Tag Archives: climate

Lies of Progressive-Democrats—More

Posted on by
Reply

Senator Tom Carper (D, DE) is on the hot seat (pun intended) this time. Despite current rising inflation and resulting higher prices for everything energy-related (like transportation fuel, home and office heating and cooling, food), he’s demanding continued and increased Federal spending, in particular, the Progressive-Democrats’ spend-a-thon reconciliation bill—inflation be damned. Because climate.

Our planet is on fire….

On fire. If we’re on fire today, what was the state of our planet in past ages when it was so much warmer than it is today, and life was lush?

If we’re on fire today, what was the state of our planet in past ages when atmospheric CO2 was so much higher than it is today, and life was lush?

Does it matter to Carper that those prior ages don’t even correlate with each other? Apparently not—just spend the damn money.

Does it matter to Carper that today, 11,000+ years after the end of the last Ice Age, we’re still cooler than Earth’s geologic warming trend line? Apparently not—just spend the damn money.

Does it matter to Carper that the mid-Holocene period of 7,000 to 5,000 years ago and beginning some 4,000 years after that Ice Age ended—a period which some might conclude was pre-industrial—was warmer than it is today?

Never mind that Carper surely knows these data full well; his intern briefed him on these things when his intern did the research for Carper.

Just spend the damn money.

The Green-Eyed Monster of Hypocrisy

Posted on by
Reply

Like the man said, you can’t make this stuff up.

Donald Clark (no flags, no hashtags)
@DonaldClark
COP [UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26)] coming to Glasgow. Leaders staying at Gleneagles Hotel & 20Tesla cars (£100K each) bought to ferry them 75km back & forth. Gleneagles has 1 Tesla charging station, so Malcolm Plant Hire contracted to supply Diesel Generators to recharge Tesla’s overnight. Couldn’t make it up.

Wow.

Intrusive Government

Posted on by
Reply

President Joe Biden (D) wants to make climate change a matter of government regulation in our nation’s financial sector.

Calling climate change a systemic risk to the financial system, the White House will release a report Friday outlining its strategy for new rules that could affect investment disclosures, insurance policies and home loans.

And

[T]he US needs “a road map for measuring, disclosing, managing, and mitigating climate-related financial risk across the economy.”

No. To the extent global warming (let’s stop hiding behind euphemisms) is a risk to our nation’s financial system, it’s a risk best handled by those who are actually expert in handling risk and the impact of risk to us citizens: our financial institutions operating in a free market, and us citizens making our own decisions regarding the risks each of us individually choose to run or not run and the impact of those risks on our individual lives.

Government can only make one-size-fits-all moves, whether nationally or regionally—it cannot tailor its moves down to the level of individual businesses, much less down to the individual.

Gina McCarthy, White House National Climate Advisor, rationalized:

This road map isn’t about protecting our financial system. It’s about protecting people, their paychecks, and their prosperity[.]

Again, no. This “road map” has nothing to do with that. In the first place, we don’t need protection beyond what we can, and should, do for ourselves in a free market. In the second place, it isn’t Government’s role to protect us from the vagaries of free markets; Government’s role is only to provide a stable economic environment in which our free market can operate. Government does that best with minimal regulation, minimal intrusion, into our markets.

John Kerry Fails Again

Posted on by
Reply

[L]ife is always full of tough choices and the relationship between nations. That was John Kerry answering David Westin, a Bloomberg Television anchor, who asked Kerry, “What is the process by which one trades off climate against human rights?” Kerry actually said that in all seriousness regarding the Biden-Harris administration’s prioritizing global warming over the People’s Republic of China’s genocide against Uyghurs.

Never mind that the Uyghurs are being murdered today, and even if Climatistas are right, nobody dies for generations under the warming.

But Kerry wasn’t done.

The point I’m making is that even as there were egregious human rights issues, which Ronald Reagan called them [Gorbachev and his Soviet Union] out on it, we have to find a way forward to make the world safer, to protect our countries, and act in our interests[.]

Never mind, either, that the Soviets—the Russians—were pushing serfdom, slavery. Serfs, slaves, however horrific their lives, are in fact alive and have a chance of escaping, of getting help to escape, their condition. The dead have no such opportunity.

This is what the Biden-Harris administration appoints and supports.

“Remove CO2 from Atmosphere”

Posted on by
Reply

That’s John Kerry’s claim and goal as he stated at the recent, pretentiously styled, Leaders Summit on Climate.

Net zero is not enough. We need to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.

There are two interpretations for Kerry’s claim.

One is that he meant complete removal, which would have the effect of starving to extinction all plant life, and from that all life on Earth.

The other interpretation is that he meant removal of “excess” CO2 from the atmosphere. He—and climatistas everywhere—decline to define “excess” in any concrete, measurable terms.

Either interpretation represents Kerry’s utter dishonesty. Dishonesty, I claim, because I don’t believe Kerry, the self-proclaimed Smartest Man in the Room, is that ignorant or that stupid.