Posted in: Climate. Tagged: Bible, Christianity, Climate, climate change, Climate Emergency, Climate Hoax, Climate Religion, Climate Scam, Climate Science, Faith, Genesis, Genesis 8:22, God, God/Creator, Instagram/Twitter/Facebook/YouTube, Life, News, Political, Politics, religion, Science, Solar, solar/wind, true science, truth, Twitter. Leave a comment
I sent the following to my state and Federal member. They are both climate scammers but there is always the hope they will come to their senses.
‘Promoting electric vehicles is incompatible with the development of wind and solar energy. Of course, politicians want both.‘ This is a must read article at https://blog.friendsofscience.org/2022/06/16/electric-vehicles-why-not-but-on-condition-of-having-electricity/
They would all be fired if working for a profit seeking company.
‘After a decade of denial and delay, Australia deserves a better future – one with cheaper power, more jobs, and less emissions,’ said Energy Minister Chris Bowen, in his last media release prior to gaining government.
Mr Bowen advocated replacing coal generators with wind and solar, with their shares of electricity supply to increase from 30 per cent to 82 per cent by 2030. To facilitate this, he proposed spending $80 billion on transmission, thereby quadrupling its present costs.
He also ridiculed a Morrison government that ‘does not believe renewables are the cheapest form of energy, or that the world’s climate emergency is Australia’s jobs opportunity’.
Following the May election – the ALP, along with Greens and Teals – received all their Christmas presents at once with an energy supply shortage where a third of the coal generators were out of action, bringing an eight-fold increase in wholesale prices.
After two weeks in office, the new government is now silent on its ludicrous claim that its replacement of coal with high-cost wind/solar generation will save households $275 a year.
The June 8 meeting of energy ministers endorsed the transmission part of the ALP plan only to see this undermined the very next day with the announcement of delays in a crucial element – the conversion of the Snowy Hydro system into a renewables-supportive pumped hydro facility.
Panicked by the tenfold increase in electricity prices, the energy ministers announced measures to patch up the wounds in the market caused by the very political controls they were amplifying. These included giving regulators powers to trade gas, with no consideration of the effects of this on other suppliers’ actions.
Energy ministers also announced replacing the existing ‘energy only’ market with a UK-style ‘capacity market’. Such a system ostensibly offers more funding to controllable supplies like those from coal, gas, and hydro. But it is less effective and more expensive than having decisions on supply reliability made by retailers who need to balance contracts between many different sources. Western Australia operates with a ‘capacity market’ and it has added costs without improving availability.
The recent bankruptcy of half of the UK’s energy retailers demonstrates that a capacity market does not give greater security.
Fundamental harm has been done to the energy system as a result of politicians meddling in commercial matters. The creation of the National Electricity Market and privatisations two decades ago has brought to Australia the world’s most efficient, lowest-cost electricity supply.
There are two reasons why it has since gone pear-shaped.
First, governments have subsidised wind and solar, making coal and gas generators unprofitable and forcing their closure. Governments made it clear that coal generators, which supply 60-70 per cent of our electricity, have a very limited social license to operate. They inhibited access to new coal supplies, accepted activists’ attacks on coal, and closed their eyes to policies of banks that refused loans and of insurance companies that refused cover.
Secondly, governments have foreclosed exploration and development of abundantly available gas in South Australia, Victoria, and New South Wales. Astonishingly, in face of consequent shortages, the Victorian energy minister, Lily D’Ambrosio, advocated diverting Queensland gas to Victoria. In response to criticism of this policy, Premier Daniel Andrews suggested it was only possible for Victoria to supply gas if we ‘frack up the joint’ which he claims (contrary to all the evidence) will harm our prime agricultural land. The state Liberal Party shares the same policy to the great detriment of the people the politicians supposedly represent.
The industry has been treated as the playground of politicians. They have compounded their own errors in subsidising renewables that undermine the whole system by funding the will-o’-the-wisp (which is hydrogen power) and by appointing activists to bloated regulatory agencies and to their own departments.
Creating the damage is easier than repairing it.
The subsidies to wind and solar will continue to poison efficient supply for many years to come. But as a start, governments must abandon all subsidies, free up regulatory restraints, and disengage from controls over retailers and generators. Efficient electricity supply, like that of groceries, telephony, and cars, requires market – not government – control. As has been demonstrated, the latter brings especially perverse outcomes when it seeks to specify particular technologies.
Rectifying the damage also requires restoring the social licence to build new coal power stations and nuclear power. This involves correcting an environment whereby financiers have joined regulators and activists in preventing new investment.
Government leadership is required to undo this damage, including by upholding laws that prevent trespass, abandoning requirements on firms to conform to concocted environmental pressures, and making all businesses aware that discrimination against energy suppliers is alien to government policy.
This will not be easy.
Ministerial statements demonstrate an ignorance in blaming the cause of the current crisis on gas and coal. Both Labor and Coalition politicians have, for the most part, listened to activists and subsidy-seekers and drunk the kool-ade that wind/solar is not only necessary to save humanity but is also cheaper. It seems the situation will need to deteriorate even further before there is a realistic chance of policy reversals.’https://www.spectator.com.au/2022/06/politicians-have-sabotaged-the-energy-market/
‘Mankind’s constant, consuming, and ceaseless primary need from the first day in Eden, has been to have enough food and water to keep his family alive. Additionally, man must have lodging, a source of income, and health care. Still, man’s biggest, most pressing, and constant need is food, including water.
And the food supply is being devastated by the ever-increasing population.
In 1906, Alfred Henry Lewis stated, “There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy.” Three days without food will often turn friend against friend, neighbor against neighbor, and in some cases, relative against relative. It will also turn decent people into criminals and, in some cases, turn well-bred people into cannibals.
No stable person will go berserk after not eating for three days, but when the fear of starvation is added, panic will soon follow.
In 1798, Thomas Malthus wrote that the population expands in times of plenty until there is not enough food (and other resources) to feed the people. A relentless struggle for food causes tremendous pressure and distress in a region. Even in difficult times, the drive for “a virtuous attachment” (marriage) is so strong that the problem will worsen with additional children making any permanent improvement of the poor impossible. His basic premise was when times are good, the population increases, and the increase tends to consume resources, making it difficult for the less fortunate.
Malthusianism is in our world today, often with missionary zeal, to cut the population by prohibiting marriage, limiting family size, and even using the radical schemes of forced abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia. Even aborting handicapped babies after their birth and killing off those born without the possibility of a “quality life.”
Malthus posited that since population growth will always outrun the food supply, any improvement of humankind is impossible unless harsh limits on reproduction are imposed. He suggested late marriages and “moral restraint” (abstinence), wars, and disease would help keep a balance between the population and the food supply. Others added birth control; however, Malthus was an English preacher and did not recommend birth control.
When favorable weather produces abundant crops, the population is generally healthy and happy. They tend to keep having children in abundance. We are told the tendency toward marriage is a constant struggle and hinders any improvement in the condition of the poor. Therefore, the population increases, causing distress and pressure for additional food and other resources. Malthus considered society doomed to famine, disease, poverty, misery, and death; however, later marriages, sexual abstinence, and celibacy would help mitigate the suffering of the poor.
He lived in the mid-1700s and did not see the Industrial Revolution galloping his way from 1760 to about 1840. He did not anticipate machines run by steam, water, air, or electricity doing the work of scores of men. He also failed to see the rise of contraceptives that permitted families to have two or three children instead of five or six—or more.
Hunger, disease, and war decrease the population requiring less food; and birth control, postponement of marriage, and celibacy further help to keep the world in balance.
He thought natural causes such as accidents, old age, famine, and “vice,” including infanticide, murder, contraception, and homosexuality, could stop excessive population growth. But he didn’t have any hope of escaping massive famine.
When good times continue and the population increases, it threatens everyone; consequently, since more people live longer, the elderly, handicapped, and unproductive are “useless eaters.”
The famines in India (which happened about every ten years for decades) were necessary to keep the “excess” population in check. Officials even prohibited private charities from taking food into famine-stricken areas! The Malthusian theory also “influenced British policies in Ireland during the 1840s, in which relief measures during the Irish Potato Famine (1845-1849) were neglected, and mass starvation was seen as a natural and inevitable consequence of the island’s supposed over-population.”
Enter the Germans. In 1920, a world-shaking book was published by Germans Karl Binding and Dr. Alfred Hoche with the English title, Permission to Destroy Life Devoid of Value or Permitting the Destruction of Life Unworthy of Life. It addressed the legal relationship between suicide and euthanasia and then extended it to killing the mentally ill. The book suggested that killing a patient was justifiable when it led to other lives being saved, mainly when the patient in question was of no value to themselves or society. The book advocates killing the mentally ill or the intellectually dead, especially since such people were a drain on society.
The expression “life unworthy of life,” which appeared first in this book, was essential to Nazi ideology. The two authors, a lawyer, and a physician, were not political and were not National Socialists. They were academics dealing with a very delicate subject. Does the state have the right to kill some people for the good of many? Does the state have a right to decide when a life is not productive?
That question has not been answered, in my opinion.
Food or the lack of it is a significant issue in our time because if not enough food is available, then everything comes down. I have never seen such an emphasis on food and its potential unavailability. It is no longer only an issue for the preppies, but for everyone since everyone eats.
People are becoming more aware of their total dependence on others for that which is indispensable—food. Past generations would have been horrified of such reliance.
With the absence of food, anarchy prevails, followed by famine. Shortage of food is one thing, but the lack of food is a disaster. Paul Lee Tan gave a peasant’s description of the Russian Famine from 1932 to 1933. “We’ve eaten everything we could lay our hands on—cats, dogs, field-mice, birds. When it’s light tomorrow you will see the trees stripped of bark…And the horse manure has been eaten. Sometimes there are whole grains in it.”
Americans have little experience with food shortage on a national scale and no examples of massive starvation in our country.
No longer is a food shortage, food interruption, and food unavailability discussed only by the fringe groups, but highly placed officials and politicians are concerned. President Biden said of the food shortage, “Yes, it’s gonna be real.” Food prices are at their highest since records began 60 years ago.
That’s one time Biden got it right.
The concern is already here, and it will worsen as grocery stores run out of major items early in the day, then they will no longer have those items at all. Then, many people will go from anxious to apprehension to anarchy—the nine meals have been missed. It is one thing to be fearful of food shortages but another to have a fear of starvation, then the fact starvation.
It will get super serious as some borderline people become irresponsible. Some parents will take what they want to feed their children. The cities would become unlivable as food riots occur as otherwise decent people use force to take what they feel they need—if not deserve. Understand this is not speculation. It has always happened in all societies. As seen before, truckers would refuse to enter the rioting cities, further exacerbating the problem.
Henry Kissinger declared in The Final Days, “Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people.” In a 1974 National Security Memo, he also declared, “Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the third world, because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries.”
If you don’t think many public officials will promote plans to diminish, deplete, and destroy elements of a population to keep order (and their jobs), you live in an alternate universe. And you don’t know history.
Our Great Food Disaster has already started.
The Great Famine was one of the great disasters of human history. The world-class disaster started when a physical chill settled on Europeans of the 14th century. The Baltic Sea froze twice, followed by unseasonably cold years of gradually shorter growing seasons that meant disaster. Rain started in 1315 and continued for 7 years, especially in the summers. Crop failures lasted through 1316 until the summer harvest in 1317.
In 1315, it rained so much, people talked of Noah’s flood. Crops failed, and people all over Europe died of starvation. People began to harvest wild edible roots, grasses, nuts, and bark in the forests. They ate their own children, and people in Poland took down hanged men from the scaffold and ate them. Food scarcity prompted prison inmates to kill new inmates and “devoured them half alive.” The time was conspicuous for severe crime levels, rampage, disease, mass death, cannibalism , and infanticide.
Almost everyone was hungry since 95% of the population consisted of peasants who had no reserve food supplies and no money to purchase if any were available for sale. During this time, people did not think or act rationally. They butchered their draft animals and ate their seed grain, guaranteeing continued famine. Many abandoned their children, yet some elderly people chose not to eat to ensure food for the young.
During this period, life expectancy was shockingly low. During the Great Famine and the Plague, it was a little under 30 years, and between 1348 and 1375, life expectancy was only 17 years! Lack of food and a deadly plague will do that to a population.
All that was area-wide, including a few nations; however, some experts tell us we are facing a world famine, first in Africa, Bangladesh, South American nations, Middle East nations, and China, then Europe and the United States.
And those populations are all headed in your direction!
Governments and do-good organizations will do something even if it is wrong. The World Economic Forum (WEF) just finished its annual conference in Davos, Switzerland, expressing concern about the world’s future because of the reliance on meat in our diets. They recommend everyone swear an oath to veganism and eat seaweed, algae, cacti, and avocado seeds. Gamblers can safely bet the farm that the billionaires in Davos did not eat algae.
God warns us in I Timothy 4:3 in the last days men would forbid the eating of meat and abstaining from marriage!
Suppose you’re stranded on a leaking lifeboat in the middle of the ocean with 5 other people. The problem is the boat will only hold 4, so two passengers must jump overboard or be thrown overboard. One passenger is CEO of a major corporation; another is a surgeon skilled in saving helpless children; another is Stacey Abrams, pretender to the Georgia Governor’s office; another is a glib college student, and an unemployed person recently fired and now waiting for the results of a recent job application. The boat is leaking badly. Two of you have to go. Whom do you throw overboard? I don’t think the unemployed man has to worry about his job application, nor will the college student have to worry about his student loans. Both are expendable.
The obvious point is people have different values in today’s world, but no person or board or any political entity has the authority to decide on a person’s worth.
But then, if Stacey would choose to do the manly thing and jump overboard, that would solve the theoretical problem. However, the food problem is not theoretical. And Stacey’s decision, like all her decisions, is totally irrelevant.
Today, leaders who allegedly are levelheaded, honest, informed, and concerned say starvation is ahead, first in third world nations then here.
Have you planted your garden yet?’https://donboys.cstnews.com/whoever-controls-the-food-controls-the-world
‘This week, the global elites descended on Davos, Switzerland for their annual pow-wow and, as always, they used the occasion to promote their agenda for centralisation and control.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) event was once again a who’s who of the global elite, with business leaders, political figures, and celebrities all rubbing shoulders.
The WEF founder Klaus Schwab opened the event by declaring that the future will be “built” by those in attendance at Davos — a clear sign that these elites see themselves as the architects of the future, with the rest of us just going along for the ride.
Australia’s taxpayer-funded e-Safety Commissioner then suggested that human rights online should be “recalibrated”, particularly when it came to free speech.
The CEO of YouTube also spoke about censoring people.
You’d expect the Davos crowd to want to “recalibrate” our right to free speech. They only want free speech to suit the needs of the elite and censor any dissenting opinions that don’t fit their narrative.
J. Michael Evans, president of the Chinese Communist Party-linked Alibaba Group boasted to the elites of the development of a carbon footprint tracker by his company:
“We’re developing, through technology, an ability for consumers to measure their whole carbon footprint. What does that mean? Where they are traveling. How they are traveling. What are they eating. What they are consuming on the platform. We don’t have it operational yet, but this is something that we’re working on.”
Can you imagine such a device in the hands of extreme green zealots that are now ensconced in government?
A panel of elite bankers then told the forum that a centralised digital currency was but five years away. Last year, the British Government and the Bank of England were mulling over the idea of making such centralised digital currencies programmable, meaning the issuer of the funds could determine what you spend your money on, where you spend it and how much you spend.
And, of course, there was a lot of finger-wagging about climate change at Davos, with the irony somehow lost on the many attendees who flew in on their private jets to attend the Swiss talkfest about lecturing us mere mortals about the need to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions.
The spoof Twitter account World Ecommunist Forum perfectly summed up the hypocrisy with this tweet:
Many alternative media journalists and commentators who turned up in Davos were accosted by police who — both frighteningly and bizarrely — wore a badge declaring themselves the “World Economic Forum Police”. Fact checkers tried to cover it up by claiming the badge was merely commemorative but you can be the judge looking at this photo of the badge on a police officer who detained independent reporter Jack Posobiec.
Security was immensely beefed up for the global elite’s version of Woodstock with a 5,000 military personnel on duty and a no-fly zone in force.
The theme of Davos 2022 was supposed to be “Working Together, Restoring Trust”. Obviously they were working on control. But there can no trusting this crowd.’ https://nationfirst.substack.com/p/exposed-what-the-globalists-did-this?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjo0MjUyOTI1MiwiXyI6ImNmZWY0IiwiaWF0IjoxNjUzNzE2NzgyLCJleHAiOjE2NTM3MjAzODIsImlzcyI6InB1Yi00NTQxODIiLCJzdWIiOiJwb3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0.XSC-5nTnHs3WO0DnrpHb3kdcotgn5XaoblBN-RStmyc&s=r