It isn’t a surprise that Bill Nye believes in the Climate scam. However, what does Bill think of those dim wits that do not? ‘The only definitive way to see significant action to prevent climate change is to simply wait for deniers and contrarians to “age out,” according to Nye.
Yep, that’s right! if you deny what these climate scammers are pushing and you aren’t dead then you should be.
I know Bill will not read this blog or the following verse but he should. Genesis 8:22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease. This was a promise from the Creator Himself after the most dramatic change of climate in history, the world-wide flood!
I love a sunburnt country, A land of sweeping plains, Of ragged mountain ranges, Of droughts and flooding rains. I love her far horizons, I love her jewel-sea, Her beauty and her terror – The wide brown land for me!
‘If you recall, last year around this time, the lead story was “global warming set Australia on fire”.
Last year we experienced one of the worst bushfire seasons in recorded history; the devastation was genuinely shocking. But like any natural disaster, climate change activists refused to let this grand opportunity pass without capitalising on it.
Don’t get me wrong; I don’t deny climate change exists.
Of course, the climate changes; it’s been doing that forever. Take the old testament, for example; there’s evidence of the “climate-changing” throughout it, from the extreme floods in Genisis to the severe droughts in the book of the Prophets.
My issue is the narrative that man-induced global warming caused last years bushfires without any actual scientific evidence, just a lot of theory.
But even more dishonest than that, neglecting the critical facts, namely:
The fact that we were experiencing a natural phenomenon known as the Indian Ocean Dipole, which, if you remember, none of the climate change protesters I spoke to at the time even knew what it was.
In addition to the natural phenomenon, we also had extreme fuel loads on the ground, which resulted from Green policies restricting the amount of prescribed burning and fire breaks allowed.
The truth is, in Australia, we have always experienced intense bushfires, drought and flooding. We always will. Reducing carbon emissions may help; it definitely won’t stop the fires, droughts or floods.
The only thing scientifically proven is that managing the fuel load will stop bushfires from spreading so far and wide.
For example, take this year, no natural phenomenon plus all the fuel on the ground burnt away last year, and what do you know, a bushfire season that the media doesn’t want to discuss.
Biden and his political mates around the world are simply following the bidding of the CCP. That’s one reason why they had to get rid of President Trump! This crazy Net Zero 2050 is their target to ruin the West and make us all slaves to the CCP. Conspiracy theory? NOT!! However, as a Bible believing Christian my hope isn’t in politicians but in the Lord Jesus Christ! Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.
‘The Ominous Outlook for 2050
There are two different visions out there of what the world ought to look like in 2050. One of them is called Net Zero, which says that within three decades the world must all but eliminate fossil fuel use, and get carbon dioxide emissions down to zero, net of the amount plants and trees absorb. So many politicians, business leaders, bankers and academics around the world are calling for Net Zero that you might think it’s solidly based on science.
But it’s not. Many experts dispute the necessity of this 2050 plan and indeed its feasibility. They say the worst case scenario for the impacts of climate change over the coming 30 years won’t be nearly as costly as the impact of getting rid of fossil fuels. They say trying to get to net zero in such a short time could destroy our prosperity and weaken us internationally. And they say we couldn’t get there even if we tried.
Despite these objections, and with virtually no public debate, governments throughout the western world are embracing the goal of net zero by 2050 and are preparing to impose the target, regardless of the costs. They’re not interested in the vision of cautious, evidence-based, adaptation to what the future brings.
Which funnily enough isn’t even the other vision I want to talk about. You see, there’s yet another, very different idea of what the world should look like in 2050 that you may not have heard of. It’s not exactly a secret, but Western governments and journalists ignore it just as they ignore skepticism about Net Zero.
This other vision is called The Hundred Year Marathon. And it’s like a mirror image of Net Zero, because it’s the Chinese Politburo’s elaborate and ambitious scheme to build up their nation’s economy and its global power so that by 2049, the hundredth anniversary of Mao Zedong’s seizure of power, China will be the world’s dominant superpower.
Then, starting in 2050, the ideology that guides the Chinese Communist Party will spread around the globe, achieving what they like to call “harmony” though a better name would be “world domination”.
You might be tempted to dismiss this warning as paranoia, some kind of warmed-over “Red scare”. But while Chinese leaders are careful not to say much to the rest of the world, they talk openly about this ambition among themselves. The plans are found in high-level speeches and strategy documents, and the implementation is progressing around the world, step-by-step, right in plain sight, including the so-called “Belt and Road Initiative” and the not-so-green investment in coal plants in many Third World nations as well as at home. But most Westerners still know nothing about it and find it hard to believe such a plan could even exist, let alone succeed.
Unfortunately, the truth is that these two apparently disconnected visions of 2050 are two sides of the same coin. They both lead us to the same place, with the west hobbled and weak, and China powerful and dominant. And if our governments don’t know it, don’t want to hear about it, the Chinese government certainly does. I’m John Robson and this is a Climate Discussion Nexus Backgrounder on the Ominous Outlook for 2050.
First of all, let me assure you I’m not saying “climate change” is a communist plot. Or a globalist plot. Or a what have you plot. Climate change alarmism isn’t not a plot at all, even if it is mistaken. The whole discussion of carbon dioxide and the greenhouse effect arose in Europe in the 1800s out of scientific inquiry, and lots of people believe in it sincerely, and it’s appropriate and necessary that we, in free societies, have a lively legitimate debate about its meaning and importance. Including the necessity and practicality of Net Zero.
But we also need to have a discussion about the geopolitical implications of the green agenda, and the illegitimate uses to which it can be put. Including the strange coincidence that a global political movement has arisen that uses the threat of climate change to impose an agenda on the Western world that fits neatly with what The Hundred Year Marathon seeks to do. If it is a coincidence.
You’ll notice, the endless chatter about “Net Zero” never seems to include China. They’re building hundreds of coal-fired power plants at home and abroad, buying up oil reserves around the world, including here in Canada, and they’re ramping up their economy as fast as humanly possible without regard for the human cost including due to real pollution as well as the “carbon” kind. And they have politely but firmly told the world to go jump in the South China Sea whenever discussion of global climate policy comes up. Except not always politely.
Sure they like to brag about the occasional solar panel they put up, or their internal carbon trading shell game, and last fall President Xi Jinping made noises to the UN about cutting emissions. That kind of talk always wins them praise from credulous western environmentalists. But the reality is, net zero is a western preoccupation and China isn’t part of it.
When I say “China” I don’t mean the geographical entity, of course. Nor do I mean the people who live there. It’s standard shorthand for a political organization called the Chinese Communist Party or CCP that rules China and its people in a thoroughly undemocratic, brutal manner.
The CCP was formed in 1921, and after decades of military insurgency it won control of China in 1949 under the leadership of Mao Zedong. It is an authoritarian communist movement that aspires to be totalitarian and control all aspects of the lives of the Chinese people including their thinking. It now has about 90 million members, but not because it’s popular. Because you pretty much have to be a Party member to have a significant job in Chinese business or government. Until the Party turns on you, that is. And then there’s nowhere to hide, no matter how important, rich or well-connected you seemed to be. There’s no such thing as free speech in China, or separation of powers, or rule of law, or private property, or security of any kind. Westerners by and large have no idea how powerful the CCP is.
For instance, China does not have a military the way normal countries do. Instead the so-called “Peoples’ Liberation Army” is the military wing of the Chinese Communist Party. Imagine the hoo-hah if Donald Trump had proposed having the US Army swear an oath of loyalty to the Republican Party instead of the US Constitution. But that’s what the CCP has done, and it now has the largest military in the world as its private enforcers.
China also does not have an independent court system, of course. Judges in China are CCP officials whose sole loyalty is to the Party if they know what’s good for them. The CCP controls the school system, the media, the universities, the internet, all local municipal governments, and of course the central government in Beijing. Leaders in any of those systems have to swear loyalty to the CCP and its ideology to hold their positions. What’s more, all Chinese companies are effectively branches of the state including under the National Intelligence Law that makes enterprises like, say Huawei, explicitly tentacles of Beijing’s espionage.
It’s not accidental and it’s not because of any external threat and there is no intention of reforming it. China made a show of moving towards democracy in the 1990s, just long enough to win a membership in the World Trade Organization in 2001. But what was really going on internally was a purge of reformers in the wake of the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989 and the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s.
By the time Xi Jinping took power in 2012 the hardliners had cemented their control. And in 2013 Chairman Xi delivered a confidential speech called Document Number 9, which outlines the seven “false ideologies” that the CCP must repress at all costs: Western-style constitutional democracy, the belief in ‘universal values’, civil society (or individual rights), free market economics, independent journalism, ‘historical nihilism’ (i.e. questioning Maoist doctrine), and anything that undermines the socialist nature of China.
In that speech he also referred to “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation”. According to China expert Michael Pillsbury, this is code for righting the historical wrongs that have prevented China from reaching its destiny of being the dominant nation in the world. They don’t simply want to be successful, to be secure, to be an equal and respected partner in a multipolar world. They believe in the saying attributed to Confucius that “there can only be one sun up in the sky.” There can only be one dominant superpower.
According to this chauvinistic, belligerent and frankly rather weird reading of history, China was destined to fill that role until its humiliation by the aggressive west in the 1800s. But by 2049 they will have righted that wrong and completed their rejuvenation. Or died trying. Along with anyone who gets in their way.
Delusions of grandeur, you might say. As we said of the Soviet Union and before that Hitler. Yes, I’m putting on that annoying historian’s mortar-board again and saying we’ve been there, we’ve done that and, you’d think, got the point. Instead while we’ve spent decades praising the CCP’s quest for social justice, building statues of Norman Bethune and praising Pierre Trudeau’s youthful visit to China, and indeed taking pity on China as a poor, weak developing nation to whom believe it or not Canada still sends foreign aid, they’ve become the world’s top producer and user of energy, steel, cement and chemical fertilizer (like Khrushchev’s U.S.S.R. before them with similar ambitions). They own over a trillion dollars’ worth of US government debt, they control over 90 percent of the world’s supply of rare earth minerals which gives them effective control over global electronics production, they took over the mobile phone infrastructure in Africa and are seeking dominance over the new 5G global communications network, and through that Belt-and-Road Initiative they have been acquiring vast amounts of transportation infrastructure around the world.
The reach of the CCP is astonishing. They own Pirelli tires, Syngenta chemicals, 40 percent of the Philippines’ national electricity system, and ports in Rotterdam, Antwerp, Greece, Bilbao, Valencia, Panama, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nicaragua and elsewhere. In Canada they own Nexen Inc., one of Canada’s major oil and gas companies. And the Canadian government still hasn’t formally barred Huawei from the 5G network’s key infrastructure, the only one of the “Five Eyes” still determined to see no evil here.
And bear in mind, we’re not talking about individual Chinese investors buying assets. These are Chinese state-owned, state dominated enterprises, all under the control of the CCP. No Chinese firm is independent of the Politburo no matter what the share certificates or formal laws say. What Chairman Xi wants, Chairman Xi takes, with the People’s Liberation Army to back him up.
Well, it’s not to stop climate change, that’s for sure. Throughout this drive for world domination in the name of communist dictatorship, which following Confucius’ policy of the “rectification of names” is exactly what it should be called, their use of fossil fuels, especially coal and oil, have soared, making them the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases by a very wide margin that grows wider every day.
Which brings us back to the climate issue. Because a strange thing about Net Zero is that it was never really discussed anywhere, or voted on. It just one day seemed to become the policy of every government, everywhere. Except China, which is applauding us for it while moving relentlessly the other way.
Net Zero has even recently and rather suddenly been embraced by the global financial system. Groups like the World Bank and major private banks have all announced they won’t lend any more money to big fossil fuel-based energy projects, even in developing countries, including coal-fired power plants. Whereas China will.
And as numerous authors have documented, top leaders in the global finance sphere have been the targets for decades of careful, sophisticated influence campaigns run out of Beijing.
Hold on a minute, I know what you’re about to say: this is all conspiracy-mongering, which you told us not to do. Besides surely it’s just a coincidence. But we already know that Russia operates this way, funding European green groups who have all but shut down energy development in the EU, forcing them to be utterly dependent on Russian gas exports. It stands to reason that China would use the same strategy. It’s not a conspiracy, they talk about it among themselves. And these days China’s resources vastly exceed those of Russia which, for all Putin’s thuggish delusions of grandeur, has been described with some justice as “a gas station for China.”
So how does this work? Well, as Toronto-based researcher Patricia Adams has documented, western green groups have been conspicuous in their fondness for the ruthless Chinese government. While everyone else has been growing increasingly alarmed at the proliferation of concentration camps, slave labour factories, crushing free speech including in Hong Kong and all the other hallmarks of totalitarian repression under the CCP, even genocide of the Uighur Muslims, environmental groups are conspicuously glowing about the Chinese leadership. As Adams says:
The big exceptions – those who have yet to have their eyes opened to the dangers posed by the CCP – are Western environmentalists and their funders. Rather than becoming cautious about China’s role in the world, these groups lavish it with praise for its environmental efforts
So do you think it’s just coincidence that, as Adams notes, some $330 million worth of funding for North American green groups can be traced to one single source, Energy Foundation China, which is managed by Ji Zou, a long-time senior official in the Chinese government?
Zou, as a paymaster for the Western environmentalists, decides what projects to fund, enabling him to effectively solicit work desired by his former employers in Beijing from the Western environmental organizations, who give it their imprimatur of legitimacy.
Still, let’s keep the rose-coloured blinders on and say it’s all just a coincidence. It’s still remarkable, and worrisome, how it all happens to work to the CCP’s advantage. Where does the Net Zero doctrine leave developing countries who need to build up their electricity grids? China is now the only place most of them can look to for funding. And it’s a role China has enthusiastically embraced, since the terms they impose on the recipients lock in their control over those governments for decades to come.
Consider BlackRock Inc, the world’s largest financial firm with $6.5 trillion in assets under management. In 2019 its President, Larry Fink, announced a plan to ensure the company’s future growth by aggressively expanding in China. To do this he recruited a team of talented financial executives, headed by Tang Xiaodong, a banker and former Chinese government official, to lead BlackRock’s Chinese operations. And right on schedule, Fink just announced they’re going to use their massive financial clout to force companies they own to commit to net zero by 2050, or face being cut off from financing.
Will BlackRock apply this rule to CCP-controlled enterprises, or the entire Chinese economy for that matter? Dream on. Once again, it’s only western companies that will be strangled and tossed in a ditch, after being plundered of their proprietary technology, while BlackRock and the CCP cash in on unrestrained growth in China driven by fossil fuels.
In other countries though, there is a conspicuous connection between governments being overly friendly with China and imposing Net Zero on themselves. Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his former Ambassador to China John McCallum have been positively giddy over the regime in Beijing, although McCallum did eventually have to be fired when his handling of a diplomatic row with China caused the Canadian press to wonder aloud where his loyalties lay because he was giving the Chinese advice on how to defeat the Canadian government, in public. Meanwhile Trudeau has, of course, announced that Canada is committing to Net Zero by 2050, notwithstanding the fact that it will wipe out our oil and gas sector and may split our country, while China is allowed to grow theirs without limit or reproach.
In the UK, where Net Zero is now gospel, connections between the CCP and the social elite are particularly deep. The 48 Group Club is a Who’s Who of top UK government, banking, university and industry elite who regularly rub shoulders with a select group of high-ranking current and former Chinese officials, ostensibly for the purpose of developing trade relationships and business deals. But as Hamilton and Ohlberg detail in Hidden Hand, the 48 Group Club has really become an organ for the Chinese government to influence British public opinion and politics through their uncritical repetition of CCP propaganda.
In a scathing conclusion, Hamilton and Ohlberg write:
In our judgment, so entrenched are the CCP’s influence networks among British elites that Britain has passed the point of no return, and any attempt to extricate itself from Beijing’s orbit would probably fail.
Well, I say try anyway. Especially if it’s all just a coincidence and those nice Chinese government agents are plying westerners with money and flattery, and sometimes other favours as well, out of the stunning benevolence of their hearts. But before accepting that preposterous assertion, or trying to hand me a tin foil hat, ask yourself this question: Suppose the CCP really did hatch the scheme of using its global influence networks to push Net Zero by 2050 on the rest of us as an integral part of its Hundred Year Marathon strategy. How would the outcome look any different from what’s been happening?
If the answer is that it wouldn’t, it’s either a plot or it’s a plan that’s getting a lot of venal, ideological or simply careless support from our side. Remember, Lenin didn’t say that the useful idiots were cynics, but he did say they were fools.
Whatever the cause, the world is traveling on two paths towards 2050. And while they seem unrelated, with one all about saving the planet from supposed climate doom and the other a dark totalitarian ambition to rule the world, they converge in a remarkable spot where the West is hobbled economically, politically and militarily by climate alarmism and its misguided schemes to slash energy abundance and squash economic growth, while China’s communist regime secures unchallenged global economic, military and ideological dominance.
The two visions are stereoscopic. Even if you close one eye, or the other, you see the same picture. But I want nothing to do it. I say it’s time to open our eyes wide and see what’s in front of us, surprisingly close, big and ominous.
My wife and I didn’t watch or listen to the Fake President’s speech to Congress and perhaps you didn’t either. So, in case you wish to know a little of what the Fake President had to say I am sharing Mark Levin’s take on it. Enjoy!
Hey, Joe, ‘The CCP won’t let America’s climate industrial complex interfere with its economic ambitions, key to which is its burgeoning supply of reliable and affordable coal-fired power.
Whereas Australia’s suicidal renewable energy obsession has destroyed this country’s competitive advantage, the only interest China has in wind turbines and solar panels is making them and flogging them off ASAP. If the object was assisting virtue signalling Western nations to wreck once reliable power grids and undermine their energy security, the CCP’s approach is well on the way.
At the other end of the spectrum, a doddery and confused 78-year-old American gent – under direction from the climate carpetbaggers and renewable energy rent seekers – is attempting to bully Australia, among others, into accelerating the process that’s left Australians suffering among the world’s highest retail power prices, with a supply so erratic that energy hungry businesses are on life support and power rationing is the new normal.
Here’s Alan Moran taking a look at how we landed here and where we’re headed, if Australia keep following the path it’s on.
Joe Biden’s bid to enforce climate club The Australian Alan Moran 22 April 2021
The urgency of the Biden administration in pursuing green policies signifies the prominence of the issue in terms of world diplomacy and domestic policies in the US, Australia and elsewhere.
Even though the long-planned UN Climate Change Conference will take place later this year in Glasgow, the Biden administration determined that it would call a two-day online conference, scheduled to begin on Thursday US time, addressing the issue of energy, climate change and the actions it deems necessary.
The US administration now proposes to spend $US2.9 trillion ($3.76 trillion) on infrastructure, most of which is climate-related and which is before congress — this is almost as much as total annual revenue and comes on top of a $US2 trillion deficit.
This fusillade of policy measures and diplomatic pressures from the US has magnified enormously the same pressures that have been exerted by the EU. They include threats of trade discrimination — a carbon import tariff — on goods from nations not deemed to be doing sufficient to suppress their emissions.
Such threats even register with China (the emissions of which exceed those of the EU and US combined), which has assured the world that it will achieve “carbon neutrality” by 2060. China’s assurances are somewhat hollow in view of having one million megawatts of coal power capacity (Australia has 25,000MW) with a further 200,000MW planned.
In contrast to fast-growing economies, Australia’s reduction in coal generator capacity has been under way for years. It stems not from a lack of competitiveness on the part of coal but as a result of regulations and direct support that subsidises wind and solar. These subsidies affect the profitability of coal plants by forcing them to run below capacity and operate stop-start. Growing nations in our part of the world — India, China, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia — have recognised the road to prosperity is cheap, dependable electricity and all have rapidly expanding coal-generating capacity.
Australia wastefully has spent much more than most other nations on measures targeted at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The ultimate test of this is per capita spending on wind and solar, where Australia has spent twice that of the next highest nations (US and Japan), three times as much as Germany and six times as much as China.
In discriminating against coal (where our domestic resources have no peers in quality and cost) Australian policy amounts to self-harm. It is actuated by a variety of factors. Originally the policies were to give a leg-up to renewables that were seen as potentially cost competitive. The lobbying power of renewable energy interests have augmented this. More recently we see added fear of being ostracised by the Western nations club as a result of the carbon emissions suppression orthodoxy.
Such dynamics strengthen the hand of domestic true believers in cataclysmic global warming. True believers and vested interests happily accept CSIRO fantasies that renewables are now cheaper than coal, while considering renewables subsidies to be essential.
The estimated cost of new actions announced by Scott Morrison this month comes on top of a plethora of support measures for renewables already in place. Such support costs $7bn a year in a wholesale electricity market worth under $12bn and a retail market worth only $30bn. On top of these costs is the $10bn Snowy 2.0 pump storage facility.
The Morrison government has not bought the fable of low-cost wind but, at least in part because of international pressure, it is doubling down on the penalties to coal that the renewable subsidies have brought. This includes the announcement of a further $1bn for the South Australian electricity grid, made unworkable by subsidised renewables, as well as additional support for the impossible economics of carbon capture and storage and hydrogen. The latest measures are icing a cake that government policies have already over-sugared.
For his part, Anthony Albanese has gone the full Sanjeev Gupta, chasing the mirage of green manufacturing. He has foreshadowed even greater subsidies for renewables, despite claiming them to be cheaper than coal, as a foundation for a resurrected manufacturing industry.
As a nation, we continue to sacrifice competitiveness and increased income levels to pursue wokeness. All this said, it has to be recognised that the outcome of a forced reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, if brought about, would have only a trivial effect on the climate. Global temperatures have been increasing for 150 years and it is only in the past 50 years that human emissions could have had any effect. Contrary to assertions, the deleterious effects sometimes mentioned have not taken place: there has been no increase in hurricanes, bushfires or other natural disasters, no rise in the oceans, the ice caps are not melting, polar bear communities are flourishing and, as all Australians will be aware, the dams are full when activists claimed this would never happen again.
We have a mix of genuine fears that mankind is irretrievably changing the world’s climate that no amount of evidence that this is not presenting serious threats will calm. We have businesses seeking to take advantage of this by seeking subsidies. And we have politics seeking to chisel out a prime role for itself in harnessing the world economy. These factors are a potent brew with drastic implications for a prosperous Australia. They also have wide-ranging geopolitical implications given the seemingly unstoppable growth of an aggressive China that, irrespective of its pledges, will not allow its wealth to be curtailed by adopting high-cost forms of energy.’https://stopthesethings.com/2021/04/26/last-man-standing-china-defies-bidens-climate-crusade-against-coal-fired-power/
God save the Queen for if God doesn’t the UK will end up with Charles and that’s not good!
‘While we have the Queen, she is a taproot into the ancient culture of the English-speaking peoples, a thousand years deep in monarchy and two thousand deep in faith; when she goes, the deracination will be swift.‘
Her successor, Charles ‘…does not want to be defender of ‘the faith’ but just ‘faith’, including no doubt a heartfelt eco-pantheism.Who knows what bits of the ancient coronation will be reworked and rewoked to honour global Gaia. He has already conscripted another solemn occasion to that cause: on Remembrance Day last year, our future monarch put on a poppy and spoke to the world about… the Great Reset!
This nakedly globalist, quasi-socialist scheme harnesses global panic about Covid and climate change and calls for revolution. The Great Reset is championed by all the usual suspects from the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, the mega corporations as well as celebrities like Prince Charles and Pope Francis.
Under the Great Reset, we are told by the official material, ‘You’ll own nothing. And you’ll be happy’. Further channelling Marx, it declares, ‘Capitalism as we know it, is dead’. And in a sideswipe at the bourgeois farmers of Australia, it tells us, ‘You will eat much less meat. An occasional treat, not a staple, for the good of the environment.’
Antonio Guterres, secretary-general of the United Nations and former socialist prime minister of Portugal, confirms that the UN’s manufactured panic over global warming is central to this globalist power grab. He says that ‘advancing the transition to net zero emissions’ is an essential ‘element of the Great Reset’.
Next on the video, up pops Prince Charles with poppy in place, warning us, ‘We are literally at the last hour and there is real urgency for action…. We need a shift in our economic model that places Nature, and our shift to net zero, at the heart of how we operate.’
‘Literally at the last hour’? This from the Prince of Whale-sized exaggerations who told us in 2009 that we have ‘just 96 months left to save the world’ from ‘irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse’. When that excitable hyperbole expired in 2017, His Royal Highness issued a shorter deadline ‘to keep climate change to survivable levels’. That new prophecy of doom expired in January just past.
If Charles were to become King, will he be merely the latest in a long line of monarchs who seek to impose economic burdens and restrictive laws on his subjects? That may not work out so well, given the first King Charles was beheaded in 1649 for attempting ‘to overthrow the rights and liberties of the people’. As Daniel Hannan writes, ‘The story of the English-speaking peoples is the story of how they imposed their will upon their rulers’. His splendid book, How we invented freedom, traces Anglo-Saxon people-power from the taming of King Æthelred in the 11th century to the barons bringing King John to heel in the 13th, through the Civil War (Charles I beheaded) and Glorious Revolution (James II exiled) and finally the American revolutionaries defying George III’s taxes in the 18th.
If our Charles were to be just another bad king in this line of bad kings, beheading is probably not an option but exile surely is.
I propose banishment to a Pacific island where he can watch the shoreline failing to submerge or to Antarctica to watch the sea-ice failing to decline or to the Arctic to watch the polar bears failing to perish.
Romans 1:19-25 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
Even since man was exited out of the Garden he has sought to replace the Creator with another god. Pantheism is such a way and the following is one example.
At Stanford University ‘Terry Root often goes to sleep at night wondering how she’ll be able to get up the next morning and do it all over again. Then the sun comes up and she forces herself out of bed. She might go for a run to release the pent-up anxiety. Sometimes she cries. Or she’ll commiserate with colleagues, sharing in and validating each other’s angst. What keeps Terry up at night aren’t the usual ailments; it’s not a tyrant boss or broken heart.
A senior fellow at Stanford’s Woods Institute for the Environment, Root has spent the past two decades unraveling the thread between climate change and the eventual mass extinctions of countless species of plants, animals — and, yes, humans. “That’s a tough, tough thing to cope with,” Root says in a weary, jagged voice. There’s more. When the gray-haired bird watcher shares her End of Days findings, she’s often met with personal attacks; naysayers hurl their disagreement and disdain, complete with name-calling and threats from politicians. But the absolute worst part of her job? We’re not listening. “It’s harder than hell to carry that,” says Root.’
‘And now there’s the website Is This How You Feel?, which publishes handwritten letters from climate scientists expressing their frustrations, fears and hopes. One professor writes, “It’s probably the first time I have ever been asked to say what I feel rather than what I think.” Another scrawls, “I feel exasperation and despair. … I feel vulnerable that by writing this letter I will expose myself to trolling and vitriol.” Joe Duggan, the mohawked Aussie with a nose ring and master’s degree in the growing field of science communications who manages the site, says he’s been shocked at how many responses he’s gotten in the mail: “There is a movement of scientists looking for new ways to connect; they’re emoting in ways they never have before,” he says.’
‘Elizabeth Allison turns off the lights. She instructs her students to stack one vertebra on top of the next until their spines are straight and long. Then to focus on the rhythm of their breath. In. And out. In. And out. Acknowledge any feelings or sensations that arise, then let them go. After 15 minutes she slowly guides them back into the present. Feet and hands begin to stir. Eyelids slowly make their way to full attention.
OK, that’s it. See you all next week — and don’t forget your homework assignment is due. After all, this is graduate-level course PAR 6079.
So much for that centuries-old hidden curriculum. From professors like Allison taking students through a guided meditation after a discussion on retreating rainforests to scientists signing up for workshops on compassion and communication to support groups for climatologists, human emotion has wedged itself into every step of the scientific method. Marilyn Cornelius, a Stanford-trained researcher, has found the best way to explore creative solutions for the planet’s woes is to meld behavioral science, biomimicry, meditation and design thinking. Now she works as a consultant, taking energy experts on wilderness retreats and teaching lab coats to connect with themselves and nature. “I made a decision to work on behavior change,” Cornelius says, “because it’s a positive way to work on the climate problem.”’https://www.ozy.com/the-new-and-the-next/its-the-end-of-the-world-how-do-you-feel/62757/?utm_term=OZY&utm_campaign=daily-dose&utm_content=Thursday_04.22.21&utm_source=Campaigner&utm_medium=email
Psalm 2:4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. 5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
The answer to this unbelief is John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
The world is as ‘NUTS’ as it is also anti-God! Before the world-wide flood God’s Word says in Genesis 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. After the flood God’s Word in Genesis 8:22 says While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease. Did you get that? According to God’s Word there will always be seedtime and harvest and the seasons! However, the unsaved, will not accept what God’s Word says and instead of reading and heeding THE BIBLE they would rather follow the words of men in their books. Consider the following.
‘In case you needed another reason to care about theclimate crisis, it has been found that pollution is causing human penises to shrink.
A leading epidemiologist and environmental scientist has published a book which examines the link between industrial chemicals and penile length.
Dr Shanna Swan’s book, Count Down, argues that our modern world is altering humans’ reproductive development and threatening the future of our species.
The book outlines how pollution is leading to higher rates of erectile dysfunction, fertility decline, and growing numbers of babies born with small penises. Though the headline fact about shrinkage may sound like a laughing matter, the research paints a bleak portrait of humanity’s longevity and ability to survive.
“In some parts of the world, the average twenty-something today is less fertile than her grandmother was at 35,” Dr Swan writes, dubbing the situation a “global existential crisis” in the book.
“Chemicals in our environment and unhealthy lifestyle practices in our modern world are disrupting our hormonal balance, causing various degrees of reproductive havoc.”
In spite of man’s fight against the Creator we are told in 2Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Mankind is not endagered due to climate change or an unhealthy environment but each man is in danger by his refusal to accept the Creator.
Hebrews 1:1-3 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.
The other day I was waiting outside the grocery store for my wife when I saw a Telsa do a U-turn at the roundabout. Now, that caught my eye as there are not many Telsas in our city of fifty thousand. However, in spite of the woke politicians it is doubtful many Telsas will not make it into many homes but horses and a carriage might. Anyway, in the US state of Nuts and Fruit ‘With half of the EV’s in the entire country being located in California, the recent 2021 California study may be a downer for the EV excitement as it shows that EV’s are driven half as much as internal combustion engine vehicles. The study illustrates that EV’s are generally second vehicles and not the primary workhorse vehicle for those few elites that can afford them.
Another challenge for the EV growth is the EV charging dependence on intermittent electricity from wind and solar. Adding EV charging loads onto the grid that is becoming more unstable is like putting salt in the wound. Power outages are now commonplace in California and Texas with more to follow throughout the nation as we adjust to a life dependent upon the time of day and the weather.
The highly educated, and well compensated EV owners that take advantage of State and Federal subsidies are sparingly using their “green” vehicles. With them setting the pace, how will the middle-income and those on fixed incomes be able to buy into the EV evolution?
The California EV market is looking for the less fortunate to belly up and join the EV train. That may prove to be a financial challenge with 45 percent of the California population – that’s a whopping 18 of the 40 million residents of the state – being Hispanic and African American – having average incomes of less than half of present EV owners. Additionally, California has the highest homeless population which is the fifth largest percentage of homeless (behind D.C., New York, and Hawaii, and Oregon), and has the second highest poverty rate.
Governor Newsom may have forgotten that whatever type of vehicles uses the roads, there are huge funding requirements for both California’s transportation infrastructure, and for the numerous environmental compliance programs that have come from the gas pumps. The state and federal subsidies help lower the price of EV’s, but EV owners do not pay any gas taxes for California’s almost 400,000 miles of roadways that are heavily dependent on road taxes from fuels that contribute more than $7 billion annually, the same tax base that will be diminishing in the decades ahead.
EV buyers hope to save from the cost of fuels as the all-in posted price of fuel at the pump includes non-transparent costs added to the actual fuel costs, such as: federal tax, excise tax, state tax, local sales tax, cap and trade program compliance costs, low-carbon fuel standard program compliance costs, and renewable fuels standard program compliance costs.
California’s Newsom may also have forgotten that his own Democrats overwhelmingly defeated Senator John Moorlach’s sponsored SB 1074 in 2018 “Disclosure of government-imposed costs” at the pump. The Supermajority Democrats in the legislature remain content with non-transparency of the numerous costs that are “dumped” onto the posted price of fuel, as they are content with keeping the public blissfully ignorant of the many taxes and regulatory costs that drive up prices, to the point that Californians continue to pay almost $1.00 more per gallon of fuel than the rest of the country. An Exxon gas station recently expressed their “transparency opinion” at the pump.
EV buyers beware that the “tax equalizer”, the “VMT” is coming. The Vehicle Mileage Tax (VMT) that has been discussed for years sounds like a logical idea – requiring the users of the highways to pay the fees to maintain those highways. The VMT tax will be needed to replace the $7 billion annually from fuel sales that will be diminishing in the decades ahead.
The challenge for a VMT will be how to implement that great idea which may require annual odometer readings! Lookout for Governor Newsom’s next Executive Order for a VMT requiring annual odometer readings so that each person pays their fair share to maintain the roads they are using to replace the diminishing fuel taxes!
In a recent Los Angeles Times article, citing Edmunds data, The number of battery-electric models available more than doubled from 2018 to 2019, but EV sales budged in the wrong direction. In response to the major efforts by manufacturers, the horrific EV sales data shows that only 325,000 electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles were sold in the U.S. in 2019, down from 349,000 in 2018. As mentioned previously, half of all EV’s in America are in one state – California. The rest of the country seems to be less enthralled with EV’s. Are EV carmakers driving off a cliff?”