RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/02/10/global-warming-alarmists-keep-letting-their-masks-slips/

Give the green shirts long enough and they will reveal their true intentions. This happened most recently when a Massachusetts official said “we have to break” the will of the average person to cut greenhouse gas emissions. It’s another in a long line of admissions made by the climatistas – thank you, Steven Hayward, for adding that descriptive term to our lexicon – that inadvertently exposes their authoritarian urges.

Ranting last month before the Vermont Climate Council, David Ismay, Massachusetts Republican Gov. Charlie Baker’s undersecretary for climate change, said that “60% of our emissions come from residential heating and passenger vehicles,” produced by people on “the street” and seniors on fixed incomes. 

“There is no bad guy left,” he continued, “at least in Massachusetts, to point the finger at, turn the screws on, and break their will so they stop emitting. That’s you, we have to break your will.”

He then added “I can’t even say that publicly.” Which itself says a lot.

Baker appeared to be unhappy with the comments and indicated that Ismay was going to get what we hope, but cannot assume, will be a stern a lecture from another administration official. But no one can, as lawyers like to say, unring that bell. Ismay’s comments are out there, and they disclose more than the alarmists want known.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/02/john-kerry-emitted-302-tons-co2-save-planet-daniel-greenfield/

In his last year in office, Secretary of State John Kerry was touting the fact that he had traveled over 1.06 million miles and spent some 96 days in the air in the course of 3 years. The archived State Department site tallies Kerry’s total record at 1,417,576 miles and 126 days in the air.

Kerry spent more time flying in 3 years than the average American would in 50 years.

When the Air Force Boeing 757 which ferried Kerry around the world broke down for the fourth time, the media and the foreign policy establishment treated it as some sort of accomplishment.

That might have amounted to something if the ketchup gigolo had done anything in that time except jet around the world to give speeches about the importance of not jetting around the world. Kerry kept racking up miles by flying to Morocco to address the 22nd UN Climate Change Conference, to Indonesia to deliver a speech denouncing unbelievers in global warming, and to Paris to warn that the earth was about to be destroyed if people didn’t stop living like him.

Kerry’s flights would have powered all the appliances in 50 American homes for a year.

“It’s the only choice for somebody like me who is traveling the world to win this battle,” Kerry recently retorted when a reporter asked him about flying his private jet to Iceland to receive an environmental award. Environmentalists don’t fly coach or even first class. They jet set.

https://spectator.us/topic/ready-climate-lockdowns-environment/?utm_source=Spectator+USA+Email+Signup&utm_campaign=

Last week President Biden signed an executive order to rejoin the Paris Climate Accords. This was a mostly symbolic gesture, as the same alarmism being pushed prior to the agreement in 2016 is still being pushed now while nation-states like China are still ignoring it. Now Biden administration climate envoy John Kerry, under fire for boarding a private jet to Iceland to accept a climate award, is telling the United States and the world that the conditions of the Paris agreement are ‘inadequate’.

As the global climate elite push eating bugs and staying home to save the Earth on the masses, it’s worth posing the question: what will be adequate? With the Global Economic Forum in Davos approaching in April, we’re going to start hearing terms such ‘Climate Equity’ and ‘Climate Reset’ (a play on the WEF’s Great Reset) more frequently. We’ll probably also start to hear calls for climate lockdowns. I know, right now that sounds completely preposterous, but don’t these kooky ideas always find a way to bleed into the mainstream? Fifteen Days to Slow the Sun!

The possibility of climate lockdowns is already being floated by some of our greatest thinkers. They see a confluence of global crises as an opportunity. The perfect storm caused by COVID-19 and the resulting global economic meltdown offers a chance to take what they see as bold and dramatic action to save the planet. The Biden administration will certainly use the consequences of COVID to push through some green legislation, but just as before, it will not be enough in the eyes of progressives. There must always be more.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/02/bidens_magical_mystery_energy_plans.html

Days after eliminating tens of thousands of jobs by terminating the Keystone Pipeline and halting drilling on Federal Lands, Joe Biden gave a speech in which he said “Today is ‘Climate Day’ at the White House and — which means that today is ‘Jobs Day’ at the White House.’” He explained that he would hire Americans to modernize the infrastructure so that it can withstand the increase in hurricanes resulting from global warming. As is true for all of his climate policies, this is delusional.

Increased hurricanes resulting from global warming? In the 51 years from 1915, 19 major hurricanes hit the Atlantic coast; in the 51 years to 2016, just seven did. In the last 11 years, only two hurricanes greater than category three hit the continental USA — a record low since 1900. From 1915 to 1926, 12 hit.

Biden said his administration would hire people to transform the American electrical sector to produce power without carbon pollution and provide rebates so that Americans would buy electric cars. He said jobs would be created for Americans to build electric charging stations all over the country. He plans to replace with electricity all the energy we get from gas.

Where is all that electricity going to come from? In the same speech, he answered that question. He said: “We’re going to take money and invest it in clean energy jobs in America — millions of jobs in wind, solar, and carbon capture” and “We need solar energy cost-competitive with traditional energy.”

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/02/02/john-kerry-global-warming-ghoul/

“But in choosing “one of the biggest gasbags in American politics,” a “lifelong joke” who is “singlehandedly responsible for massive amounts of terrible emissions,” Joe Biden and his handlers took asininity to another level. They showed they are as tone deaf as Kerry. And so goes the growing polarization of the United States.”

Presidential climate envoy John Kerry stirred up a black cloud last week when he said the workers who lost their jobs over the administration’s decision to shut down Keystone XL pipeline construction could just make solar panels instead. At least he didn’t tell them they should learn to code. But it was a cruel comment nonetheless, and representative of the political left’s careless destruction of livelihoods in service of their climate god.

At a news conference last week, Kerry said “what President Biden wants to do is make sure that those folks” who lost jobs “have better choices, that they have alternatives, that they can be the people who go to work to make the solar panels.” Unsaid yet clearly understood is the Democrats’ contempt for calloused-hand working class Americans – these “deplorables” just can’t make good decisions and need the guiding hand of government to help them avoid the briar patches and potholes of life.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/global_warming_facts_vs_media_misrepresentation.html

With Joe Biden ramping up the greenie ideology, the history of global warming is worth another look.

All you need to know to understand that the conspiracy is false is to see that the Earth had a substantial, lengthy cooling period from 1945 to 1975.

On the first Earth Day in 1970, after 25 years of cooling, people were scared to death about dire forecasts by “experts,” without any scientific data supporting their predictions, that billions would soon freeze and die of starvation because of a new ice age. The media participated in scaring the public. The predictions were 100% wrong because a little warming resumed as it always does. .

By 1970, there had been around 100 years of exponential growth in oil and coal consumption, the population had risen by several hundred percent and CO2 content had increased substantially. Cars, trucks, planes, combines, tractors, TVs, air conditioners, furnaces and computers had been invented. Most houses now had electricity.

Yet the Earth was cooling so much that billions would die because of cooling despite all these inventions that supposedly cause warming. A child could understand that if a significant period of cooling occurred that oil and humans did not cause warming. But the cultists don’t care about facts or science when they are pushing their radical leftist agenda to destroy jobs and America.  

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2021/01/trofim-lysenko-looks-down-and-smiles/

” I would argue that modern scientists have re-discovered that their science, their theories, their working hypotheses, are not required to be ‘correct’, just as Spengler observed, only that they be ‘practical’. They have discovered that as long as their pronouncements service the political ends of their funders, the role of scientist-as-political-advocate is both much more lucrative and much less mentally taxing than being correct in the old-fashioned scientific sense. They have decided to leverage their scientific credibility in the pursuit of power in the political domain. One can only wonder if they have heard of a Russian scientist by name of Trofim Lysenko and the disdain with which he and his twisted, Kremlin-endorsed theories are held today.”

Reading Quadrant Online and Peter Smith’s recent posting ‘Never Let a Good Panic go to Waste’ [i], it has become apparent there is a post-modern aspect to the way science is performed that requires some explanation. This paragraph of Peter’s particularly caught my eye.

You will recall an article in the Johns Hopkins News-Letter reporting on an analysis by Genevieve Briand (assistant program director of the Applied Economics master’s degree program at Hopkins), claiming on the basis of her analysis of CDC data that “in contrast to most people’s assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States.” (the retracted article reporting Briand’s conclusions can still be read here)

Is this really the way modern medical science is performed? Yes, apparently.

I have written about some of this recently in Quadrant Online articles, [ii] but I hope readers will be tolerant if they have seen some of this before, as I believe I now grasp there is an important conclusion to be drawn that wasn’t clear to me before.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-were-ending-the-epas-reliance-on-secret-science-11609802643?mod=opinion_lead_pos7

The task of science is one of test and retest, analysis and comparison, over and over. It is slow and careful work, done in the open. Only rarely has science benefited from secrecy, and that is usually for reasons of national security. The geniuses of the Manhattan Project who built the atomic bomb, the mavericks of Cape Canaveral who sent men to the moon, these giants did their work behind high walls, and for good reason.

But the work of the Environmental Protection Agency—to protect human health and the environment—shouldn’t be exempt from public scrutiny. This is why we are promulgating a rule to make the agency’s scientific processes more transparent.

Too often Congress shirks its responsibility and defers important decisions to regulatory agencies. These regulators then invoke science to justify their actions, often without letting the public study the underlying data. Part of transparency is making sure the public knows what the agency bases its decisions on. When agencies defer to experts in private without review from citizens, distinctions get flattened and the testing and deliberation of science is precluded.

Our rule will prioritize transparency and increase opportunities for the public to access the “dose-response” data that underlie significant regulations and influential scientific information. Dose-response data explain the relationship between the amount of a chemical or pollutant and its effect on human health and the environment—and are the foundation of the EPA’s regulations. If the American people are to be regulated by interpretation of these scientific studies, they deserve to scrutinize the data as part of the scientific process and American self-government.