very combustible, pollutant Lithium. These anti-oil policies greatly harm the poor, middle class, and small businesses with higher prices.
The Biden administration has rejoined the Paris climate accord where politicians and bureaucrats from around the world pretend they can control temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity if thousands of industries are destroyed and we hand them trillions of our hard earned dollars.
Does anyone really believe that Iran, Russia, and other major oil-producing countries will give up oil? Isn’t it important that Biden let a pipeline proceed from Russia to Germany while stopping the pipeline from Canada to the United States?
Does anyone believe that China cares about its carbon footprint as it continues to build a large number of coal power plants? Here’s what’s going on in China:
Despite Pledges to Cut Emissions, China Goes on a Coal Spree
As the Biden administration works so hard to destroy industries, I have not seen one journalist as Biden, Harris, Kerry, Psaki, or anyone else in the administration asked for evidence to support the destruction.
In a free society with independent journalists, we should see the reporters asking questions and doing research to see if what they are told is correct before they repeat talking points to the public. Sadly, in the United States, we have seen, for decades, almost all journalists have essentially become campaign workers to elect Democrats and lobbyists to sell the radical leftist policies to the public.
Media outlets, especially the social media giants, work very hard to stifle debate and silence anyone who disagrees by repeating the talking points that we are anti science and climate change deniers who should not be listened to. It is an outright lie to call people who tell the truth that the climate has always changed cyclically and natural climate change deniers. I have never seen anyone deny that the climate changes.
Here are some simple scientific facts to report if journalists and others cared about facts instead of pushing an agenda:
The estimate of world population in 1900 was 1.654 billion. In 2000 it was 6.143 billion
The estimate of CO2 atmospheric content in 1900 was 291 Parts per million. In 2000, it was 370 PPM
Cars on road in U.S in 1900: 8,000
Worldwide cars, trucks and buses in 1968: 216 million
Worldwide cars, trucks and buses 1985: 484 million
Worldwide cars, trucks and buses 1996: 671 million
Now let’s look at historic temperatures:
Global temperature 1900s: 56.73 degrees (Fahrenheit).
Global temperature 1940s: 57.26 degrees
Global temperature 1970s: 57.20 degrees
Global temperature 1990s: 57.76 degrees
Therefore, in one hundred years, the world population rose around 271 percent, CO2 content rose around 27% and vehicles on the roads rose around 84,000 times or 8.4 million times, while temperatures only rose 1.81%.
This does not include planes, trains, boats, farm equipment, construction equipment, factories, computers, coal and gas fired power plants, gas grills, cows and all the other things the people are told cause warming. Yet temperature only rose 1.03 degrees in 100 years.
Another important scientific fact is that the globe cooled enough in a thirty-year period from the 1940s to 1970s that on the first Earth Day in 1970 when we were warned of the threat of a coming ice age.
Another climate fact is that a 450-year global cooling period ended around 1860 and some warming is natural after a cooling period.
Where is the evidence that humans, CO2 and fossil fuels cause warming and climate change?
An additional fact is that life expectancy in the U.S in 1900 was around 52 and today it is around 80. Thank goodness fossil fuels have provided power plants, sewage and water treatment plants, central air, central heat, mass production, combines, tractors and other oil derived products that have greatly improved our quality and length of lives and increased productivity.
Thank goodness for the clear, innocuous, non-pollutant CO2 that allows plants to thrive and the world to be fed. Why would we bury CO2 while promoting the flammable pollutant Lithium?
Why doesn’t the media report the scientific fact that more people die of cold than a little warming? The answer is the truth doesn’t matter when leftists want more power.
More people die of cold: Media’s heat-death climate obsession leads to lousy fixes
Shouldn’t policies be based on scientific evidence instead of computer models before thousands of industries and millions of jobs are destroyed and everyone’s lifestyle is turned upside down?
Countries throughout history have collapsed because the governments got too powerful,, not because the people had too much freedom. Sadly, most journalists are supporting the powerful government over the people.
Good background reading on this matter: Rupert Darwell: ‘Green Tyranny’ and ‘The Age of Global Warming’. Both books cover the issues in great detail.
I believe that, in trying to make sense of this nonsense, we should remember the old American maxim: follow the money. If we ask who benefits, we find that there are a number of companies which got subsidies to develop ‘renewable’ energy and then subsequently went bankrupt. But not before their management paid themselves rather large salaries and bonuses. Not only in the U.S., but also in Canada and in the U.K. And if we look even closer, we find that these companies contributed heavily to the coffers of the governing political parties.
And while we are at it, let’s not forget the number of scientists and researchers who, by hyping the danger of global climate armageddons, obtain never-ending government research grants from which they pay themselves a hefty salary, to say nothing of the universities which get a percentage of the grant to waste on enhancing administration powers and pensions.
I have been waiting, however, for the final shoe to drop and so far no one has tossed it. And that is: global restrictions of the amount of carbon dioxide will have a deleterious effect on the economic development of nations like Brazil, India and China. Now, if we remember that in the era of ‘woke’ everything which can conceivably affect victims smacks of racialism, then are these policies not racially motivated? Is not the effort to restrict carbon dixoide a disguised effort to keep the countries of the third world in their place? And furthermore are they not the product of white men? White supremacy rears its head again. Dear me!
I wish the writers would stop reading their dictionaries looking for words like “stark” to describe normal human activities.
The alternative to using NO carbon-based fuels is a world living in caves and eating raw meat. Now this may be attractive to some…
My experience a few years ago as an engineer working in the Renewable Energy sector is that using this form of energy will not be an effective substitute for carbon-based energy sources. Perhaps nuclear sources would be able to cope, but, well, we all know what would happen if every country, especially the US, went totally nuclear.
Look around you as you sit in your abode. Everything you lay eyes on – literally everything – was in some way created for your benefit by modern energy-based technology, most of it oil-based.
So as I said to some colleagues where I used to work, you have to choose what items you want to give up to ensure a colder world… perhaps…
I said most of this yesterday, and not for the first tiem either. A few years ago, the “wobble” was “in”…hothouse gases were “passe”.
All kinds of bean-headed theories abound over any time period you want to select. When I was growing up, reputable scientists wer speculating that the weight of the earth’s rapidly increasing population and bovines, , would become so great as to put the Earth out of it’s natural orbit and skittering off into space…….
I suppose it depends more on whom has the scantiest head hair, longest beard and thickest glasses.
A nice examination of the original nonsense-dictating-science scam, and yet it only discusses a fraction of the story.
The use of fear mongering of the end of the world thru carbon production has long been shown to be a scam of global proportions. It has been used to produce legislation that harms free societies which impose financial and commercial burdens upon them while leaving totalitarian regimes, such as China, free to pursue their unregulated polluting methods. This disparity(ignoring the use of slave labor) allows these totalitarian states to produce their product cheaper and corner key sectors of the manufacturing of world trade. And this is but one aspect of this scam. Any international solution to this nonsense should provide a level playing field of regulation over all nations or none at all(I personally prefer none). For those who are obsessed with their fears of a carbon born armeggedon, they should feel free to pay for the privilege of their madness from their own coffers – but this would not advantage their totalitarian masters that are the actual root and beneficiaries of this vast swindle. This only adds another small part of this power grab of the Left which pales by the recent use of election thefts and world health manipulations that have recently been used to upgrade this older model of nonsense-dictating-science.