Environment Archives - Page 61 of 71

Environmental Solutions, Not Social Overhaul

November 17, 2021

By Dominick Sansone

The Glasgow climate summit and recent bold climate proposals are more about politics and do little to actually help the global environment.

The recent climate summit in Glasgow saw world leaders gather together to unanimously declare—as articulated by U.S. President Joe Biden himself—climate change as the “[paramount] challenge of our collective lifetimes.” Calling on the world community to devote themselves to confronting this “existential threat,” Biden cited his own administration’s lofty goal of reducing carbon emissions by at least 50 percent in the lead up to 2030.

“High energy prices only reinforce the urgent need to diversify sources, double down on clean energy development, and adapt promising new clean energy technologies.” This will ostensibly manifest through the type of long-term development envisioned in the massive infrastructure bill currently making its way through Congress.

As previously stated in this publication, the United States—as well as the developed economies of Western Europe—is hardly the primary cause of concern for those who would wish to see lower carbon emissions on a global scale. Substantial growth projected in greenhouse gas emissions is largely due to developing countries, such as India and China, which are poised to continue increasing their reliance on coal. The latter country has already set plans in motion to build increased capacity for the high carbon-emitting fuel, while the former currently sees about 70 percent of its electricity output derived from coal.

That does not mean that the United States needs to simply disregard its levels of carbon emissions. The U.S. still relies on dirtier forms of petroleum for 35 percent of its energy consumption, and coal for 10 percent. Prioritizing a transition to natural gas, in addition to the energy security made possible through independence from imports, would see real movement in measurable reductions to U.S. emissions. Instead, with the price of natural gas doubling in part due to the Biden administration’s policy choices, the use of coal has subsequently increased by 22 percent in 2021. Despite upending U.S. energy independence, the president apparently sees no irony in shamelessly asking for OPEC to increase production in an effort to reduce gas and oil prices.

The attempts of developed Western nations to subsidize policy that radically overhauls the energy landscape have a less than stellar record. Echoes of the Obama-era Solyndra scandal still reverberate in the energy industry. Germany’s attempt to heavily subsidize wind and solar in the 2010s led to a significant increase in burning coal, due to the inability of the former two to provide energy without interruption. Although the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline may imply a more realpolitik approach in Berlin to ensuring a stable and clean source of fuel, coal burning still tops wind as the country’s primary source of electricity.

While U.S. renewable energy investment continued to rise by significant amounts throughout the Trump administration—despite claims that the former president heavily favored the oil and gas industries—frozen windmills in Texas this past winter, although not responsible for blackouts, displayed the danger of relying entirely on fickle renewables. The impact of the weather freezing the turbines led to a 60 percent drop in wind-energy production compared to the previous week.

These facts, however, are all irrelevant to those attempting to place climate as the central axiom around which to enact a new green-centric policy agenda. That is because their true goal is radical social reorganization based on equity-based notions of justice. The acolytes of transformational programs such as the Green New Deal are not interested in pragmatic, if gradual, steps that would allow the United States to practically and effectively become more energy efficient; rather, they are interested in recasting society according to ideological principles.

This is not the rambling of conspiracy theorists who envision an underground lair of technocratic elites laying the foundations for a one-world government—it is the words of the agenda’s own proponents. Vice President Kamala Harris, in collaboration with Green New Deal champion Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, last year introduced the Climate Equity Act (CEA) in the Senate, in order to “center [the fight against climate change] in justice and equity.” Equity, as aptly described by James Lindsay, is shifting resources and shares in a system so as to ensure that outcomes proportionally resemble the envisioned conception of fairness.

Harris’s cosponsoring of the CEA is not an aberration in an otherwise moderate climate policy; it is rather a testament to the Biden administration’s wholesale buy-in to the radical green agenda. The 46th president has additionally created the new Office of Domestic Climate Policy, headed by chief of staff Maggie Thomas who has previously stated that there is “no role for natural gas” in the nation’s energy mix, short-term or otherwise. Instead, she supports a goal of 90 percent of electricity production coming from renewables by the year 2035. Another new establishment under the Health and Human Services Department is the Office of Climate Change and Health Equity, tasked with the stated mission of “protecting vulnerable communities” from the impact of climate change. It is easy to see how these vaguely defined executive appointments not beholden to an electorate could morph into centralized authorities for enforcing a radical equity-based agenda—in fact, they would likely welcome the task in their mission statement.

During the Glasgow summit, President Biden additionally took it upon himself to apologize for the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accords during the Trump administration. Trump had originally withdrawn from the pact under the auspices of its disadvantageous impact on U.S. industry. Citing a commitment to the American workers, Trump criticized the deal as resulting in “lost jobs, lowered wages, shuttered factories, and vastly diminished economic production.” Considering the achievement of (now eliminated) energy independence, the United States becoming a net exporter of oil in 2019 for the first time in its history, a continued growth in renewables, and all while still managing a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, one has to question how exactly participation in the Paris Accord was in the national interest of the United States.

The answer is that it wasn’t. It wasn’t even really advantageous to the interest of reducing global carbon emissions. As previously stated, if multilateral agreements such as the Paris Climate Accord actually wanted to invest resources in the areas which are most crucial to reducing carbon emissions—in other words, where they would receive the greatest return on investment—they would focus almost exclusively on the challenges posed by developing countries.

This, however, is not the concern of those who seek to overhaul the world economy and hamstring western industry along the way. Those interested in a recasting of society are not concerned with actual concrete steps that would practically allow the United States to approach reductions in carbon, as well as more energy efficient solutions, through innovation and ingenuity. They are also not interested in prioritizing energy security for American citizens.

At the summit, Prince Charles called for a “war-like footing” on the climate issue, proclaiming the need of a “Marshall-like plan.” Another Brit, much greater and deserving of our attention, previously stated that there are those who will seek to perpetuate a sense of crisis in times of peace, so as to justify the individual citizen’s subjugation to the state. “The argument…that economic crises are only another form of war, such that we must live our lives in a perpetual state of war…this, of course, is the socialist view.” These words were written by Winston Churchill in defense of the U.S. Constitution, as a response to (ironically) the big-government views of U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt.

According to Churchill, once the government found a seemingly just cause that it could utilize to incite the passions of its people, it would then be able to manipulate their desire to do good for its own purposes. After the individual is brought under the “subjugation of the executive government,” Churchill continued, “socialism…[allows] the rulers to demand of him in time of peace sacrifices only tolerable in a period of national self-preservation.”

Those who wish a radical overhaul of society—whether out of a genuine belief in the greater good or from a selfish desire for power—have found an issue that allows them to invoke a sense of moral superiority. What higher duty is there than responsible stewardship of our natural home, the earth? We must be on our guard that our desire to live up to this task does not blind us to the schemes of those who would seek personal advantage from our goodwill.

*****

This article was published on November 12, 2021, and is reproduced with permission from The American Conservative.

America Finally Admits Recycling Doesn’t Work [+Video]

November 16, 2021

By Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

It’s time to admit the recycling mania is a giant placebo.

A couple of years ago, after sending my five-year-old daughter off to school, she came home reciting the same cheerful environmental mantra I was taught in elementary school.

“Reduce, reuse, recycle,” she beamed, proud to show off a bit of rote learning.

The moral virtue of recycling is rarely questioned in the United States. It has been ingrained into the American psyche over several decades. On a recent trip to the Caribbean, my friend’s wife exhibited nervous guilt while collecting empty soda, water, and beer bottles destined for the trash since our resort offered no recycling bins.

“I feel terrible throwing these into garbage,” she said, wearing a pained look on her face.

I didn’t have the heart to tell her that there was a good chance the bottles she was recycling back in the States were ending up just like the ones on the Caribbean island we were visiting.

Difficult Implementation

As Discover magazine pointed out a decade ago, recycling is tricky business. A 2010 Columbia University study found that just 16.5 percent of the plastic collected by the New York Department of Sanitation was “recyclable.”

“This results in nearly half of the plastics collected being landfilled,” researchers concluded. [View chart click here.]

Since that time, things have only gotten worse. Over the weekend, The New York Times ran a story detailing how hundreds of cities across the country are abandoning recycling efforts.

Philadelphia is now burning about half of its 1.5 million residents’ recycling material in an incinerator that converts waste to energy. In Memphis, the international airport still has recycling bins around the terminals, but every collected can, bottle and newspaper is sent to a landfill. And last month, officials in the central Florida city of Deltona faced the reality that, despite their best efforts to recycle, their curbside program was not working and suspended it. Those are just three of the hundreds of towns and cities across the country that have canceled recycling programs, limited the types of material they accepted or agreed to huge price increases.

One reason for this is that China, perhaps the largest buyer of US recyclables, stopped accepting them in 2018. Other countries, such as Thailand and India, have increased imports, but not in sufficient tonnage to alleviate the mounting costs cities are facing.

“We are in a crisis moment in the recycling movement right now,” Fiona Ma, the treasurer of California, told the Times.

Cost is the key word. Like any activity or service, recycling is an economic activity. The dirty little secret is that the benefits of recycling have been dubious for some time.

“Recycling has been dysfunctional for a long time,” Mitch Hedlund, executive director of Recycle Across America, told The Times.

Has Recycling Always Been An Illusion?

How long? Perhaps from the very beginning. Nearly a quarter century ago, Lawrence Reed wrote about the growing fad of recycling, which state and local governments were pursuing—mostly through mandates, naturally—with a religious-like fervor. There were numerous problems with the approach, he observed.

The fact is that sometimes recycling makes sense and sometimes it doesn’t. In the legislative rush to pass recycling mandates, state and local governments should pause to consider the science and the economics of every proposition. Often, bad ideas are worse than none at all and can produce lasting damage if they are enshrined in law. Simply demanding that something be recycled can be disruptive of markets and it does not guarantee that recycling that makes either economic or environmental sense will even occur.

If only lawmakers had heeded Mr. Reed’s advice, or that of John Tierney, who offered similar guidance in The Times the following year.

Believing that there was no more room in landfills, Americans concluded that recycling was their only option. Their intentions were good and their conclusions seemed plausible. Recycling does sometimes make sense–for some materials in some places at some times. But the simplest and cheapest option is usually to bury garbage in an environmentally safe landfill. And since there’s no shortage of landfill space (the crisis of 1987 was a false alarm), there’s no reason to make recycling a legal or moral imperative.

That’s economics, you say. What about the environment? Well, the environmental benefits of recycling are far from clear. For starters, as Popular Mechanics noted a few years ago, the idea that we don’t have sufficient space to safely store trash is untrue.

According to one calculation, all the garbage produced in the U.S. for the next 1000 years could fit into a landfill 100 yards deep and 35 miles across on each side–not that big (unless you happen to live in the neighborhood). Or put another way, it would take another 20 years to run through the landfills that the U.S. has already built. So the notion that we’re running out of landfill space–the original impetus for the recycling boom–turns out to have been a red herring.

Recycling Efforts Backfire and Create Waste Themselves

And then there are the energy and resources that go into recycling. How much water do Americans spend annually rinsing items that end up in a landfill? How much fuel is spent deploying fleets of barges and trucks across highways and oceans, carrying tons of garbage to be processed at facilities that belch their own emissions?

The data on this front is thin, and results on the environmental effectiveness of recycling vary based on the material being recycled. Yet all of this presumes the recyclables are not being cleaned and shipped only to be buried in a landfill, like so much of it is today. This, Mises would say, is planned chaos, the inevitable result of central planners making decisions instead of consumers through free markets.

Most market economists, Reed points out, “by nature, philosophy, and experience” a bunch skeptical of centrally planned schemes that supplant choice, were wise to the dynamics of recycling from the beginning.

As engineer and author Richard Fulmer wrote in 2016,

Recycling resources costs resources. For instance, old newsprint must be collected, transported, and processed. This requires trucks, which must be manufactured and fueled, and recycling plants, which must be constructed and powered.

All this also produces pollution – from the factories that build the trucks and from the fuel burned to power them, and from the factories that produce the components to build and construct the recycling plant and from the fuel burned to power the plant. If companies can make a profit recycling paper, then we can be confident that more resources are saved than are used. However, if recycling is mandated by law, we have no such assurance.

Again, economics is the key.

It’s time to admit the recycling mania is a giant placebo. It makes people feel good, but the idea that it improves the condition of humans or the planet is highly dubious.

It’s taken three decades, but the actions of hundreds of US cities suggest Americans are finally willing to entertain the idea that recycling is not a moral or legal imperative.

COLUMN BY

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

Glasgow Gas Emissions Fiasco!

November 16, 2021

By Save America Foundation

Todays blog comes from Chris whose work you all seem to like! Please share as always!

I predicted two weeks ago the Glasgow climate conference wouldn’t amount to much, and I was right. It was billed as the “last chance” to save humanity, but it ended with China and India teaming up to water down language calling for phasing out the use of coal. The final language talks about how coal will be ‘phased down’, not ‘out’.

So there were two skunks at this garden party, but it was all completely foreseeable when you remember both China and India are building coal-fired power plants like crazy. Estimates vary, but China is building at least 95 new coal plants and India is building 28. You can add to that 23 more in Indonesia and dozens elsewhere. Add it all up and you get 195 new coal plants being built around the world, as we speak.

China already has over a thousand coal plants. India ranks second with 281, the U.S. third with 252, and 475 in the next nine countries combined. No wonder U.S. climate envoy John Kerry said in January the U.S. could go to zero carbon emissions tomorrow and it wouldn’t make any difference, not when 90 percent of global emissions come from outside the U.S.

Speaking of John Kerry, we were treated during the conference to the pathetic spectacle of him desperate to get a deal, any kind of deal, with China. The dealhe got is big on hifalutin talk about ‘thinking big’ and ‘shouldering responsibility’, but short on specifics. China pledged to decrease its coal use. Good luck with that when China’s 95 new coal plants come on line. If we didn’t know Kerry’s ‘deal’ was worthless when it was announced, we certainly knew it when China and India watered down the final conference agreement. And for this worthless piece of paper Kerry explicitly stated he was willing to overlook China’s use of slave labor to produce solar panels. Swell guy.

Did the conferees act like climate change is a crisis? No. In addition to watering down the final language, the conferees made more worthless pledges to double the amount rich nations will pay poor nations for climate change. Which doesn’t mean a whole lot when you consider developed countries reneged on a previous pledge to deliver $100 billion in climate payments per year to developing countries by 2020. Meanwhile, the actions promised at the conference are insufficient to meet the conferee’s own goal of keeping the planet from warming more than 1.5 degrees Celsius. No matter. John Kerry declared mission accomplished, peace with honor, don’t make the perfect the enemy of the good.

I’ve said many times I’ll believe it’s a crisis when they act like it’s a crisis. They’re not acting like it and, therefore, have failed to make the case it really is a crisis. Yet Kerry & Friends want to turn the U.S. upside down to tilt at windmills. Kerry says the U.S. won’t have coal-fired power plants by 2030. Looks like former President Obama’s ‘war on coal’ has resumed. One of Joe Biden’s nominees said she wants coal and oil companies to go bankrupt to fight climate change.

The inmates are running the asylum. They’re chasing unicorns starting with the whole bogus notion of human-induced climate change, but this is what they’re really talking about: cutting your energy use by 90 percent, stopping economic growth entirely, keeping you from traveling, cutting your food by a third, and only allowing you to buy 9 pounds of clothing a year. Is that what you want?

In case you haven’t figured it out yet, this isn’t about the climate. It’s about making you poor and keeping you under their thumb. Obama said he would give upa lot of his lifestyle to fight climate change. OK, you go first. When Obama and Kerry follow the climate crowd’s advice to own nothing and be happy about it, I will gladly follow suit. Until they do, they should just stop flapping their gums. It’s annoying.

Visit The Daily Skirmish

AWED NEWSLETTER: We cover COVID to Climate, as well as Energy to Elections

November 15, 2021

By John Droz, Jr.

Welcome! We cover COVID to Climate, as well as Energy to Elections.

Note 1: Here is the link for this issue, so please share it on social media. We hope that the Newsletter format makes it easy to scan and read.

Note 2: Please see our major new website (C19Science.info) which has dozens of quality, science-based COVID-19 reports.

— This Newsletter’s Articles, by Topic —

COVID-19 — Repeated Important Information:

New website (C19Science.info) with dozens of quality COVID-19 reports.

COVID-19 — Therapies:

Japan drops vax rollout, goes to Ivermectin — ends COVID almost overnight

Short Dr. Campbell video: Ivermectin vs Pfizer’s new COVID-19 drug

Short Dr. Campbell followup video: Alternative facts

Study: What repurposed drugs are effective against COVID-19?

Study: Concluding that Ivermectin is a very powerful obstructor of COVID-19

Study: Comparing the effectiveness of different drugs to block COVID-19

How Do We Determine Whether a Therapy is Effective?

US Election:

Election-Integrity.info (10 major election reports by our team of experts, plus much more!)

Dems stand to lose 46 House seats in 2022

One Year Ago on Election Night All State Reporting Was Zeroed Out — Why?

Protecting Every Citizen’s Vote by Safeguarding the Integrity of the Ballot Box

Report: Citizen’s Guide to Building an Election Integrity Infrastructure

US Election — State Issues:

Three Proposed NYS Liberal Election Changes are Rejected

Setting Election Laws Belongs To Pennsylvania’s Legislature, Not Its Courts

Most 2020 Ballot Images from 56 Georgia Counties Have Been Destroyed

Report: How Many Potential Election Crimes Languish in Florida?

US Politics and Socialism:

Congressman exposes the fine print of Biden’s massive socialist spending bill

Meeting: We Will Not Be Silenced

Mammoth Nation: a site identifying Conservative US companies

A Nation in Peril

Teach Them To Hate

‘Radical’ Biden nominee faces backlash from banks

Someone Doesn’t Want You To Know About the Schiller Institute

Congress Approves $1.2T Investment in Energy, Climate Resilience, Natural Resources

The Most Anti-American Man in America

The Gathering Storm and Its Historic Precedent, Part 2 – America

US announces big hike in Medicare premiums

Religion Related:

Today’s man: An abominable snowman

Biden Offers To Have Hunter Repaint Sistine Chapel

Dems Trillion+ Plan, Specifically Excludes Religious Schools

Education Related:

I’m a Neurologist With Alzheimer’s

How Short-term Thinking on Race Has Caused Long-term Problems in Higher Ed

Faced with increasing Ds and Fs, schools are ditching the old way of grading

Science and Misc Matters:

Much of What You Know About Groupthink Is Wrong

Medical Research Rapidly Adopts ‘Systemic Racism’ as Truth, Risking Scientific Credibility

Doctor diagnoses patient with ‘climate change’

Book Review: George Melloan’s ‘Bogus Science’

Short video: Masculinity Is In Crisis

Report: Altered State — a checklist for change in New York State

Please use social media, etc. to pass on this Newsletter to other open-minded citizens…

If at any time you’d like to be added to (or taken off) the distribution of our popular, free Media Balance Newsletter, simply send me an email saying that.

Note 1: We recommend reading the Newsletter on your computer, not your phone, as some documents (e.g. PDFs) are much easier to read on a large computer screen… We’ve tried to use common fonts, etc. to minimize display issues.

Note 2: For recent past Newsletter issues see 2020 Archives & 2021 Archives. To accommodate numerous requests received about prior articles over the twelve plus years of the Newsletter, we’ve put together archives since the beginning of the Newsletter — where you can search by year. For a detailed background about the Newsletter, please read this.

Note 3: See this extensive list of reasonable books on climate change. As a parallel effort, we have also put together a list of some good books related to industrial wind energy. Both topics are also extensively covered on my website: WiseEnergy.org.

Note 4: I am not an attorney or a physician, so no material appearing in any of the Newsletters (or the WiseEnergy.org website) should be construed as giving legal or medical advice. My recommendation has always been: consult a competent, licensed attorney when you are involved with legal issues, and consult a competent physician regarding medical matters.

COP 26 President Apologizes in Tears after UN Conference Failure

November 14, 2021

By Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

COP 26 has finally come to an end. There is even a new agreement. Yet as he made his closing remarks COP 26 President Alok Sharma, MP hung his head and proclaimed through tears, “May I just say to all delegates, I apologize for the way this process has unfolded and I am deeply sorry.”

President Bidens’ climate envoy John Kerry tried to declare victory, but the Left is livid.

Swedish climate scold Greta Thunberg tweeted, “The #COP26 is over. Here’s a brief summary: Blah, blah, blah.”

The #COP26 is over. Here’s a brief summary: Blah, blah, blah.

But the real work continues outside these halls. And we will never give up, ever. https://t.co/EOne9OogiR

— Greta Thunberg (@GretaThunberg) November 13, 2021

Guardian climate reporter John Vidal wrote, “If could have been worse, but our leaders failed us at COP26. That’s the truth of it.”

What’s got the Left in a tizzy?

Minutes before nearly 200 nations adopted the final agreement, India, working with China, stepped in to protect coal.

Kerry has been making much of the fact that The Glasgow Climate Pact is the first climate agreement to actually name a fossil fuel. However, India amended the agreement to change “phase out” of coal to “phase down.” For China and India this actually means INCREASE coal. Both nations are expanding coal burning as fast as their economies can go. “Phase down” is the verbiage China suckered John Kerry into when China and the U.S. penned a side climate deal last week. Full text at CFACT.org. China promised Kerry to maybe think about phasing coal down during its 15th five year plan which doesn’t even start until 2026.

Here’s more of what has the climate-Left gnashing their teeth. The Glasgow Climate Pact:

Names coal, but not oil or gas;
Extends deadline for nations to submit new emissions reduction plans;
Does not fund reparations for “loss and damage” when poor nations experience natural disasters;
Does not mandate ongoing public climate finance;
Contains weasel words such as “unabated” fossil fuels and “inefficient” subsidies leaving plenty of wiggle room;
Climate computer models project current emissions commitments leave the world warming 2.4 degress C;
UN Secretary General António Guterres said limiting warming to 1.5 degrees C is “on life support.”

Disappointment on the Left is a sure indicator that the free world dodged a bullet. However, there’s plenty of danger still lurking in the Glasgow Agreement. Carbon carpetbaggers came away smiling.

The sums of money changing hands in the name of climate are staggering. John Kerry is talking about $130 TRILLION dollars, not only through government mandates and spending, but through private finance. Kerry’s true constituents: the people selling subsidized wind, solar, batteries, offsets, carbon credits and the rest are ecstatic.

They may not know how to alter the temperature of the Earth, but they do know how to make a buck.

COLUMN BY

Craig Rucker

Craig Rucker is a co-founder of CFACT and currently serves as its president.

One of AOC’s Worst Green New Deal Ideas is Included in Biden’s ‘Build Back Better’ Plan

November 13, 2021

By Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

The plan would simply waste money, create zero jobs on net, and do nothing to mitigate climate change.

The fate of President Biden’s multi-trillion-dollar social spending agenda, the “Build Back Better” plan, has consumed the political conversation in recent weeks. Amid all the furious attempts at reading political tea leaves, a curious fact has flown under the radar: The latest iteration of Biden’s plan includes one of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s worst ideas.

“Happy to announce creation of a US Civilian Climate Corps is now in the Build Back Better Act,” the far-left congresswoman recently tweeted. Referencing the public works “job creation” scheme first proposed as part of the Green New Deal, Ocasio-Cortez claimed the initiative will create 300,000 jobs while combating the “climate crisis” and “environmental injustice.”

Happy to announce creation of a US Civilian Climate Corps is now in the Build Back Better Act.🌎

Estimated to create 300k+ public jobs w/ Dept of Labor + Americorps to combat the climate crisis & enviro injustices.

We 1st outlined the vision for it here: pic.twitter.com/i1K2E1TIHg

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) November 3, 2021

Indeed, a perusal of White House communications makes it clear that the plan for a Civilian Climate Corps—not long ago considered a radical pipe dream—is now part of the president’s plan.

“The Build Back Better Framework will create a Civilian Climate Corps with over 300K members that look like America,” the official White House Twitter account wrote. “This workforce will conserve public lands, bolster community resilience, address the changing climate, and put good-paying union jobs within reach for more people.”

“Climate change has become a climate crisis,” Vice President Kamala Harris similarly said in a speech promoting the plan. “But today we know that this moment of crisis is also a moment of opportunity… an opportunity to create good, union jobs.”

“Once these bills are passed… young people will join our new Civilian Climate Corps,” she continued. “These are the opportunities we have within our grasp right now.”

.@VP Kamala Harris: “Once these bills are passed, plumbers will fill the jobs we need to replace all those lead pipes. Young people will join our new Civilian Climate Corps. These are the opportunities we have within our grasp right now.” pic.twitter.com/qwAOYTQXHD

— The Hill (@thehill) November 6, 2021

The Build Back Better Framework will create a Civilian Climate Corps with over 300K members that look like America. This workforce will conserve public lands, bolster community resilience, address the changing climate, and put good-paying union jobs within reach for more people.

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) October 31, 2021

With the proposal gaining momentum in Washington, DC, it’s well worth examining its actual merits. And even a cursory glance reveals that in reality the plan would simply waste money, create zero jobs on net, and do nothing to mitigate climate change.

According to Fox News, the latest bill text allocates $8 billion in taxpayer funds for this Civilian Climate Corps initiative. That’s a sizable sum that could be spent elsewhere—or better yet, left in our pockets to begin with. Yet under the Biden-AOC plan, the federal government would use that $8 billion to create well-paying jobs for young people who want to be employed full-time doing environmental activism and community projects.

Yet the claim that this would “create” jobs is false, at least on net. Sure, it would “create” some jobs in this new Climate Corps. But the government cannot create resources out of thin air. Whatever money it spent to put these climate change activists to “work” would have to, directly or indirectly, come from elsewhere in the economy.

As Henry Hazlitt wrote in Economics in One Lesson, “It is highly improbable that the projects thought up by the bureaucrats will provide the same net addition to wealth and welfare, per dollar expended, as would have been provided by the taxpayers themselves, if they had been individually permitted to buy or have made what they themselves wanted, instead of being forced to surrender part of their earnings to the state.”

Simply put, a dollar spent paying a 19-year-old to plant flowers is a dollar not spent by a private company paying them to deliver food, and so on. So, there’s no reason at all to believe a Civilian Climate Corps would create jobs on net.

Perhaps most damning, the Civilian Climate Corps would make a statistically negligible difference in reducing US carbon emissions, the stated goal of the Biden administration’s plans. Even halting all US vehicle emissions would barely make a dent in global emission levels, and make-work schemes like this would have no noticeable impact, simply as a matter of scale. Even many supporters of the idea acknowledge this.

“Emissions reduction, obviously, is the goal we need to achieve for the sake of safety,” Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse said. “To be clear, I support a Civilian Climate Corps. It just doesn’t measurably reduce emissions.”

So, if a Civilian Climate Corps wastes billions, creates zero jobs, and doesn’t even help the climate, why on Earth has President Biden included it in his spending agenda? Whatever his reasons, wasting $10 billion on AOC’s fever dreams is a raw deal for American taxpayers.

WATCH: Brad Reacts to Cringey ‘Free Healthcare’ TikToks (DEBUNKS Socialists)

COLUMN BY

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Policy Correspondent at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Like this story? Click here to sign up for the FEE Daily and get free-market news and analysis like this from Policy Correspondent Brad Polumbo in your inbox every weekday.

Without Fossil Fuel Infrastructure We’re Supposed To Have An ENERGY CRISIS!

November 13, 2021

By Ronald Stein

Over the last decade, climate activists have successfully pressured governments, banks, and corporations to divest from crude oil and natural gas companies. The energy infrastructures are just like the “civil” infrastructures the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Infrastructure Report Cards constantly addresses, and the resultant poor “grades” given to the infrastructures of our economy. Under-investment in infrastructure leads to deterioration and supply chain issues that more adversely impact the economy.

Without fossil fuel infrastructure we’re supposed to have an ENERGY CRISIS! ESG “Environmental, Social, and Governance” investments are all the rage on Wall Street these days as climate activists continue to pressure governments, firms, and banks to divest from oil and gas exploration. The ESG investment directions are impacting the energy markets and the supply chain of products and fuels manufactured from crude oil and are, paradoxically, causing rising coal use, carbon emissions, and shortages.

Meanwhile, China, India, East Asia, and Europe are all mining and burning more coal to make up for the lack of natural gas. China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Vietnam, and Africa will have more than 3,000 coal-fired power plants by 2030 in those developing countries with billions of people seeking abundant, affordable, and reliable electricity.

The ESG considerations now propagating throughout corporate America account for much of the decline in capital expenditures by international oil companies in recent years. Big financial institutions such as Bank of America and Mastercard, investment managers such as BlackRock and Vanguard, and hundreds of corporations are going all-in on the financial and commercial portion of the Great Reset, pushing environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics.

As we have learned from the ASCE Infrastructure Report Cards, under-investment in oil and gas exploration is “supposed” to facilitate the deterioration of fossil fuel infrastructures and lead to an economy rife with inflation and supply-chain disruptions.

Of the three fossil fuels of coal, natural gas, and crude oil, the ESG enthusiasts do not understand that crude oil is seldom ever used for the generation of electricity.

For electricity, most of the world’s continuous uninterruptable electricity generation is by coal, natural gas, hydropower, and nuclear. Crude oil is a non-player for electricity generation.

The primary usage of crude oil is not for electricity, but to manufacture oil derivatives that make 6,000 products used in our daily lives, and the transportation fuels needed by the world’s:

Militaries

23,000 Commercial jets

20,000 Private jets

10,000 Superyachts over 24 meters in length

300 cruise ships

53,000 merchant ships, and

1.2 billion vehicles

The economic comeback from the covid pandemic has pushed up demand. The underperformance of electricity generation from breezes and sunshine has meant higher demand for both natural gas and coal, to provide continuous uninterruptable electricity generation.

With ESG investment guidelines hovering over corporate America, oil and gas firms have since refused to expand production, even though the proof of this desperately needed infrastructure is in the data. Fossil fuels’ share of global energy production remain unchanged at 81 percent. To the extent emissions in Europe and the US declined, it was largely due to the transition from coal to natural gas.

Socially responsible investing is decades old, but ESG was embraced over the last decade by large university endowments, investment banks like Blackrock, governments, the International Energy Agency, the United Nations, and eventually by oil and gas companies themselves, including Shell, Total, and many others. In May, a court in The Netherlands ordered Shell to reduce its emissions, a ruling that made firms reluctant to invest in new oil and gas exploration.

With ESG having picked breezes and sunshine as the winners for intermittent electricity generation, those taxpayer subsidies could further reduce the incentive for private firms to invest in oil and gas. Even if they don’t, the Biden administration has moved to restrict oil and gas drilling on public lands.

Like California, that relies primarily on foreign countries for 58 percent of California’s crude oil demands, President Biden has effectively accepted the idea that the United States will rely more on foreign oil. As a result, foreign nations will benefit from rising oil and gas prices at America’s expense.

High oil and gas prices are already creating political problems for governments as they worsen inflation. Prices and shortages are likely to remain high for years not months.

Increasing America’s dependence on foreign oil producers makes even The New York Times, which has long championed oil and gas divestment, nervous.

The flagship of the alarmist policies today is the Green New Deal, the most recent iteration of the Green New Deal was first proposed in the United States by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and backed by other prominent politicians and Democratic presidential candidates, including Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Elizabeth Warren (D_MA), and Kamala Harris (D-CA).

Among the goals, the GND seeks to accomplish by 2030 are the following:

The elimination of all electricity generated by coal, natural gas, and nuclear power, concurrently while intermittent electricity from breezes and sunshine is underperforming.

The GND seeks to replace all fossil fuels, including the innocent bystander fossil fuel of crude oil that is seldom used for electricity, but necessary for products and fuels.

The ESG movement does not bode well for both the electricity market and the supply chain for more than 6,000 products as the primary usage of crude oil is for the manufacture of derivatives for thousands of products, and fuels for transportation infrastructures.

Seems that we have learned very little from the ASCE Infrastructure Report Cards that have taught us those infrastructures deteriorate with under-investments. By under-investment in crude oil and natural gas infrastructures, the world leaders are tinkering with the supply chain of crude oil that is destined to impact resultant shortages of transportation fuels and the thousands of products made from the oil derivatives manufactured out of crude oil demanded by current lifestyles and worldwide economies.

*****

This article was published on November 5, 2021, and is reproduced with permission from CFACT, The Committee for A Constructive Tomorrow.

COP 26: Loch Ness and Other Monsters

November 12, 2021

By Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

In 1973, Leonard Nimoy starred in a series entitled In Search of in which he went off searching for all sorts of myths, legends and hoaxes. In one memorable episode, the former Mister Spock went off in search of Scotland’s legendary Loch Ness Monster.

(1973? Dating myself… We were little!)

CFACT is in Scotland for the UN conference on climate change in search of exaggerated weather claims, mistaken public policy, wasteful spending, hidden agendas, hypocrites, Socialists, and so-called “solutions” that solve absolutely nothing.

If you’ve been paying attention, you know CFACT has had no problem locating way too much of the above.

With your help, CFACT’s hunt has been so successful in fact, we decided to follow Nimoy, and so many others, and try our luck in search of Scotland’s most famous, most elusive monster, “Nessie” herself.

Pete Murphy posted our findings to CFACT.org. Take it from here, Pete:

Drumnadrochit, Scotland U.K.

The business of the 26th United Nations Climate Summit took a lull in the action, which allowed for some light-hearted business mixed with sight-seeing by the CFACT crew.

We decided to go in search of the legendary, cryptic “Loch Ness Monster,” which took us to the northern Scotland village of Drumadrochit, a three-hour drive from Glasgow through the Scottish countryside in a fossil-fueled vehicle.

And we found it!!

From the 16th century ruins of the Urquhart Castle on the west bank of Loch Ness Lake, CFACT leadership, dressed in Scottish kilt, hit pay dirt. It not only located the Loch Ness monster, but befriended this beast and its new friend, the visiting Sasquatch!!

The climate change issue is the Loch Ness legend on a far grander scale. We are now in at least the fourth decade since politicians and hucksters alike sounded the alarm about inexorable global warming, which followed a generation of know-it-alls that predicted an upcoming ice age, planetary starvation from overpopulation, and related calamities. In many respects, there is about as much reason to believe a disastrous, imminent global warming apocalypse as there is a Nessie and Big Foot roaming about Earth.

Climate is changing, but in a natural and historically consistent way with mankind’s influence tangential at best and of arguable significance regardless.

But the beat goes on with the catastrophic climate narrative, as does the Loch Ness myth. The latter story has playfully become a tourist attraction; the former is reaching the point of parody.

Climate Czar John Kerry: the U.S. ‘Won’t Have Coal’ by 2030

November 11, 2021

By Discover The Networks

Globe-trotting private jet enthusiast and Vietnam-era traitor John Kerry, President Joe Biden’s so-called “climate envoy,” said in an interview with Bloomberg at the COP26 climate conference in Glasgow, Scotland, that there would be no coal in the United States by the end of the decade.

“By 2030 in the United States, we won’t have coal,” Kerry stated. He went on to say, “We’re saying we are going to be carbon-free in the power sector by 2035. I think that’s leadership. I think that’s indicative of what we can do.”

It’s not leadership. It’s part of the Biden administration’s goal to commit national energy suicide. By contrast, the power-mad Chinese regime has no intention of sacrificing any its energy infrastructure for the sake of the planet.

Kerry is the first Biden official to publicly comment on the administration’s environmental policy since the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill that contained numerous sections dedicated to climate change passed Congress. His aspiration to rid the country of its coal by 2030 aligns with Biden’s deadlines for lowering greenhouse gasses by the same year.

According to the U.S Energy Information Administration (EIA), coal accounted for 10% of our nation’s total energy consumption in 2020.

John Kerry

207 Known Connections

KERRY SAYS “THE BIGGEST THING” HE IS DOING FOR ENVIRONMENT IS “TRAVELING AROUND THE WORLD”

During an interview aired on the October 27, 2021 edition of Bloomberg’s Leaders with Lacqua, host Francine Lacqua asked Kerry: “Secretary, have you changed anything in your lifestyle to actually help the cause against climate change?”

Kerry answered: “Indeed, I have. I have a solar system for my home. I drive an electric car now. I still have the one internal combustion engine vehicle, which is being traded for another electric car, and we’re making more conscious decisions about our use of energy within the house. I mean, I’ve become a flagrant light switch-chaser whenever I walk through a room or a building. Yes, I think there’s a new consciousness. Am I doing everything that I should be or could be? Probably not. But I’m super conscious of the need to try to all of us do what we can to make a contribution here. The biggest thing I’m doing in my lifestyle is traveling around the world, trying to do diplomacy and help make a larger decision in the context of Glasgow that could reduce a lot of the anxiety that we’re all living with today about where we’re headed.”

To learn more about John Kerry, click here.

It’s the Weather, Not the Climate, Stupid!

November 10, 2021

By Dr. Rich Swier

Weather is the state of the atmosphere, describing for example the degree to which it is hot or cold, wet or dry, calm or stormy, clear or cloudy.

What is Weather?

According to BYJU’S

The day-to-day conditions of the atmosphere at a place with respect to elements like humidity, temperature, wind speed, rainfall, etc. is called the weather of that place.
Weather can be cloudy, sunny, rainy, stormy or clear. It is a part of the natural phenomenon which maintains the equilibrium in the atmosphere.
But conditions can be worse sometimes. When the atmospheric conditions are extreme or intense enough to cause property loss or life loss, such weather is termed as severe weather.
These also vary according to the altitudes, latitudes, and region and pressure differences. Tornadoes, cyclones, heavy rainfall, fog, winter storms come under this category. They are disastrous and hazardous. Proper disaster management and strategies are required to handle these conditions.

Weather is the key factor in our daily lives. The weather determines how we heat/cool our homes, how we dress to keep warm or fight the heat and how we live our lives. If your an Eskimo living in Alaska you deal with different weather conditions than someone who is living in Florida, for example.

Why are we so focused on the Climate?

Climate was in use in English for well over a hundred years before we began to use the word in the 16th century to refer to weather conditions. So climate is synonymous with the weather. Then mankind began to use the phrase climate change in 1956.

Skeptical Science, whose mission is to debunk climate misinformation by presenting peer-reviewed science and explaining the techniques of science denial, noted this about the phrase climate change:

“The roots of the term have been around since 1956, when a scientist referred to it as ‘climactic change’ in a paper. By the ’80s, ‘climactic change’ had morphed into ‘climate change’ and entered popular discourse.”

BYJU’S Factors Affecting Weather:

All the changes that happen in the weather are made by the sun. Because the sun has a very high temperature and it is a huge sphere of hot gases. It is the main source of heat and light for the earth. It is even the primary source of energy hence affects the weather.
The energy reflected and absorbed by the earth’s surface, the oceans and the atmosphere play an important role in determining the weather at any place.
Gases like methane, water vapour and carbon dioxide also play a role in determining the weather.

So is it weather or climate?

Why I’m a Conservationist and not an Environmentalist

I deeply care about the planet earth and about all of the creatures living on the land and in our seas, rivers and oceans. However, I am not a environmentalist. Rather I am a conservationist.

According to Merriam-Webster, a conservationist is “a person who advocates conservation especially of natural resources.”

In contrast, an environmentalist is defined as one “concerned about environmental quality especially of the human environment with respect to the control of pollution.”

Do you see the difference?

Conservationism

A conservationist uses what has been given to us to use. He or she does not want to control people but give people access to all natural resources but task people to use these natural resources for the good of all of mankind. Not to do so is blasphemy.

I believe that it is mankind’s duty to use our God given natural resources. I also believe that God tasks us to use them wisely. I believe in waste not, want not.

Environmentalism

Environmentalists, unlike conservationists, want to prevent mankind from using earth’s natural resources. Environmentalism wants to “save the planet” by sacrificing the lives, liberties and prosperity of mankind.

An environmentalist is focused neither on nature nor on science. An environmentalist is focused on controlling pollution by controlling people. Environmentalists have killed millions of people (e.g. when environmentalists banned DDT which lead to the deaths of millions who succumbed to malaria in third world countries from infected mosquitoes).

In order to control the people environmentalists have over time pushed three myths (big lies):

Myth #1: Human Extinction Due To Climate Change Is Imminent
Myth #2: The Climate Is Getting Substantially More Dangerous for Humans
Myth #3: Natural Disasters Are Getting Substantially More Frequent And Severe

Conclusion

I believe Theodore Roosevelt said it best, “To waste, to destroy our natural resources, to skin and exhaust the land instead of using it so as to increase its usefulness, will result in undermining in the days of our children the very prosperity which we ought by right to hand down to them amplified and developed.”

It’s not about pollution at all.

Environmentalists want to reduce the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere. They forget that it’s CO2 that feeds the plants and makes them green and grow faster thereby producing more for mankind to consume. Remember learning about osmosis in high school?

Genesis 1: 27-30 reads:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.’ Then God said, ‘I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground–everything that has the breath of life in it–I give every green plant for food.’ And it was so.

Don’t fall for the environmentalist’s big lies. Believe in the truth. God’s truth.

We have been given great bounty and we are tasked to give thanks for it.

Remember what Edmund Burke wrote,

“There is but one law for all, namely that law which governs all law, the law of our Creator, the law of humanity, justice, equity – the law of nature and of nations.”

As we approach Thanksgiving Day 2021 perhaps we should bow our heads in prayer and be most thankful for our conservationists who give us food, drink and with this bounty, health and prosperity.

BIDEN’S BOLSHEVIK: Saule Omarova wants to ‘bankrupt’ the fossil fuel industry to ‘tackle climate change’

November 10, 2021

By Dr. Rich Swier

“The goal of socialism is communism.” – Vladimir Lenin

Why Saule Omarova is Biden’s Bolshevik

On November 6 and 7, 1917, leftist revolutionaries led by Bolshevik Party leader Vladimir Lenin launched a nearly bloodless coup d’état against the Duma’s provisional government. It now appears that Biden has appointed a Bolshevik as his Comptroller of the Currency.

Joe Biden wants to put an actual Communist — self-proclaimed “radical” Cornell University law school professor Saule Omarova — in charge of the nation’s banking system.

Omarova graduated from the Soviet Union’s Moscow State University in 1989 on the Lenin Personal Academic Scholarship, according to the Wall Street Journal. As recently as 2019, she was still praising the USSR’s economic system as in some ways superior to our own. “Say what you will about old USSR, there was no gender pay gap there. Market doesn’t always ‘know best.’” [Emphasis added]

Read the full article.

Now Omarova wants to bankrupt America’s oil, coal and natural gas industries for the greater good of climate change. Watch:

Biden nominee Saule Omarova saying the quiet part out loud. On the oil, coal and gas industries:

“We want them to go bankrupt if we want to tackle climate change.” pic.twitter.com/luMR2HEMK9

— BidenNoms, A Project of AAF (@bidennoms) November 9, 2021

Climate Change and Big Brother

Al Gore wants “big brother” to watch you if you oppose Biden’s climate change agenda. Watch Al Gore’s latest ‘solution’ to Climate Change is mass surveillance:

Public Debt is a Public Good? Not!

In the tweet below Omarova wants more public debt.

Why? Because, according to her socialist thinking, public debt serves the “public good.”

Assistant Professor of Law at UC Berkeley School of Law Abbye Atkinson in a paper titled Making Public Debt a Public Good wrote,

“In other words, a public agency like the NIA [National Investment Authority] would center broad social welfare in its fiscal mandate rather than individual wealth accumulation. For example, it could readily support infrastructure geared toward remediating racial justice.“

A terrific new essay by @abbye_atkinson on how to make public debt serve… well, the public. And thanks for the shoutout to the National Investment Authority (NIA) idea! Spot on. @LPEblog @justmoneyorg @BuddyYakov

Making Public Debt a Public Good https://t.co/sNjoqz0o04

— Saule Omarova (@STOmarova) September 20, 2021

What is the National Investment Authority (NIA)? According to Data for Progress:

Originally advanced in 2018, the NIA proposal has become particularly salient in the context of the current intersecting public health, economic, and climate crises. Drawing on the experience of the New Deal era’s Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC), the NIA offers a concrete institutional solution to multiple organizational, financial, and operational challenges associated with the long-term climate agenda. The NIA would operate alongside the Treasury and the Federal Reserve and directly allocate both public and private capital to clean infrastructure projects that currently do not get funded in private markets on the necessary scale.

The NIA fits perfectly with Biden’s Build Back Better agenda.

Biden’s Bolshevik Saule Omarova is all in on bankrupting our energy industry and increasing public debt.

Recently 11 Republicans voted with Democrats to raise the national debt ceiling. In June, 2021 the Foundation for Economic Education reported:

A new poll from Axios/SurveyMonkey is out on how Americans view free-market capitalism and socialism. The initial takeaway, as we’ve seen with many other polls in recent years, is that overall support for socialism is on the rise while the appeal of capitalism is ebbing away.

Is Biden Building Back Better the second Bolshevik Revolution?

Conclusion

Biden’s Build Back Better agenda is morphing from a cultural war into a full blown Bolshevik Revolution. The Russian Revolution of 1917 involved the collapse of an empire under Tsar Nicholas II and the rise of Marxian socialism under Lenin and his Bolsheviks. The causes of the Bolshevik Revolution were widespread inflation and food shortages in Russia after World War I.

After the collapse of Afghanistan, America’s longest war, Biden inherited an economy from President Trump that was robust, growing, with low inflation, no food shortages with American energy independence.

Biden, since his inauguration, has reversed everything President Trump has done to make America great. Biden’s Build Back Better has, in fact, caused supply chain shortages, rising inflation, food shortages, rising cost for home heating fuel and gasoline prices. Biden and his Bolshevik are now determined to destroy America’s energy industry for the “great good” of climate change.

Watch this absurd question by Kamal Harris:

NEW – Kamala Harris asks NASA if they are able to “track trees” by race as part of “environmental justice.”pic.twitter.com/zFMayeTbhJ

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) November 6, 2021

Track trees by race? Environmental Justice? Really. What happened to equal justice under the law. What happened to our Constructional rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

We believe is will get worse before getting better. The are dark days ahead as long as the Democrats and their Republican RINO allies keep taxing, spending and raising the debt on our children and grandchildren.

In a May 15th, 2021 FEE column titled “The US Is 5 Years Away from a National Debt Death Spiral. Here’s Why” Craig Eyermann wrote:

According to the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Debt Management, the U.S. government is just five years away from the point where every new dollar it borrows from the public will go toward funding interest payments on the national debt.

Craig Eyermann warns, “There’s an old saying that applies for the U.S. government’s looming fiscal situation: “If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.” It’s only ever a question of how painful it will be when it does.”

Conservatives must take control of one or both houses of Congress to stop the Biden Bolsheviks and their agenda to destroy our collective pursuits of happiness.

RELATED ARTICLES:

White House Tells Businesses to Ignore Court Order on Vaccine Mandates

Republicans Who Supported Biden’s $1.2T Infrastructure Bill Once Opposed $25B for Border Wall – Breitbart.com

Brown University Researcher: ‘Instead of fighting a war on terror, U.S. should be mobilizing to combat climate change’

Academic Wants a U.S. ‘War’ Against ‘Climate Change’

Doctor Diagnosed Patient With ‘Climate Change’ in Canada

November 10, 2021

By Pamela Geller

Here we go…..

Climate change is the greatest political fraud of our time – the earth has been warming for millions of years. It’s the very definition of the emperors new clothes. But it provides the left with a hammer.

The ‘boogie man” is about to get the COVID clampdown treatment.

Doctor blames asthma suffered by patient on ‘climate change’ after historic heat wave killed 500 in Canada

A British Columbia emergency room doctor diagnosed a patient with ‘climate change’ after believing his asthma worsened as a result of a historic heat wave

He said his patient’s health was also exacerbated by poor air quality linked to forest fires in the province during the summer

Nearly 500 Canadians were killed, mostly in British Columbia, during a five-day heat wave as temperatures surged past 121F

Climate change will kill 250,000 per year between 2030 and 2050 from malnutrition, malaria, and heat stress, the World Health Organization says

By Michelle Thompson For Dailymail.Com, 7 November 2021

A Canadian doctor pointed to ‘climate change’ as the cause for a patient’s asthma after finding that an unprecedented heat wave and poor air quality contributed to the person’s deteriorating health.

Dr. Kyle Merritt, who works at a Nelson, British Columbia hospital, said the environmental hazards prompted him to make his first ‘climate change’ clinical diagnosis after treating the patient who came in struggling to breathe.

‘If we’re not looking at the underlying cause, and we’re just treating the symptoms, we’re just gonna keep falling further and further behind,’ the emergency room doctor told Glacier Media.

‘It’s me trying to just… process what I’m seeing.’

The diagnosis came shortly after a historic heat wave in June killed nearly 500 Canadians during a five-day period as temperatures surged past 121F.

When the heat wave passed, it was replaced by another health threat as thick smoke from wildfires compromised air quality.

‘We’re in the emergency department, we look after everybody, from the most privileged to the most vulnerable, from cradle to grave, we see everybody. And it’s hard to see people, especially the most vulnerable people in our society, being affected. It’s frustrating,’ he said.

Merritt also spoke about a patient in her 70s whose ailments were exacerbated during the heat wave.

‘She has diabetes. She has some heart failure. … She lives in a trailer, no air conditioning,’ he told the outlet. ‘All of her health problems have all been worsened. And she’s really struggling to stay hydrated.’

The observations made by Merritt and other doctors throughout the western Canadian province promoted the colleagues to launch Doctors and Nurses for Planetary Health.

The healthcare professionals are using the group to advocate for better health by protecting the environment, they said on the website.

‘We are deeply concerned about the climate crisis and its impact on health,’ the group’s website says. ‘This summer, our patients experienced extreme weather events of heat dome, drought, and severe wildfires. Record-breaking temperatures soared above 40 degrees Celsius in June and air pollution from wildfires reached 43 times the amount of safe levels throughout July and August. ‘

Read the rest…

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there . It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

COP 26: Obama & AOC Fly In

November 10, 2021

By Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

Barack Obama may have served as the 44th President of the United States, but he is just as wrong as anyone else who approaches global warming from deep roving left field.

“For those listening back home in the U.S., let me say this,” Obama told UN COP 26, “It doesn’t matter if you’re a Republican or a Democrat if your Florida house is flooded by rising seas, or your crops fail in the Dakotas or your California house is burning down.”

Sorry to inform you, Mister President, all those things are WEATHER, NOT CLIMATE. It doesn’t matter if you’re rich or poor, short or tall, crop production is setting records, California fires are historically normal, and sea level has risen at the same minuscule pace since before the industrial revolution.

“It’s not just that we can’t afford to go backward,” Obama said. “We can’t afford to stay where we are. The world has to step up and it has to step up now.”

The U.K. Independent commented, “The emptiness of these promises shows COP26 — and the future COP27, COP28, COP129 — for the farce that it is. This is not a serious attempt to solve the climate crisis. It’s a chance for world leaders to pat themselves on the back for doing barely anything in the past and pledge to do stuff they’ll never do in the future. Obama is famed for inspiring hope, but today his words ring hollow.”

Obama called for wealthy nations to spend much more. The Paris Climate Accord contains plans to redistribute $100 billion per year to poor nations. Funding never reached that level and the developing world is not happy. At a UN conference in Bonn years ago, a delegate from the island of Tonga approached CFACT’s delegation and asked, “you’re Americans? When are you sending the money?” Climate cash is the reason they signed onto the Paris agreement in the first place.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also jetted in to Glasgow to push the Green New Deal. “I have worked very hard on advancing the Civilian Climate Corps, which is now successfully in the Build Back Better Act,” AOC said, “we’ll seek to mobilize over 300,000 jobs for young people in emissions draw down and environmental injustice.”

That’s a pretty big reveal AOC made. If she is correct, the Biden social spending bill still contains funding for AOC to mobilize, indoctrinate and deploy a vast brigade of climate campaigners to harry and subdue the rest of us. There seems no end to the bad policy crammed into Biden’s bill. That’s no way to “build back better.”

The UN announced today that it has performed an analysis that the pledges made at COP 26 are insufficient to keep the globe from warming over its (arbitrary) 1.5 degree C target. The UN announced that 2.4 degrees seems more likely. Of course that is based on climate computer modeling, not reality.

The good news? Climate computer modeling ALWAYS runs too hot!

P.S. Don’t let Obama and AOC have the last word on climate! Help CFACT present the facts that debunk the global warming narrative. Please donate right now and let’s beat the Left with hard work and devastating facts.

Brown University Researcher: ‘Instead of fighting a war on terror, U.S. should be mobilizing to combat climate change’

November 9, 2021

By Robert Spencer

“In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion; the more intelligent, the less sane.” ― George Orwell, 1984

Heidi Peltier is a “senior researcher at the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University and director of programs for the Costs of War Project.” For all her skills as a researcher, however, she doesn’t appear to be aware that the Obama administration ended the war on terror in 2012. What’s more, the waste she decries in the war on terror is largely derived from the fact that it was wrongly conceived from the beginning, and wrongly executed all the way through.

In any case, she wants an end to Wilsonian messianic interventionism, and that would indeed be a good thing. But she wants the resources of the U.S. government to be devoted instead to fighting “climate change,” apparently unaware of the fact that such a fight will be just as empty and fruitless as the “war on terror,” if not even more so. It is, to say the least, unproven that human activity has caused climate change, and even more unproven that human activity can fix the climate. What’s more, the activities proposed are all being undertaken by the U.S. and Western Europe, while China ignores the problem and benefits economically from the West’s self-abnegation.

She says: “Climate-related disasters have killed more Americans from flooding and wildfires than the 2,996 people who died in the 9/11 attacks.” That may be, but again, there is no proof that this was the result of something human beings did. There have been floods and wildfires throughout history. Nor is it certain that ending the use of the internal combustion engine etc. will solve the problem.

It’s time to shift from the ‘war on terror’ to a war on climate change

by Heidi Peltier, Guardian, November 7, 2021:

Large government bureaucracies are often slow to adapt to changing realities, such as the catastrophic threats we face in a warming world. The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is no exception. New research from Brown University’s Costs of War Project shows that the DHS has been overly focused on foreign and foreign-inspired terrorism, while violent attacks in the US have more often come from domestic sources. A combination of willful ignorance and institutional inertia caused the agency to miss the rise in white supremacy and domestic terrorism that led to the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the US Capitol.

The new data from Dr Erik Dahl, Associate Professor of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School, show that just one of the 46 failed terror plots in the US from 2018 through 2020 was directed by a foreign organization. In contrast, 29 plots were planned or carried out by domestic groups. In 2019, DHS finally acknowledged the growing threat of targeted violence and domestic terrorism borne mainly of far-right ideology and white supremacy and issued its first strategy document identifying these threats.

While we know now that the threat of violent attacks from domestic sources outnumber those from foreign sources, a bigger source of insecurity still is that of climate change. On October 21, the DHS released its first-ever “Strategic Framework for Addressing Climate Change,” acknowledging the importance of climate as a source of disruption and threat to security. As the COP26 UN climate meetings start this week, it’s time for a recognition that climate change is in fact a more expensive, more deadly, and more real threat to lives and to the US economy than the threat of what we call terrorism.

The “War on Terror” – a phrase born in the George W Bush administration – needs to be retired both as an action and a concept. The word “terrorism” instills a sense of fear and gives carte blanche for the US government to intervene around the globe….

Instead of wasting trillions of dollars and millions of lives fighting a war on terror, the US should be mobilizing to combat climate change….

Climate-related disasters have killed more Americans from flooding and wildfires than the 2,996 people who died in the 9/11 attacks….

GENOCIDE 2.0: Environmentalism Embraces Population Control to ‘Ecologically Right-sized the Number of Humans’

November 7, 2021

By Dr. Rich Swier

Genocide: The deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.

“Of all the problems which will have to be faced in the future, in my opinion, the most difficult will be those concerning the treatment of the inferior races of mankind.” ― Leonard Darwin

“Soon it will be a sin for parents to have a child which carries the heavy burden of genetic disease.” ― Robert Edwards

Humans are considered carbon-based life forms. Our bodies are 18% carbon. According to the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, “By mass, about 96 percent of our bodies are made of four key elements: oxygen (65 percent), carbon (18.5 percent), hydrogen (9.5 percent) and nitrogen (3.3 percent).” Plants then use the carbon dioxide humans breathe out and create the oxygen humans and other creatures breathe in!

When we take a breath, we pull air into our lungs that contains mostly nitrogen and oxygen. When we exhale, we breathe out mostly carbon dioxide.

QUESTION: Do we need to cull the population, thereby cutting CO2, in order to save the planet?

Environmentalists, with the full assistance of the United Nations, want to reduce CO2 (carbon) from the earth in order to save it.

QUESTION: How do environmentalists want to reduce CO2?

ANSWER: First slow, then stop and finally reverse population growth by killing the born and unborn!

So how does this reversing of population growth impact you and me?

The Population Media Center’s website states:

CREATING THE CONDITIONS FOR POPULATION GROWTH TO STOP

Slowing down, stopping, and eventually reversing human population growth — these are ethical imperatives that will help improve the chances of future generations establishing sustainable living scenarios with the planet.

The most ethical gift we can give the people and creatures of the late 21st century and early 22nd century is a chance. In the realm of population, this means working across the generations to ensure a much smaller, more ecologically right-sized number of humans. [Emphasis added]

So we must reduce the population in order to save the planet? So what are the three types of population policies proposed by environmentalists? They are:

Pro-natalist: A pro-natalist policy is a population policy which aims to encourage more births through the use of incentives.
Anti-natalist: An anti-natalist policy is a population policy which aims to discourage births.
Eugenics: Eugenics is the practice or advocacy of improving the human species by selectively mating people with specific desirable hereditary traits. Eugenics was popular in America during much of the first half of the twentieth century and was embraced by Adolf Hitler in attempt to create a superior Aryan race, while at the same time eliminating the undesirable. This lead to the holocaust.

So, if you are pro-life you would be pro-natalist. If you are anti-natalist you would be pro-abortion. If you believe that only the most worthy humans should bread you are pro-eugenics.

Environmentalism, Eugenics & the New Genocide

Professor Paul Sutton, of the University of Denver, was a delegate for the American Association of Geographers at COP26. He wrote in The Hill, the largest independent political news site in the U.S.:

[W]ithout population stabilization and eventually degrowth, all the other approaches to climate change will not work.

[ … ]

The least costly and most effective policy to control future CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and thereby climate change is to curb global population growth by simply providing contraceptive care to all women in the world who want it but do not currently have access.

Daily Express columnist Leo McKinstry said, “curbing population explosion should be top of the COP26 agenda.” McKinstry went on to state:

“There are currently 7.9 billion people on Earth, a total expected to rise by at least one billion every 12 years. It is a level of growth whose insatiable demands not only put an intolerable strain on our natural resources, but also fuels the ruination of eco-systems, from rivers to rain forests. …

“The decision to avoid this question at COP26 is the equivalent of holding a conference on obesity without mentioning calorie intake or lack of exercise.”

These comments sound very much like the arguments used to promote Eugenics. In 1936 the United States Public Health Service (now the CDC) conducted an experiment:

[T]he government used 623 black men as human guinea pigs in a 40-year medical experiment. This in itself is bad enough, but for 40 years these black men, predominately poor and uneducated, were deliberately kept in the dark about what was happening to them. This “experiment” continued for 20 years after the Nuremburg trials and the set of standards that came out of the trials called the Nuremburg codes. The civilized world agreed that human beings would not be used as research animals and that doctors would never forget their first duty to heal their patients.

Covid, Vaccines & the New Holocaust

Google actually has a counter with information on Covid infections, deaths and vaccinations. According to Google there have been worldwide 219,456,675 cases of Covid, 4,547,782 deaths, and 3,108,880,373 fully vaccinate.

USAFacts.org reported that 9.2% of those vaccinated have “serious symptoms.” This means that to date 286,016,994 humans are having serious effects from being jabbed. The Mayo Clinic reports:

Serious side effects of the Janssen/Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine can occur within three weeks of vaccination and require emergency care. Possible symptoms include:

Shortness of breath

Persistent stomach pain

Severe or persistent headaches or blurred vision

Chest pain

Leg swelling

Easy bruising or tiny red spots on the skin beyond the injection site

In the United States VAERS has received 6,968 reports of death (0.0019%), according to the CDC. (Numbers as of Aug. 26, 2021.)We still do not know the serious side effects of getting jabbed.

Conclusion

Population control is the new way forward to save the planet. When people like Leo McKinstry compare people to calories we begin to see how environmentalists want to dehumanize humanity. This dehumanization leads to Eugenics which leads to depopulation by force, which leads to governments deciding who lives and who dies by mandate.

It’s happened so many times in history. Hundreds of millions have been slaughtered, like cattle, in the name of saving humanity.

KFF.org has an ongoing research project tracking the public’s attitudes and experiences with COVID-19 vaccinations.

Covid has become the hammer to drive the nails into the coffins of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It has lead to a new age of rule by global government mandates presumably to save the people from themselves. Watch Dr. Lee Merritt speak about “The Heart of the Vaccine’s Darkness.”

It’s ironic that environmentalists use the term “human footprint” to symbolize their movement to eliminate CO2 from the atmosphere when of course what they really want are no more human footprints at all.

Remember what George Orwell wrote in his novel 1984:

“The object of terrorism is terrorism. The object of oppression is oppression. The object of torture is torture. The object of murder is murder. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?”

We all understand where this all leads, don’t we. The question is how do we stop Genocide 2.0?

COP 26: Socialists & Scoundrels Emerge From Hiding

November 7, 2021

By Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

If there’s one thing that unites the UN conference in Glasgow, it is that everyone wants a piece of you.

Apparently what is troubling the Earth is that you are too free and live too well. Plans to curtail your freedom and redistribute what you’ve worked for into more deserving pockets abound. That none of this will meaningfully alter the temperature of the Earth doesn’t enter into it.

Everywhere CFACT goes in Glasgow we encounter utter shamelessness.

A UN climate conference is a place where a mega-movie star like Leonardo DiCaprio jets in to sit with an old-guard Socialist like UN Secretary General António Guterres to discuss new ways to bring you to heel.

A UN climate conference is a place where Al Gore pushes his “Green” investment company’s plans to grow rich from taxpayer subsidies, all the time donning an unearned mantle of virtue. The WSJ once wrote that Gore has amassed a vast fortune without ever conferring value upon a customer.

A UN climate conference is also a place where Socialists feel free to emerge from the shadows to boldly attack free-market Capitalism, as if their failed ideology were not responsible for suffering throughout the 20th century on a never-before-imagined industrial scale.

Pete Murphy has served as an intrepid CFACT correspondent here in Glasgow and posted a roundup of much of what he saw in the UN “Green Zone” in Glasgow. The Green Zone is the place where activists and NGOs let their hair down and showcase their propaganda. Check out this collection of wacky posters Pete photographed. They’d be funny if those behind them were not so dangerously, deadly in earnest.

There has been a major push at COP 26 to accelerate the war on coal, however, China has sidestepped all that, and continues to commission new coal plants at the rate of one a week. That wind and solar are not up to the job of replacing electricity from coal somehow escapes most of those at the COP. Nuclear remains the most efficient way to safely generate clean, emissions-free (if that’s your thing) electricity. An alliance of blinkered Greens and vested energy interests refuses to budge from its way.

CFACT’s Marc Morano has been covering Swedish climate scold Greta Thunberg’s conclusion that COP 26 is a useless exercise in “blah, blah, blah” with glee.

However, consider the yet darker side of “blah, blah, blah.” What Greta and the red brigades in Glasgow truly mean is that they do not value deliberative, democratic processes, individual choice, or national sovereignty. They demand immediate destruction of the free-market economic prosperity and individual rights that have nurtured them from infancy — and replace them with what?

The Green-Left seldom reveals just what they would do with power should they get it. For a hint we have to look at the pain they’ve wrought when they had the chance. Look at great cities like Portland and Seattle in flames and disorder, or a jewel of a country like Venezuela plunged into starvation and despair if you are seeking present-day lessons in why not to put the Woke in charge.

Then there’s the entire sad history of Socialist destruction throughout the 20th century.

Pity Greta didn’t stay in school and learn about that.

RELATED ARTICLE: Cop26: It’s socialism or extinction

COP 26: Kerry’s Climate $ Trillions [+Video]

November 4, 2021

By Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

John Kerry told UN COP 26 that the United Nations can count on the $100 billion in funding they’ve been begging for and a whole lot more.

Kerry, who serves as President Biden’s “climate envoy,” said that “billions won’t cut it” and that a plan to spend trillions of dollars on “climate finance” will be announced on Wednesday.

This seems to be the Biden Administration’s “M.O.” Ignore debt, welcome inflation and spend, spend, spend. The Left is working overtime to fundamentally shift economic life from free market capitalism to central government planning. To update an old cliché: “a trillion here and a trillion there and pretty soon you’re talking about real money.”

The bloviating from the podium continues at COP 26 with a concerted attack on methane. Did you ever shop for a methane stove, furnace, water heater, or BBQ? No? That’s because you know it better as natural gas, the odorless, invisible, clean-burning fuel with the blue flame found in abundance in the United States. It is natural gas that allowed America to lead the world in emissions reductions (if that’s your thing). Team climate started calling it by its chemical name “methane” to scare us with anti-science, chemistry-phobic bias.

CFACT’s Marc Morano has been broadcasting from Glasgow nonstop, yesterday telling OAN’s Stephanie Hamill live on the air that “if you actually cared about the climate, this isn’t the place you would go to solve it. You would actually go to free market, wealth creation and prosperity and not the centralized plan the United Nations is proposing.” Marc has been calling out climate hypocrites for jetting in on private jets to the COP and leading plush plutocratic lifestyles while demanding the rest of us tighten our far humbler belts.

I don’t know who is scarier, the wacky leftists running amok inside the COP and out, or the international elite meeting in the back rooms of the conference planning how next to control and fleece us.

President Biden’s feckless naivety continues to astound. Biden used his last day at the COP to take China and Russia to task for not sending their heads of state to Glasgow, saying they made “a big mistake.” “The rest of the world is going to take a look at China and say, ‘what value have they provided?”’

If Kerry succeeds in conjuring up trillions of dollars in climate finance, whom does he think is waiting in the wings eager to supply the solar panels, wind turbines, batteries and rare earths it would take to build a new inefficient “renewable” energy infrastructure?

Try looking east, Mister President.

It’s not China who made the worst climate mistakes in Scotland.

COP26 and Population: The First Shall be First, and the Last Shall Be Kept From Breeding

November 3, 2021

By MercatorNet – Navigating Modern Complexities

The COP26 conference on climate change may have solved little, but it was a brilliant opportunity to recycle hoary clichés about overpopulation.

Professor Paul Sutton, of the University of Denver, was a delegate for the American Association of Geographers at COP26. He wrote in The Hill, the largest independent political news site in the US: “without population stabilization and eventually degrowth, all the other approaches to climate change will not work.”

He wants an aggressive program of population control: “The least costly and most effective policy to control future CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and thereby climate change is to curb global population growth by simply providing contraceptive care to all women in the world who want it but do not currently have access.”

Closer to home, Daily Express columnist Leo McKinstry says that “curbing population explosion should be top of the COP26 agenda”.

Observers have remarked on the absence of Presidents Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin but the most significant absence, he declared, is the lack of emphasis on population control. We are “perhaps the biggest cause of environmental degradation”.

“There are currently 7.9 billion people on Earth, a total expected to rise by at least one billion every 12 years. It is a level of growth whose insatiable demands not only put an intolerable strain on our natural resources, but also fuels the ruination of eco-systems, from rivers to rain forests. …

“The decision to avoid this question at COP26 is the equivalent of holding a conference on obesity without mentioning calorie intake or lack of exercise.”

And with a grand rhetorical flourish he concludes: “Overpopulation is an engine of social injustice and eco-destruction. It should be at the heart of COP26 proceedings.”

There is a kind of twisted logic in these gentlemen’s pronouncements, since if people are not born, they cannot harm the Planet, but neither can they help it.

In fact, however, global birth rates are also in decline. The population growth we now see is caused by people living too long — a problem stemming from greater prosperity.

For those who argue that there are “too many people”, it makes more sense to kill people already born than to kill the unborn – unless they wish the human race to die out altogether.

Perhaps they do – apart from themselves of course — which explains lamentations about the problem of the “ageing population” alongside a clamour for the right-to-die and quiet moves to make it easier for old, the sick and the disabled to refuse treatment.

Just to add to the general mood of merriment and optimism, the consumer organisation Which? is telling Britons that eco-friendly households should give plastic Christmas trees a miss this year. Which’s sombre message is that you will need to keep a plastic tree for at least 12 years to offset its carbon footprint.

But they shouldn’t buy real ones either. The greenest things to do are to hire a real fir tree (expensive), grow your own (do you have the patience?), or make a fake one out of sustainable materials (who has the time?).

If we continue down this slippery green slope, it can only be a matter of time before Christmas itself, with its feasting and present-giving, will be abolished as being detrimental to the environment. And after all, bowing down to a baby – when babies are supposed to be ruining the Planet — rather than to the 95-year-old misanthropist David Attenborough, is so un-green.

Malthus is on the nose because of the experience of forced population control in China and India. But it is being revived.

It is of course heavily disguised as Caring for the Planet, and in a sly inversion of the Biblical morality which tells us that the first shall be last and the last shall be first, it seems the first shall continue to be first and the last shall be prevented from being born.

Whether or not the nobs talk openly about overpopulation, if COP26 has its way, the rest of us will be poorer, colder and sicker – and without children to console us in our old age. That’s the kind of unwanted Christmas present we can all do without.

COLUMN BY

Ann Farmer

Ann Farmer lives in the UK. She is the author of By Their Fruits: Eugenics, Population Control, and the Abortion Campaign (CUAP, 2008); The Language of Life: Christians Facing the Abortion Challenge (St… More by Ann Farmer.

Blah, Blah, Blah – CLIMATE – Blah, Blah, Blah

November 3, 2021

By Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

Greta Thunberg Continues To Show Us That She Is CLUELESS, Chants “Blah, Blah, Blah”

UN COP 26, the most significant climate conference in years is underway in Glasgow and CFACT is there!

World leaders such as Boris Johnson, Prince Charles, President Biden, Al Gore, and UN Secretary General António Guterres ascended the stage for the UN “World Leaders Summit.”

CFACT found ourselves in the unusual position of agreeing with Swedish climate kid Greta Thunberg who called the world leaders’ rhetoric a bunch of ineffectual “blah, blah, blah.”

Greta just topped herself singing repeatedly to world leaders, “You can shove your climate crisis up your a***,” to the tune of “she’ll be comin’ round the mountain.” Watch:

CFACT shares Greta’s sentiment on this one. (Though not her penchant for profanity).

All this top down blah, blah, blah demands a little perspective:

Joe Biden? Desperate to use climate to salvage his plummeting favorability rating… Fell asleep at the summit.
Boris Johnson? Hailed unanimously by both left and right as a greenwashing climate hypocrite.
Prince Charles? Spouts any left-wing trope in his quest to expunge cheating on the world’s most popular princess.
António Guterres? Six year president of the SOCIALIST INTERNATIONAL!
Al Gore? CFACT confronted Gore at the COP over his hypocritical massive energy footprint. Think waterfront mansions and private jets. Mr. Nobel bolted.

Pete Murphy joined CFACT’s delegation to Glasgow as a policy analyst. Read Murphy’s first dispatch from the COP at CFACT.org. In addition to his roundup of world leader bloviating, Pete reports that Climate Depot’s Marc Morano went on the airways reporting developments on One America News (OAN), the Joe Piscopo national radio show, and Washington DC’s talk radio station WMAL, among other media. Stay tuned for much more.

Check out the big black inflatable capitalist “snake” climate campaigners are parading around Glasgow. They did a fine job of underscoring the anti-capitalist agenda lurking behind so much climate and environment rhetoric.

CFACT’s (unofficial) poll of local Scots, however, reveals a people firmly grounded in common sense. Scots are waking up to the fact that their massive investment in intermittent wind and solar power is threatening them with unaffordable electricity prices and blackouts. Look to Scotland and some other European countries for a model of how not to handle a national energy strategy.

CFACT is your eyes, ears and voice in the UN climate process.

Watch for much more as COP 26 unfolds in Glasgow.

COLUMN BY

Craig Rucker

Craig Rucker is a co-founder of CFACT and currently serves as its president.

Why I’m a Conservationist and NOT an Environmentalist

November 2, 2021

By Dr. Rich Swier

“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And God said, ‘Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind.’ And it was so.” – Genesis

“Our task must be to free ourselves by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature and its beauty.” — Albert Einstein

“There is a delight in the hardy life of the open. There are no words that can tell the hidden spirit of the wilderness that can reveal its mystery, its melancholy and its charm. The nation behaves well if it treats the natural resources as assets which it must turn over to the next generation increased and not impaired in value.” – Speech by Theodore Roosevelt in Osawatomie, Kansas, August 31, 1910.

I deeply care about the planet earth and about all of the creatures living on the land and in our seas, rivers and oceans. However, I am not a environmentalist. Rather I am a conservationist.

According to Merriam-Webster, a conservationist is “a person who advocates conservation especially of natural resources.”

In contrast, an environmentalist is defined as one “concerned about environmental quality especially of the human environment with respect to the control of pollution.”

Do you see the difference?

Conservationism

The U.S. Department of the Interior says this about the conservationism:

President Theodore Roosevelt was one of the most powerful voices in the history of American conservation. Enthralled by nature from a young age, Roosevelt cherished and promoted our nation’s landscapes and wildlife. After becoming president in 1901, Roosevelt used his authority to establish 150 national forests, 51 federal bird reserves, four national game preserves, five national parks and 18 national monuments on over 230 million acres of public land.

Today, the legacy of Theodore Roosevelt is found across the country. There are six national park sites dedicated, in part or whole, to our conservationist president. Along with others like John Muir and Rachel Carson, Roosevelt’s words and actions continue to affect how we approach and appreciate the natural world. In honor of his birthday, check out some great Roosevelt stories and quotes below.

I believe that it is mankind’s duty to use our God given natural resources. I also believe that God tasks us to use them wisely. I believe in waste not, want not.

Aldo Leopold wrote,

“Conservation is a state of harmony between men and land. By land is meant all of the things on, over, or in the earth. Harmony with land is like harmony with a friend; you cannot cherish his right hand and chop off his left. That is to say, you cannot love game and hate predators; you cannot conserve the waters and waste the ranges; you cannot build the forest and mine the farm. The land is one organism. Its parts, like our own parts, compete with each other and co-operate with each other. The competitions are as much a part of the inner workings as the co-operations. You can regulate them—cautiously—but not abolish them.”

Love the land and its creatures but partake of earth’s bounty.

As John James Audubon wrote,

“A true conservationist is a man who knows that the world is not given by his fathers, but borrowed from his children.”

Environmentalism

An environmentalist is focused not on nature or science. An environmentalist is focused on controlling pollution by controlling people. Environmentalists have killed millions of people.

In order to control the people environmentalists have over time pushed three myths (big lies):

Myth #1: Human Extinction Due To Climate Change Is Imminent
Myth #2: The Climate Is Getting Substantially More Dangerous for Humans
Myth #3: Natural Disasters Are Getting Substantially More Frequent And Severe

Biden’s Build Back Better agenda has a climate basket.

Biden’s Climate Basket:

This basket is filled with green energy goodies. It’s the Green New Deal on steroids. Unfortunately, if you heat your home using natural gas or electricity you are being tricked because you energy bill will go up, not down. If you drive a car, SUV, truck or van that uses fossil fuels you have already see gasoline and diesel prices go up over 323%. There’s no treats in this basket for us consumers too. For you see went the cost of energy goes up so does the prices of consumer goods. This basket is filled with tricks and no treats.

Here are three absolutes that John Casey, a good friend of mine, taught me about the climate:

The climate changes.
These changes of the climate follow natural cycles (e.g. summer, fall, winter, spring).
There is nothing mankind can do to change these natural cycles.

Conclusion

It’s not about pollution at all.

Genesis 1: 27-30 reads:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.’ Then God said, ‘I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground–everything that has the breath of life in it–I give every green plant for food.’ And it was so.

Don’t fall for the environmentalist’s big lies. Believe in the truth. God’s truth.

We have been given great bounty and we are tasked to give thanks for it.

Remember what Edmund Burke wrote,

“There is but one law for all, namely that law which governs all law, the law of our Creator, the law of humanity, justice, equity – the law of nature and of nations.”

As we approach Thanksgiving Day 2021 perhaps we should bow our heads in prayer and be most thankful for our conservationists who give us food, drink and with this bounty, health and prosperity.

Difficult Implementation

Has Recycling Always Been An Illusion?

Recycling Efforts Backfire and Create Waste Themselves

— This Newsletter’s Articles, by Topic —

COVID-19 — Therapies:

COVID-19 — Vaccines:

COVID-19 — Vaccine Mandates:

COVID-19 — Misc:

Wind Energy:

Solar Energy:

Nuclear Energy:

Fossil Fuel Energy:

Misc Energy:

Manmade Global Warming — COP26:

Manmade Global Warming — Misc:

US Election:

US Election — State Issues:

US Politics and Socialism:

Religion Related:

Education Related:

Science and Misc Matters:

What is Weather?

Why are we so focused on the Climate?

Conclusion

Why Saule Omarova is Biden’s Bolshevik

Climate Change and Big Brother

Public Debt is a Public Good? Not!

CREATING THE CONDITIONS FOR POPULATION GROWTH TO STOP

Environmentalism, Eugenics & the New Genocide

Covid, Vaccines & the New Holocaust

Conclusion

Conservationism

Environmentalism

Conclusion

STAY INFORMED