What Happened to the Armchair Environmentalists and Climate Alarmists When the Hurricanes Hit?

Guest Opinion: Dr. Tim Ball

There are two ways to get ahead. Pull yourself up or push other people down. There are few better exponents of the pushdown option than the environmental groups and their supporters. They are, for the most part, urban guerrillas, useless people who do little or nothing except undermine the lives of others. They are the green bullies who tell others how to live, yet, hypocritically, live in similar lifestyles. Of course, in the case of Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio, they live energy gobbling lifestyles beyond the imagination of those they condemn. This includes going to the point where they destroy people’s lives, economies, and communities. Trump talks about the loss of businesses across the US but needs to note that much is due to the work of environmentalists and politicians at all levels.

Where was Greenpeace during the recent hurricanes? I went to the American Greenpeace web page to find out what they were doing to assist people afflicted by the recent hurricanes. Their US web site says nothing about help. I thought a tag that read “What We’re Doing” would list places where you could donate, plans to send supplies and other rescue efforts. All it did was list six things such as “Fighting Global Warming” and “Saving the Arctic.” The only request about paying was a headline under a picture of an ExxonMobil storage tank that read, “Make fossil fuel companies pay for hurricane destruction.” This implies they believe that human CO2 mostly created by burning fossil fuels is responsible for the hurricanes. They don’t present any evidence to support this claim. Of course, they can’t present evidence because it doesn’t exist.

The web site expects you to send them money for doing nothing to help the people affected. Instead, they point fingers from their urban armchairs at the energy companies that provided the fuel for the people to head down the highway away from danger. While real, employed, hard-working people were doing remarkable things to save lives and help others, Greenpeace asked for money to undermine their economy and further destroy their lives. The problem is Greenpeace is not alone. Most environmental groups, do little more than collect amounts of money, so much of which goes to further destroy jobs and the economy.

They are aided and abetted by political leaders at all levels and of all stripes. These politicians fulfill H.L. Mencken’s observation that,

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins all of them imaginary.

Notice that the only leader to act decisively and effectively was the White House. All the critics could do was make fun of Melania’s shoes, but they even got that story wrong. A real measure of the White House success was that there were virtually no stories about the impact of the hurricane or of people who suffered any more than was necessary. This was because they would have to report how successful the effort was.

Trump is one of the few leaders to see the fraud that was the Paris Climate Agreement. He is also pulling the plug on all the wasteful and unnecessary expenditures made by other politicians who want to appear good to groups like Greenpeace. The following is a classic example of the ignorance, arrogance, and wrong thinking in a recent report about the preparedness of US urban areas for global warming.

In an article titled “The Best US Cities to Live in to Escape the Worst Effects of Climate Change” the author writes.

“The bottom line is it’s going to be bad everywhere,” Bruce Riordan, the director of the Climate Readiness Institute at the University of California Berkeley, told Business Insider. “It’s a matter of who gets organized around this.” Still, there are some cities with a better chance of surviving the onslaught of a warmer planet, Vivek Shandas, an urban-planning professor at Portland State University, told Business Insider. “There are places that might at least temper the effects of climate change,” he said.


The Pacific Northwest is the best overall US region for escaping the brunt of climate change, Shandas said. Cities in the area aren’t perfect — “they have other challenges,” he said, but added that “their infrastructure tends to be newer and more resilient to major shocks.” That’s is key when it comes to coping with heat and rising water. Seattle is one of the most “well-positioned” of these cities, Shandas said.


Portland was the first US city to come up with a plan to prepare for climate change. The city’s historic Climate Action Plan, created in 1993, is a set of policies and initiatives aimed at slashing the city’s carbon emissions. The goal is to cut them 40% by 2030 and 80% by 2050.

I assume Seattle is prepared for sea level rise better than Denver or they are prepared for a stampede from California’s the heat increases there. These comments only bear consideration because they are so ignorant.

I learned a great deal about these urban guerrillas over forty years of working with primary producers like farmers, foresters, and fishermen. No, I won’t be politically correct and call them fishers. Sensible, intelligent, people know it is an inclusive generalist term. My experience is that few groups, especially those in urban areas know or care more about the environment and climate. It affects their daily lives, their homes, children, and income.

Trump talks about the Washington Swamp, but for most rural primary producers every urban area is an ungrateful, ignorant, swamp. We can define the Washington Beltway as the distance that swamp dwellers can see. Maurice Strong knew what he was doing when he set up the global warming deception through the bureaucrats who live in the swamp. The distortions this creates are evident in the weather forecasts. On a regular basis, you hear forecasts offering sunshine and heat when the crops and farmers need cool and rain. It occurred this summer when the entire focus was on the plight of the urbanites forced to flee the hurricanes. Meanwhile, few know about the drought that has affected the crops and everything else in the north-central US. I recall one summer in Manitoba Canada when urban dwellers complained bitterly about the weather. It was sunny all week and rained every weekend jokes appeared that asked, “What do you call it after two days of rain?” Answer, “Monday.” “What do you call it if it rains on Monday?” Answer; “A long weekend.” Farmers loved the summer as they could work in the fields and spend the weekends with their families as the rain nourished their crops.

Urbanites criticize primary producers for changing and damaging the environment, but the only place on Earth was a human-induced warming is attributable and measurable is in the urban heat island effect (UHIE). They blame the rural people for pollution and overuse of chemicals. The problem is the highest levels of pollution and concentration of waste are in the urban areas, and immediate surrounding farmlands used as landfills and hazardous waste dumps in classic, not in my backyard (NIMBY) exploitation. In fact, in most regions farmers are not replacing the chemicals they take from the ground and send to the urbanites as food. Les Henry, a Saskatchewan soil specialist, told me that across the Canadian Prairies they had not replaced 50 percent of the nitrogen taken from the soil. Part of the reason is cost, but a major part is a false concern created by urbanites accusing them of using too many chemicals.

The biggest hypocrisy is that urban areas only developed because the rural areas produced a surplus of food. It is the origin of the word civilization, but now, as they become detached from the production process they become less civilized. As we became urbanized, most people forgot that the society only exists because of that surplus. Many years ago, I coined the phrase that “there are no farms in the city, but no city without farms.”

In the year 2000, I was speaking to approximately 1000 farmers in Lloydminster on the Saskatchewan/Alberta border. Their concern was the drought decimating their crops, and forcing many to slaughter cattle they could no longer support. Politicians and urbanites were not listening, or even aware of their plight. I pointed out that about 60 percent of the people in Toronto were not even born in Canada. They represented a bigger vote pool than most of the farmers on the Prairies. It is another measure of the genius of the US Founding Fathers who recognized these inequities and created the Electoral College. Canada is still coping with the monarchical system that puts all the power in the urban areas.

One farmer got up and asked me what I thought they should do. I said the problem requires a solution they would never consider because of who they are and what makes them cope. They must get together and announce they are not planting a crop or sending any animals or byproducts to the urban areas. The irony is society considers farmers conservative, but they are the biggest risk takers. Every time they plant a crop they are at the mercy of the vagaries of weather and nature.

In 1786 Thomas Jefferson expressed the difference between primary producers and the urban dweller.

“An industrious farmer occupies a more dignified place in the scale of beings, whether moral or political, than a lazy lounger, valuing himself or his family, too proud to work, and drawing out a miserable existence by eating on that surplus of other men’s labor which is the sacred fund of the helpless poor.”

Jefferson’s description is almost identical to the derogatory dictionary definition of a parasite.

“• derogatory a person who habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return.”

I watched and was directly involved with what happens when Greenpeace target an issue they deem unacceptable. One of the jobs we did in anti-submarine patrol out of Summerside, Prince Edward Island, was monitoring the annual seal hunt in the Gulf of St Lawrence. This hunt for seals for food and clothing is centuries old, an extremely dangerous and miserable job for extremely low pay. It was the sole source of income for hundreds of the people in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The idea is to get your ship locked in the ice then do daily hunts across the ice. Greenpeace decided this had to stop and began a campaign with staged videos of the hunting method designed to not mar the skin. Besides depriving a hunt that was carefully monitored and provided basic livelihoods, they did more harm than good. For example, they went out on the ice and sprayed green dye spots on the seals to make the pelt worthless. The problem is this destroyed the seal’s camouflage. Seagulls swooped in and killed them by pecking their eyes out. I watched Orca (Killer whales) come up under the ice and break through to capture seals.

The Newfoundlanders responded with great skill and humor as ordinary working people do. Greenpeace claimed they were defending the seals. The Newfoundlanders said the seals ate the Cod and somebody needed to defend the Cod. They formed a group called Codpiece. To further amplify their focus on the hunt, Greenpeace were part of arranging a visit from Brigitte Bardot to witness first-hand what was happening. Newfoundlanders offered to help in their friendly way. Witness what they did when aircraft landed there during 9/11. They said Ms. Bardot needed appropriate clothing for the cold, wet and slippery conditions involved. Only after she came back off the ice did they inform her that the boots and clothing were made from sealskins.

I used to ask where the Sierra Club was when the forest fires were burning? Similarly, I asked where was Greenpeace when the hurricanes hit? Indeed, where are any of the parasitic environmentalists when disasters hit? They are usually sitting in their armchairs blaming those dealing with the problem and planning more destruction. But, based on what I witnessed when they became involved, it is better they stay home. What we need to do, like the people of Newfoundland and Labrador is expose and ridicule their misinformation, lack of understanding, and document the enormous damage they do to people’s economies and lives, by pushing other people down.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 30, 2017 7:24 am

They are all a tad out of control….
Antifa is planning a new round of nationwide riots on November 4 as part of a plot to start a “civil war” that will lead to the overthrow of the Trump administration.
Far-left militants plan to “gather in the streets and public squares of cities and towns across this country” in the hope of building momentum for civil unrest that leads to nothing less than domestic regime change.

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  Latitude
September 30, 2017 8:47 am

“…..Antifa is planning a new round of nationwide riots on November 4 as part of a plot to start a “civil war” that will lead to the overthrow of the Trump administration…..”.
Definition of treason:
1 :the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign’s family.

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 10:58 am

That “civil war” has been years in the making and both sides seem very comfortable with the idea. Right wing sites are filled with people saying “bring it” and left wing sites are filled with people saying “We’re coming”. The comments indicate these people are very, very eager for this. I don’t think Trump being president is anything but a coincidence. Had Hillary been elected, we’d be going there anyway. The division of America started decades agao, probably in the 60’s and Obama gave it that last big push.
If only climate change was our biggest problem as the media claims.

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 11:51 am

what do you define as right wing?

Bryan A
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 11:54 am

Need to get signage in every news clip from devastation site broadcast footage asking “Where’s the help from _______________?”
Sierra Club

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 1:13 pm

HotScot: Sites that claim to be conservative, even if they are not, people who think for themselves at least once in a while, people who loved Reagan. Technically, people who like JFK fall int that catagory—that was before the Left went socialist full on. That’s the best I can do. Most definitions are all blurred and the goals of both sides are the pretty much the same—to wipe out the opposition, however they define it, and own the country. Definitions can be used against one’s own followers, too. Very fluid.

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 1:38 pm

“The division of America started decades ago, probably in the 60’s and Obama gave it that last big push.”
That’s right, Sheri.
The Vietnam war was the first time that reporters took the side of the Left in a big, public way, and used propaganda and lies to push the anti-war narrative and divide the American nation.
Before the Vietnam war, the MSM (a much smaller MSM than now) reported the news fairly straight. No huge bias towards either Left or Right, although they were pro-Kennedy and anti-Nixon during the 1960 elections, but their criticisms of Nixon were very mild compared to today (they made fun of Nixon sweating profusely on camera during one of the debates), but they didn’t make up lies about Nixon to harm him, like they are doing today against Trump.
Kennedy won the election that year. Both Kennedy and Nixon were in support of the war in South Vietnam, fearing a communist “domino effect” that might spread to the whole of Southeast Asia and even India, if something wasn’t done to stop it. Communism, at that time, was on the march all over the globe.
The Left and the MSM have never looked back after the Vietnam war, and have made demonizing the Right as their main focus of attention, in order to gain and keep political power.
And they have been doing this “propaganda and lies” against the Right ever since, culminating in the flood of lies being put forth by the MSM today, in order to demonize Trump, and the Right in general.
I actually went to Vietnam because of the lies put out by the MSM. According to the MSM, the American military was barely hanging on by a thread in South Vietnam, and getting beaten at every turn, when they fought against what the MSM described as “the toughest soldiers in the world”, the North Vietnamese and South Vietnamese Viet Cong communists. They called them that, as a method of discouraging Americans and to make Americans give up on the war. All the MSM reporting was focused on this goal throughout the war and continues to this day. Lies and propaganda are legitimate tools as far as the American Left is concerned.
I haven’t seen one Vietnam documentary I would consider even half-way accurate. I haven’t seen the new 10-part series on Vietnam that was recently broadcase on tv yet, but I’m sure that when I do, I will be disapponted in the accuracy of the reporting. If I’m not, it would be the first time.
Remember, the Left owns most of the media, so don’t expect a fair accounting of the Vietnam war from them. If it were a fair accounting, it would be an indictment of the anti-war Left and the MSM, and they can’t have that, so they continue to lie about the Vietnam war all these years later.
I was in the Army, stationed in Wildflecken, Germany, at this time, and I read these daily dire reports of failure by the U.S. in South Vietnam, and said to myself, this can’t be true, because if it were true, then my whole worldview was wrong, so I had to go see for myself because I had to know. So I volunteered to go to South Vietnam in May 1968.
When I got to South Vietnam, I found out that they were all lies and anti-war propaganda. The “toughest soldiers in the world’ were the American troops who kicked the hell out of the North Vietnamese troops and the Viet Cong, throughout the war. My worldview was the correct worldview after all.
General Giap, the Supreme Commander of the North Vietnamese military, and the architect of the war strategy, told a reporter after the war, that the American troops won just about every battle in South Vietnam, but that didn’t matter because North Vietnam had the American anti-war Left and the MSM on their side. He was exactly right.
American troops defeated the North Vietnamese troops and the North Vietnamese finally came to the bargaining table, and after the Peace Accord was signed, South Vietnam was still there as a viable nation with a bright future ahead of it.
Then the anit-war Left in the U.S. Congress just threw away all that blood, sweat, and tears expended in Vietnam, by refusing to come to South Vietnam’s aid after North Vietnam violated the Peace Agreement and again attacked South Vietnam in 1975.
The Left controlled Congress in those days, and it was right after Nixon had resigned over Watergate, so the Left felt imboldened and just turned their backs on South Vietnam and threw them to the wolves. Like Obama did to the Iraqis in 2011. In both cases, millions of innocent people were killed and displaced from their homes as a result.
What is so ironic is that this last attack by North Vietnam in 1975, started out with them sending a large proportion of their fighting forces into northern, South Vietnam, to the point that they created gridlock with every highway, road, and trail jam-packed with North Vietnamese troops and military equipment frozen in place, and unable to move forward or backward, and they were sitting ducks for American B-52 bombers out of Guam.
The B-52’s could have spent about a week or two carpet bombing the stalled North Vietnamese forces and would have for all intents and purposes, wiped them out where they sat, and the war would have been over and North Vietnam would have been in very dire straights with most of their military destroyed.
It would only have taken a short time (hours) to get the B-52’s over the enemy, but the American Left refused to come to the aid of South Vietnam, even though they were legally and morally obligated to do so.
My natural skepticism sent me to Vietnam. I found out that the MSM had been lying all along (like today) and that the MSM was biased, and were not above lying to push this political objective of getting the U.S. out of Vietnam.
Up until then, I thought the MSM was telling it straight but I found out otherwise when I saw it for myself. I have been on a one-man crusade against the Left and especially the MSM, ever since.
I know how dangerous their lies really are to our society and to our allies in the world. In other words, the Left and the MSM, and their lies, put U.S. national security at risk every day because they lie about the true situation.
American Leftists are incapable of defending U.S. national interests. They have proven it time after time, Obama being the latest example of the delusional thinking taking place in Leftist’s minds. The Iraq war was won, then Obama sat there and twiddled his thumbs while the Islamic Terror Army attacked and gained in strength and territory every day, displacing and killing millions of innocent people in the process. Obama acted like an innocent bystander and never took any serious measures to stop the terroirsts. It was almost like he was on the terrorists side, not our side.
So the big divisions in the U.S. did start during the Vietnam war, and the Left continues to divide us to this very day, epitomized again by Barack Obama and his racebaiting and identity politics.
One bright spot is the public is on to the MSM now. They know they are a bunch of partisan, political liars. The Left and the MSM still have millions of people fooled, but there are millions more who are no longer fooled, Trump’s election demostrates this.
We should all get down on our knees and thank God that Trump got into Office. Only a person like him, vulgar and brash as he is, could take on the Left and the MSM successfully and win this battle. If he wins, we all win. We all need to stand up and fight the false narratives and distorted realities put out by the Left and the MSM, if we value our personal freedoms.

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 2:42 pm

It’s NOT the Constitutional definition of Treason, which is the only one that counts.
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”
You will find NO US court willing to entertain a treason indictment against these antifa morons. Maybe indictments for inciting immediate violence, engaging in actual violence or the like, but not “treason”.

Ron Long
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 3:52 pm

Antifa won’t be causing trouble in Reno. TA, correct you are about the MSM and VietNam reporting. Thank you for your service. I was in VietNam in 1969. There essentially were no Viet Cong, it was all North Vietnamese Army and some Chinese advisors. The MSM has stayed far left ever after. If you think CNN is biased, tune into CNN International. It looks like CNN INT is providing talking points to not only the global warming crowd but also ISIS, North Korea, and EU. Why do they do this? Business. They have identified a niche for themselves and they will ride thar train to the end of the tracks. Global Warming? An easy sell to their followers because it is evil Americans and their SUV’s causing the problem. Reality? Inconvinient!

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 6:09 pm

Wow, TA you hit the nail on the head. I was in Vietnam in 1968-1969.
If you want to hear what a true conservative is (a constitutional conservative),
listen to this podcast from the Mark Levin Show:
click on 9/28/17, the early commercials are zapped. You only have to listen to the 1st 10-15 minutes of it to get the gist of it…more if you want to learn more…

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 6:31 pm

And thanks for creating common sense paragraphs so that I could read the whole thing. Some make one giant paragraph when posting, and I automatically skip over those…just sayin…

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
October 1, 2017 7:57 pm

Ron Long wrote: “TA, correct you are about the MSM and VietNam reporting. Thank you for your service. I was in VietNam in 1969. There essentially were no Viet Cong, it was all North Vietnamese Army and some Chinese advisors.”
And thank *you* for *your* service, Ron. 🙂 I was there from May 1968 to Dec. 1969.
The Viet Cong screwed up badly! They must have been reading American anti-war propaganda reporting, which kept saying the U.S. was on the ropes in South Vietnam, and about to be kicked out of the country in defeat by the communists. The American anti-war Left did this in an effort to demoralize the American public and get them to give up on the war.
The North Vietnamese and the South Vietnamese Viet Cong communists launched the country-wide Tet Offensive in Feb. 1968, where they simultaneously attacked just about every city and town in South Vietnam. The biggest attack of the entire war.
Newspaper reports of this huge Tet Offensive attack by North Vietnam was the source of the dire predictions of how the war was going, that I kept reading over in Germany.
According to the propaganda, the U.S. was getting its butt kicked, and that’s what I questioned, and what caused me to go and see for myself.
The Viet Cong apparently believed all this propaganda, and were certain of their victory over the Americans, and so they came out of hiding for the first time during the war.
Before this big attack, the Viet Cong remained hidden among the South Vietnamese population and operated like terrorists do today with hit and run attacks, and then they would go back into hiding until the next attack.
But they thought they were going to win this Tet battle and so they would no longer need to remain anonymous. When they finally came out of hiding American troops decimated them to the point that they were no longer a viable fighting force, and it remained that way until the end.
The Tet Offensive turned out to be a huge defeat for the North Vietnamese. After it became clear to the public that they had been beaten badly, the North Vietnamese thought they needed to prove they were still a viable force, and launched a smaller country-wide attack which was called “mini-Tet” in May 1968.
This second attack was much less potent than the first and again the North Vietnamese were beaten badly by American troops. They lost every battle but you couldn’t tell it by reading the American anti-war MSM.
Those Viet Cong messed up bigtime believing all that anti-war propaganda, came out of hiding, and were wiped out by American troops. That’s what they get for believing the American anti-war Left and the MSM.
Yeah, they thought they were going to win this one. I guess they didn’t realize they were going up against the “toughest troops in the world”: The Americans.

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
October 1, 2017 8:03 pm

J. Philip Peterson wrote:
“Wow, TA you hit the nail on the head. I was in Vietnam in 1968-1969.”
And thanks for *your* service, J. Philip. 🙂

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
October 1, 2017 8:07 pm

And thanks for creating common sense paragraphs so that I could read the whole thing.”
Yes, I make an effort to make it readable. Huge paragraphs are a definite turnoff to a lot of people.

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
October 2, 2017 11:55 am

Well, I watched the first two episodes of the new tv series about the Vietnam war and it looks like the same old anti-war propaganda to me.
In episode two they start out by implying the U.S. had no idea what it was doing in South Vietnam and the South Vietnamese did not want the U.S. there to begin with, and wanted to be reunited with North Vietnam. This is classic Vietnam anti-war propaganda, and it’s not true.
The South Vietnamese ran *away* from the North Vietnamese, not to them. And the South Vietnamese today treat American war veterans like they are royalty. Even the North Vietnamese treat returning Americans well.
The South Vietnamese knew Americans were there to help them and appreciated it. And still do.
And the propaganda said that the South Vietnamese government was corrupt and did not deserve America’s support. There *was* corruption in the South Vietamese government but it was no different than any other Southeast Asian nation which were equally corrupt.
The American presence in South Vietnam kept the corrupt government officials in line, and the South Vietnamese were better off for it. And there were many South Vietnamese government officials who were *not* corrupt. Of course, the anti-war Left concentrated only on the bad things.
I only watched about 20 minutes of episode two and that’s what I got from it. The main theme is the U.S. intervention was doomed from the beginning, which is what they have been saying from the beginning.
There was also praise for some prominent Leftwing propagandist reporters, claiming *they* told the truth about Vietnam and how bad it was, while other, lesser reporters were reporting favorably on it.
It all sounds like the anti-Vietnam-war rhetoric the American Left has been putting out since the war began.
I suppose I will watch the rest of the series, although I know it will make me angry.
I ought to get a transcript and set about rebutting every propaganda point they make.
If you want a book that tells the truth about the Vietnam war, go get “Stolen Valor : How the Vietnam Generation Was Robbed of Its Heroes and Its History”.
Going by the new Vietnam war series, it looks the Vietnam Generation is still being Robbed of Its Heroes and Its History”.

Reply to  Latitude
September 30, 2017 12:10 pm

Not surprising at all that these fascists call themselves anti-fascist. They probably also want virtue signaling dimwits to identify them as “liberal” and “progressive” too.
Yeah, you f-wits, Stalinism is really cool, liberal and progressive, yay.

Reply to  philincalifornia
September 30, 2017 2:08 pm

According to them, anyone to the right of socilism, is fascism.
Despite the fact that fascism is actually of form of socialism.
For them it’s become a catchall phrase for anyone they dislike.

Richard Bell
Reply to  philincalifornia
September 30, 2017 4:20 pm

Can anyone explain how a political spectrum defined by one form of totalitarian authoritarianism on the far left and an only slightly different form of totalitarian authoritarianism on the far right has any room for western parliamentary democracies between the two “extremes”?
All that I can think of is that calling fascism a far right ideology is a deception so when the fascists start their coup by pulling the state to the left, all of the socialists will help them drag the state as far as Fascism and the socialists will be surprised when they are rounded up.

Reply to  Richard Bell
September 30, 2017 5:08 pm

Fascists, Socialists and Communists are all Left wing authoritarian/totalitarian regimes.
The fact that they all tend to virulently hate each other is irrelevant, in many cases the more similar the ideology the more extreme of the antipathy of its adherents to almost identical ideologies, take the traditional and extremely bloody conflicts between Catholic and Protestant Christians or Shia and Sunni Muslims, for example.
Right wing beliefs are Libertarian, believing in small government, personal responsibility and low taxation, at the extreme Right are the Anarchists, superficially similar to the extremists of the Left but generally more spontaneous and disorganised, mostly simply into anti-authoritarianism and sticking it to ‘The Man’.

Reply to  philincalifornia
September 30, 2017 9:32 pm

ANTIFA = vegan ISIS.

Reply to  Latitude
September 30, 2017 5:01 pm

I think that qualifies as ‘Sedition’ : conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch.
When is the US going to prosecute these folk, before or after they start a civil war?

Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
October 1, 2017 6:01 am

When? I found on another site that Antifa and the other rabid leftist groups are now listed as domestic terrorist groups by the US government.
Someone who went undercover to get the real dope on these dopes showed his video later to reporters and they walked away from him. At the end of his video, he asked “Are the media complicit? Or are they just stupid?” That is a very good question. I’d say complicit, myself.
I also saw a video of people blocking traffic on a freeway in Los Angeles – don’t know which one – holding up signs that read ‘November 4 It Starts’. Whatever they’re planning to do, it will be destructive.

September 30, 2017 7:39 am

Well done Dr. Ball!
Maybe they could give these folks a small island in the Caribbean where they can live the life they profess without any outside assistance. The only thing allowed are a couple of goats, chickens, and several axes/machete’s. No one in, no one out in their little utopia.

Reply to  john
September 30, 2017 8:17 am

It would never work because Greenpeace and their ilk wouldn’t have anyone to scold and rebuke; their primary reason for living.

Bengt Abelsson
Reply to  john
September 30, 2017 8:52 am

Well, the steel in the axes/machetes have to come from somewhere – and CO2 have been released during that process, so no, steel may not be used by a true believer.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Bengt Abelsson
September 30, 2017 9:00 am

Get very nasty and give them pile of obsidian. Or be even nastier and let them try to find suitable stone for tools before they starve.

Bryan A
Reply to  john
September 30, 2017 11:58 am

No animals for food…raising animals for food creates the release of both CO2 and Methane CH4 and requires additional plant growth for their feed

Reply to  Bryan A
September 30, 2017 12:04 pm

just for their suffering

Reply to  Bryan A
September 30, 2017 1:05 pm

Humans require mammalian meat…

Reply to  Bryan A
September 30, 2017 3:06 pm

But do environmentalists?

Walt D.
September 30, 2017 7:41 am

They are carpetbaggers.

September 30, 2017 7:43 am

Did you expect anything else? Work is the last desperate way to get money…

Mike Maguire
September 30, 2017 8:04 am

Excellent article Dr. Ball!
As an operational meteorologist that predicts crop yields and production based on real weather(not models) and other factors(increasing CO2) as well as energy use, it’s mind boggling to see the massive disconnect between the narrative of catastrophic human caused climate change and extreme weather we hear about………..and the actual weather that we’ve been having.
There has been nothing unusually extreme about our weather recently.
The last 40 years have featured the best weather/climate and CO2 for most life on this greening planet, in at least 1,000 years, since the Medieval Warm Period that was this warm globally.
There was a lot of sensationalizing of 2015 and 2016 being the hottest years ever because of increasing CO2………..even as they completely missed the most important news.
Crop yields and world food production kept setting records. Not despite those conditions being hyped as disastrous but BECAUSE of them.
This one graph shows it better than words:
“Record cereal production seen boosting global stocks to an all-time high in 2017/18”
What if fossil fuels never existed, nor CO2 emissions from humans and everything happening today in the atmosphere/oceans/land and biosphere were exactly the same?
Since humans would not have an agenda based on cutting CO2 emissions, what would be our response to the exact same weather/climate?
Undoubtedly, the benefits of CO2 and global warming would be getting much more press time. Natural climate change and cycles, which have been replaced by “human caused” would be discussed. Maybe we would recognize the need for adaptation along the sea coasts, where the increase in sea levels has been around 1 inch/decade for over a century.
These extreme events recently, like the hurricanes would be put into proper context and compared to similar extreme events and hurricanes in the past………not sold as unprecedented from human caused climate change.

J Tull
Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 30, 2017 8:19 am

What are the chances of early frost this fall in the upper plains and late frosts next spring in upper latitudes?

Mike Maguire
Reply to  J Tull
September 30, 2017 8:08 pm

A frost at this time of year in the Northern Plains would not be considered early but instead close to average:
Probably some frost this week for the high plains of the Dakotas. With regards to next Spring, I don’t usually do much seasonal forecasting, sticking mostly to 2 weeks. However, I have slightly elevated odds of this Winter being colder than average, especially in the Plains eastward because of the recent tendency for the upper level ridge west/trough east couplet.
Also, odds of a La Nina this Winter look decent and that pattern is often a strong feature for La Nina Winters.
What does that mean for next Spring? Don’t know. Damage from late Spring frosts are often more the result of unusual warmth in early Spring. This causes many plants to come out of dormancy early, including the Winter wheat.
Sometimes a cold March, that delays development, decreases the risk of a late frost doing damage.
Of course corn and soybean farmers would prefer the warm and dry early Spring to get planting underway early.
2 years ago, we had a very mild Winter because of the strong El Nino blowing mild, dried out oceanic air masses across the country with a zonal, west to east jet stream…….cutting off(diverting) the cold northern jet stream to the north.
Last Winter, the small but key region that we use to determine El Nino/La Nina was neutral but the Pacific Ocean overall acted like it does during a strong El Nino. That’s why California got bombed with numerous drought busting storms. The same flow caused much of the country to be mild much of the time.
A potential La Nina this Winter increases chances for the opposite kind of Winter coming up.

Mike Maguire
Reply to  J Tull
October 1, 2017 3:50 am

We may have some hard freezes coming for the N.Plains to Upper Midwst early in week 2 of the forecast.

Mike Maguire
Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 30, 2017 8:30 am

As an operational meteorologist that predicts crop yields and production based on real weather(not models)”
OK, I take that part back. I do use models, including weather models all the time but appreciate the need to RECONCILE the difference between the models and observations/reality on a timely basis in order to move in the right direction with predictions.
Meteorologists are wrong all the time when we forecast weather(and its effects) because our modeling of the chaotic atmosphere and inability to capture initial conditions perfectly, leads to increasing errors with time in modeled output.
But we stay realistically connected to that and make the best adjustments based on the newest, latest information, that replaces yesterdays.
The best busted forecast, is the one that is discarded the quickest.

The Deplorable Vlad the Impaler
Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 30, 2017 10:31 am

I do not believe anyone here has an argument with the aspect that you use models to make forecasts. Part of my long employment history has seen me as Pilot-In-Command of air transport aircraft, which, in turn, has led me to experience forecasts that were invalid before they were made (on occasion).
Not through any fault of the model, per se, but because Nature is a chaotic system (albeit with some “heartbeats” of a regular ‘cycle’, i.e., seasons). As I recall, the Aviation Weather forecasts are revised about every 3 – 6 hours, out of necessity. Something, somewhere, changed, and so the forecasts needed to be updated or revised. It is NOT the fault of the model, the modeler, or anything other than Nature itself, doing what Nature does.
I have no problem with your models predicting temperatures, precipitations, and harvests, since you are willing, unlike the ‘climate modelers’, to discard an inaccurate model and replace it with something based on more current information. You have nothing to answer for, when you are willing to replace a “wrong” forecast with an ‘updated’ forecast, based on newer information.
And, just to cap this, I’ve also seen Aviation forecasts that fairly well hit the mark, and allowed us to modify a planned flight to either a different destination, or make the best decision possible. My hat is off to all meteorologists, regardless of their “track record!”

Mike Maguire
Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 30, 2017 7:48 pm

Appreciate the comments and understanding. You can often tell when a local National Weather Service forecast is likely regurgitating the computer guidance. I just copied this one from Des Moines IA.
Sunday Night:
“A slight chance of showers before 1am, then a chance of showers and thunderstorms between 1am and 4am, then a chance of showers after 4am”
If you go to the hourly weather forecast from the computer generated products, that’s exactly what it shows. A human, looking at weather maps, would never be so precise with exact, hourly times assigned to specific weather conditions that change 3 times during just one, 12 hour forecast period. A human would state something like, “a chance of showers and possibly a thunderstorm”.
It seems a bit much to me when they have a precise forecast like that for a period a couple of days out. It implies pinpoint precision skills that exceed the ability to deliver with consistency.
However, it may actually be useful in some cases. For instance, a person with an outdoor event 2 days from now at 2 pm that needs dry weather can plan better if the forecast has the rain chances before 1pm, then no rain from 1pm-4pm vs a human stating a chance of rain that afternoon.
Not that we can forecast the rain chances ending or beginning with such accuracy but the product user will understand that rain chances will drop off or begin around those time frames and hopefully, should realize they are give or take a couple of hours.
With climate models, I think that one of the biggest problems is that they are presented as yielding products that have more skill than is possible.
They are useful in showing a range of potential outcomes based on various scenarios. But there are way too many unknowns which play a role in the outcome to assign the level of skill that too many people assume they have when using them.

Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 30, 2017 12:35 pm

“What if fossil fuels never existed”
Mr.Maguire. If fossil fuels had never existed, I doubt very much there would be much of a “modern” society at all

Mike Maguire
Reply to  jvcstone
September 30, 2017 7:08 pm

True jvcstone,
I should have also added in the hypothetical that another abundant, reliable and cheap energy source was used that did not emit CO2.

Phillip Bratby
September 30, 2017 8:06 am

Greenpeace is evil personified.

Jeroen B.
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
September 30, 2017 8:15 am

“Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained as stupidity.”

Reply to  Jeroen B.
September 30, 2017 9:13 am

…and a complicit news media

Reply to  Jeroen B.
September 30, 2017 10:28 am

With respect to Greenpeace and others like them, Phillip is correct. They are stupid and act with malice (by their fruits ye shall know them), so yes, they’re evil. They want to corrupt or deprive humanity of that which is good.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
September 30, 2017 9:36 am

… and their fund-raising publicity stunts are given free front-page advertising by the likes of the BBC, the latest one being stopping a cargo ship with a few VW diesel cars, which was the lead news item on the BBC recently.

Reply to  climanrecon
September 30, 2017 12:02 pm

Should have been nicked for piracy and hung from the nearest yardarm.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
September 30, 2017 3:05 pm

Greenpeace has been and is a very useful tool for promoting the U.N. Global Green Economy agenda.
IMO, this is the reason why they were allowed to run roughshod over Europeans. Now it’s North America’s turn but the U.S. does have laws to cope with groups such as Greenpeace.

Ron Long
September 30, 2017 8:08 am

Great Report. Also, as here in Argentina, environmentalists are useful fools that corrupt politicians like to place in front of them to legitimize their actions. This gives the environmentalists instant status as saviors, whereas they are simply enablers. GreenPeace has stated that their recruiting efforts in some countries are much easier than in others. I wonder why.

Tom Halla
September 30, 2017 8:09 am

Nice commentary.

Gunga Din
September 30, 2017 8:22 am

Great as usual, Dr. Ball.
But I’m a unclear with the Bridgett Bardot 9/11 thing.
Did her plane have to land in the area on 9/11 and then Greenpeace arrange for her to go out to a seal hunt?

John MacDonald
Reply to  Gunga Din
September 30, 2017 11:23 am

Gunga, two separate events.
On 9-11, Newfoundlanders in Gander and surrounding communities hosted many grounded aircraft at the former WW2 airfield.
Bardow visited the ice in the 70s or 80s. She helped GP create all sorts of havoc that still ripples today.

Gunga Din
Reply to  John MacDonald
September 30, 2017 11:51 am

Thanks for the clarification. The post seemed to relate both events.
Perhaps “Witness what they did when aircraft landed there during 9/11.” should be a parenthesis?

Reply to  Gunga Din
September 30, 2017 12:06 pm

Pity they hadn’t told Bardot her clothes were sealskin when she was in the middle of an ice field.

September 30, 2017 8:31 am

read the book “why nations fail” and learn how through history elites have extracted wealth from the masses by slavery and serfdom. Read how elites enriched themselves by selling monopolies to their friends while blocking innovations that would increase prosperity for all.
Realize the striking similarities now : renewables will create a new class of poor. Nuclear energy is blocked.
The green movement truly is a revolt of the new elites.

Reply to  David
September 30, 2017 12:38 pm

Human history is a long chain of Big Kids making Big Messes, while the longsuffering adults clean them up as best they may.

September 30, 2017 8:35 am

Thank you Tim – another great article!
Best, Allan
Several trillion dollars of public funds have been squandered on global warming hysteria. There never was any evidence that climate sensitivity to increasing CO2 was high enough to cause dangerous global warming. Claims of wilder weather, etc. are pure fiction. Global warming alarmism is a failed hypothesis.
Since 1940 there has been ~22 years of positive correlation of temperature with CO2, and ~55 years of negative or ~zero correlation. The global warming hypo is contradicted by a full-Earth-scale test since 1940, when fossil fuel combustion accelerated. CO2 is NOT a significant driver of global warming.
The leading advocates of global warming hysteria and their institutions have profited handsomely from this obvious sc@m. What will dissuade them are huge lawsuits under civil RICO in the USA, and class action lawsuits elsewhere.

Reply to  Allan MacRae
September 30, 2017 12:41 pm

“What will dissuade them are huge lawsuits under civil RICO in the USA, and class action lawsuits elsewhere.”
Sadly, Allan, that will never happen as politicians are nothing more than a committee. A committee is deliberately designed so proceeding with, or obstructing a decision, is a shared activity and therefore non attributable to an individual. Not that I think you don’t know all this.
Committees cower behind the concept of democracy, but they themselves are small groups of fascists who determine the direction of the lives of others. They cite the rights of minority groups (as an example) to uphold their ludicrous decisions, but never produce the hard numbers to support those decisions, merely that one or other minority group might suffer inconvenience, whilst the majority are inconvenienced.
So the western world is being dragged into rule by the minority, over the majority. And whilst that might seem alarmist, it’s a genuine concern particularly relevant to immigration and the growing enclaves of cultural and religious groups in our midst who refuse to conform to the cultural or legal norms of our respective countries.
In the UK there are numerous examples of this behaviour, more in Europe.

Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 1:31 pm

Unfortunately I agree with your assessment.
Not enough introspection in this world.

Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 1:48 pm

Unfortunately, we are the eyes and ears.
Politicians are the voice, which represents one fifth of the function of a head.
Even the head of an individual can be overcome by it’s minority constituent.

Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 8:15 pm

HotScot and Hans,
The first civil RICO lawsuit against warmists has already been filed earlier this year, as I predicted circa 2014.
Don’t bet against my predictive track record – it is excellent to date.
Best, Allan 🙂
I posted the following in 2014 – at least one civil RICO lawsuit has since been filed, but this field is open to many more such lawsuits. Global warming alarmism is a trillion-dollar industry based on fr@ud.
Under civil RICO, target warmist institutions with money – such as universities that profited from billions in funding for phony warmist research.
I suggest that someone is going to sue these warmist fr@udsters in the USA, probably using the civil RICO statutes.
Watch for it…
Best, Allan

Reply to  HotScot
October 2, 2017 9:19 am

Allan MacRae
fingers crossed. Keep us updated.

September 30, 2017 8:35 am

they were busy wasting gas for water

September 30, 2017 8:56 am

parasitism is widely practised in nature as a profitable business model. Windmills and solar panels are parasites of fossil energy.

Reply to  David
September 30, 2017 1:15 pm

It’s profitable until you run out of hosts.

Reply to  Sheri
September 30, 2017 1:38 pm

and that is the function of government- to farm raise their prey.

September 30, 2017 8:56 am
Moderately Cross of East Anglia
September 30, 2017 9:10 am

An excellent critique of Greenpeace and the like. What infuriates me is that in the UK Greenpeace and the WWF (which is engaged by proxy in illegal deforestation and murdering indigenous forest dwellers) are give charitable status so that they enjoy huge tax breaks. What a scandal for organizations which are now wreaking tremendous harm to human progress by grotesquely stupid opposition to scientific progress.

Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
September 30, 2017 12:47 pm

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
I think you’ll find that since Cameron’s promised ‘bonfire of the quango’s’ innumerable charities popped up, propped up by government grants/tax breaks etc., virtually all of them performing similar roles to those of the quango’s.
Without government support few of them would survive, but they are utilised as lobbying instruments, hence government support. And of course, no one can object to a ‘charity’.

Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 1:12 pm

Don’t forget ‘institute’ and ‘non-profit’ used to bally round legitimacy.

Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 2:14 pm

I bought a box of sugar recently, on the back were panels proclaiming that the sugar was both vegan and gluten free.
The stupid, it burns.

September 30, 2017 9:44 am

In the UK farmers are under sustained assault from the urban right-on “green” brigade, led by the likes of the BBC Countryfile programme, which used to treat farmers as heroes, but now only if they host wind farms, solar panels, are totally organic, and declare carbon sequestration and bio-diversity as their main purposes.

Reply to  climanrecon
September 30, 2017 12:55 pm

Organic farming. A luxury of the western elite.
Meanwhile, organic farmers in developing countries are living at subsistence level, forced to operate without fertilisers and pesticides that would benefit their entire community.
I never buy organic produce, it’s inhumane.

Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 2:09 pm

I make an exception for local farmers’ markets, who’ve grown the produce themselves and whatever money I spend goes from my hand straight to theirs. Of course, local does not necessarily mean organic, just usually. Many of them aren’t even full-fledged farmers. Farmers’ spouses selling the excess from their home gardens, for example, or the hobbyist beekeeper with a couple boxes of honey jars to offer.

Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 4:13 pm

I should probably have qualified my statement. Commercial organic farming is a con.
Home produced goods are a normal way of life, but not in the suburbs. Supermarkets are usually the only meaningful source of produce in the suburbs, the closest most people will come to the country.
As a kid I used to milk the cows, bottle the milk, and deliver it to a community, within 3 hours. Unpasteurised, and with thick cream at the top of the bottle. No problem and not expensive. We used to carve Halloween turnips into lanterns before pumpkins were ever available in the UK. Now, turnips sold in supermarkets are a fraction of the size they were. We harvested the grain crops with a Massey Ferguson tractor pulling a primitive harvester with a tractor pulled trailer beside it collecting the grain.
We were what would be described today as illegal child labour. But we loved it. Money wasn’t the point, working was the point.
The farm I worked on has been turned into a trendy housing development.

September 30, 2017 9:51 am

Excellent article, submit to the NYT for publication

September 30, 2017 10:02 am

Vivek Shandas says Seattle is well prepared for sea level rise. Perhaps it is, simply because of its topography but also because there is little or no sea level rise there. PSMSL .org tide gauge data reveals seas at the shoreline rising at a rate of about 1 or 1 1/2 mm/yr while a city GPS elevation gauge shows land subsiding at about 1 mm/yr for a net rise of somewhere between 0 and 1/2 mm/yr. This should suffice for several hundred years. All this due no doubt to the wise choices of its Democratic government.

Tom Judd
Reply to  DHR
September 30, 2017 12:20 pm

I think Seattle should be a lot more concerned and prepared for the possibility (probability?) that Mt. Rainier blows its stack than it should be about the effects ICE powered commuters around town may have on the sea levels in its harbors.

Reply to  Tom Judd
October 3, 2017 10:26 am

The Cascadian quake ought to due nicely..

Reply to  DHR
September 30, 2017 1:01 pm

Hang on.
If the sea is rising by 1 or 1.5mm per year, and the land is subsiding by 1mm a year, doesn’t that mean that sea level is rising by 1.5mm per year, irrespective of what the land is doing?
And relative to each other, wouldn’t the combined effect be that the tide will be 2mm to 2.5mm higher every year?
Or did I totally misinterpret your post?

Paul Watkinson
Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 5:12 pm

You misunderstand. The tide gauge is mounted on the falling land and therefor it’s readings are a sum of actual SLR plus land subsidence. Actual SLR is thus Reading less subsidence.

September 30, 2017 10:04 am

To me, its kind of like the über-clean Swiss neighbors who bîtch and complain endlessly about our practice of leaving our curbside trash bins out for the full day following pickup. Like it matters. Yes – we don’t give a fûque. Are WE bad because we choose to not give a fûque? (Most argue, yes. I argue, no: it doesn’t matter.)
The evergreen community wants to make its neighbors first “feel bad” about not doing as much as they are, and ultimately to pass laws requiring neighbors to do as much as they do. Whether the net effect of all their (and eventually our) efforts is quantitatively meaningless or not. They’re on Jihad. Religious belief (and I’d argue real religious belief) that their efforts make them good, pure, righteous people, and their actions, intents and policies are thereby justified.
Well, I have a word for y’all greenies: get over yourselves. When we’re being realistic about the global warming scare, it turns out that there is no SIGNIFICANT THREAT to the numbers bandied about. We’ve warmed, what … +0.7°C in the last 50 years? New England still has a hundred days of winter, folks. Lakes freeze over, and you skate on them. For just as long a ‘season’ every year as 100 years ago. Its documented.
WE ARE FORCED TO LISTEN to a narrative that (just like the 1970s) posits that the World is Coming To An End because of all the bûllsnot that Mankind has been consuming, burning, emitting and polluting.
Well the EPA has quite successfully gotten the bad apples out of the barrel. The – yes, alarming – practices of the pre 1970s are muffled, washed, ensconced, entombed, neutralized, gathered and kept largely out of our waterways, lakes and streams. Our air (thanks to EPA) quality in cities has hugely improved. Our drinking water quality (except for Flint Michigan) has been increasing, generally.
I am not a ranting greenie. I’m a practical environmentalist who knows fees, tariffs, surcharges, taxes, penalties and prison time work well to curb bad apples’ bad behavior. And that’s what we need to do. Not run around with our hair on fire just because the Porlandians have swallowed the Red Pill and gone nuts.

Reply to  GoatGuy
September 30, 2017 1:18 pm

In the 1960’s/70’s in the UK, refuse collectors came round to the back of our house to collect the trash (bins as we call them in the UK). There was no need for hulking great plastic bins to litter our pavements.
I now live in a house, forming one of five Victorian cottages. Our bins are conveniently situated within the walled confines of the building, adjacent to the road. It would take seconds for the bin men to walk in and collect them, but no, we are obliged to litter the narrow pavement, on a busy road, outside our house with massive plastic bins.
The bins are rarely collected before 2pm but we are told to leave them on the pavement from 7am.
The sooner they have autonomously operated refuse containers the better. F*ck self driving cars, get our proprieties right!

September 30, 2017 10:22 am

A little o/t, but please do not add Seattle to your list of places to move to. The post card images from Elliott Bay are very pretty, but misleading. The City Clowncil of Freattle has turned the downtown area into a giant homeless camp, and the police are prohibited from bothering the campers. (Seriously. See photo in linked article of tents next to courthouse.) My daughter accepted a new job in downtown Seattle in July, 2016, and quit after one year. She couldn’t stand the brutal commute, the constant panhandling walking to her building, and most surprising of all (to me), the frequent lockdown of her building due to some political protest on the sidewalk in front. Unknown to her when she started, the building housed the consulate of some rogue nation, a nation home to some well known contributors to WUWT.*

Reply to  Windsong
September 30, 2017 11:10 am

The reason your daughter had a brutal commute is because Seattle is the most economically vibrant city in the US right now. It has led the nation in home appreciation for 12 months straight. That’s the price of success, not a terrible city.

Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 1:16 pm

Seattle, like Denver where I’m from, has turned to trash.
Housing prices do not make a vibrant city, or else you’d be praising up the Hamptons and L.A.

Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 1:18 pm

How does one have so much homelessness with a “vibrant city”?

Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 1:22 pm

Because it’s ‘vibrant’, so it’s attractive.
Streets of gold and all that.

Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 2:20 pm

It also means that the city fathers refuse to do the things necessary to deal with growth. Such as build roads.

Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 2:22 pm

“Appreciation” is also the result of those same city fathers refusing to let anyone build much new near the city.

Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 2:28 pm

So you’re saying that for a year straight, more and more indigent city residents have been priced out of owning a home. No wonder the downtown is one big hobo camp.

Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 11:13 pm

$1.00 – $2.00 = 100% appreciation.

Bruce Cobb
September 30, 2017 10:29 am

Portland was the first US city to come up with a plan to prepare for climate change. The city’s historic Climate Action Plan, created in 1993, is a set of policies and initiatives aimed at slashing the city’s carbon emissions. The goal is to cut them 40% by 2030 and 80% by 2050.

Interesting. So, the way to “prepare for climate change” is to raise the cost of electricity, raise people’s cost of living, raise taxes, and drive business away. Yeah, good plan.
Come to think of it though, that approach would probably work to prepare for an invasion by space aliens. No self-respecting space alien will attack retarded and deranged people. True fact.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
September 30, 2017 1:24 pm

Interesting point there.
If every western city did the same, where would people and businesses go?
China and India are options I suppose.

Michael Jankowski
September 30, 2017 10:39 am

…Seattle is one of the most “well-positioned” of these cities, Shandas said…
Not-so-well-positioned for Ranier to blow.

September 30, 2017 10:44 am

“What we need to do, like the people of Newfoundland and Labrador is expose and ridicule their misinformation, lack of understanding, and document the enormous damage they do to people’s economies and lives, by pushing other people down.”
Best response ever to the problem.
I read a novella some time ago, {don’t remember the author’s name) in which a main ‘character’ was a group called the Statque. It was a governmental body with the sole purpose of maintaining the status quo. Their political rant was that the Universe was in Entropy and declining rapidly, but they had no proof other than a few exploding stars (novae). I thought it was ridiculous then, but when the Greenbeans started up, they appeared to be doing some good. However, this is several decades later and I see only the usual bandwagon and the usual crowd on it, and it’s mostly about getting attention, NOT about doing anything. They really do need their own planet. Maybe Elon Musk can get them to Alpha Centauri B before too long.
We’re probably going to see a lot of changes, mostly prompted by people who may wake up from the state of mindlessness that they’ve been in. Just remember, it was a small child who pointed out that the emperor was wearing no clothing

the old man
September 30, 2017 10:49 am

Being a former rural lad m’self, Tim’s take on the rising urbanised blight and their imposition on the bigger democracy over time rings true to me. Quite a while ago, I took a look at Vancouver from such a perspective:

Gunga Din
Reply to  the old man
September 30, 2017 12:09 pm

It would seem that the further one is removed from nature, the more they think they know how to “preserve” it.

the old man
Reply to  Gunga Din
September 30, 2017 5:17 pm

Tho they’ve – ( excuse the poetic licence) belted you and flayed you, by the livin’ gawd that made you, You’re a better man than I, Gunga Din. Nothing else needs sayin’…. Just sayin’.

Dan Cebuliak
September 30, 2017 11:05 am

I agree with Dr. Tim Ball. For many years especially after the “Global Warming” crises turned into the “Climate Change” crises which has now morphed into “Climate Chaos” and what ever name that will be used to deceive the public, It was clearly evident that there was an agenda being played out. Under sustainability the hoax was being perpetrated on the people, while governments and corporations did totally the opposite. I was also aware these so called environmental groups were the soft sell of the agenda, and continually questioned along the same lines. It wasnt until 6 years ago I started to study Agenda 21, brought in by the UN and Maurice STrong that I fully comprehended what was going on, and it was less then that warm fuzzy feeling that other groups are pushing I discovered that Transition Towns is also part of that facade, the underside of ICLEI, which is now Governments for Sustainability, a very well cloaked con game…. Dr Tim Ball, thank you for the work you are doing, and I do wish you the very best of luck in dealing with Andrew Weaver, who is also pushing the hoax with his new false sense of power in BC….

September 30, 2017 11:07 am

I agree with Dr. Tim Ball. For many years especially after the “Global Warming” crises turned into the “Climate Change” crises which has now morphed into “Climate Chaos” and what ever name that will be used to deceive the public, It was clearly evident that there was an agenda being played out. Under sustainability the hoax was being perpetrated on the people, while governments and corporations did totally the opposite. I was also aware these so called environmental groups were the soft sell of the agenda, and continually questioned along the same lines. It wasnt until 6 years ago I started to study Agenda 21, brought in by the UN and Maurice STrong that I fully comprehended what was going on, and it was less then that warm fuzzy feeling that other groups are pushing I discovered that Transition Towns is also part of that facade, the underside of ICLEI, which is now Governments for Sustainability, a very well cloaked con game…. Dr Tim Ball, thank you for the work you are doing, and I do wish you the very best of luck in dealing with Andrew Weaver, who is also pushing the hoax with his new false sense of power in BC…

September 30, 2017 11:25 am

” Pull yourself up or push other people down. There are few better exponents of the pushdown option than the environmental groups and their supporters. They are, for the most part, urban guerrillas, useless people who do little or nothing except undermine the lives of others. They are the green bullies who tell others how to live, yet, hypocritically, live in similar lifestyles.”
Isn’t that just the truth…
No understanding, just put downs.
No acknowledgement of their own past mistakes, just raking over others’ past errors for no good reason.
Never forgive and forget, always attempt to punish others.
Agitators committed to helping raise a noisy rabble just because they can because they want to.

Reply to  tom0mason
September 30, 2017 1:32 pm

There is also the strange distortion that somehow fascism and the Klan are somehow right wing organisations.
Both emerged from the left.
Extreme right wingers may worship money, but I’ll take that over bigotry any day.

September 30, 2017 11:48 am

This site: //globalwarmingisreal.com might be a real sign of the times.
Notice that there are no comments to recent articles and only 9 ‘shares’.
Professor Ball, we are making progress in exposing the truth. As always, thank you!

H. D. Hoese
September 30, 2017 12:10 pm

Great Article
I once told a bright architect working on an academic building that cities were parasites. Surprised, he mentioned all the obvious collective benefits, but neglected, as I pointed out, where stuff comes from and goes. The biological rule about parasites is that they cannot kill their host species, but, like predators, prudently accommodate. The ways they do this are fascinating.
Several eclipses ago my high school class was taken to a slaughter house. Suggest we put this in the curriculum. Might help to teach them a little bit about nitrogen (in the cows) also.

September 30, 2017 1:04 pm

I too dealt with fishermen, farmers and the like for much of my career. I also had to deal with the environmental movement in all its iterations. The former always had a great deal of common sense and a better understand of what was happening in the real world, except for politics. They naturally distrusted politicians, because even when they threw their bum out and replaced them the results once they were in the state capitol or federal capitol were the same. On another note, remember Greenpeace started as an “anti-nuclear” weapons organization. Of course they were only opposed to the West having nuclear weapons and power and not the Soviet bloc, can’t anger those that fund you. When the USSR collapsed (rebranded) Greenpeace saw the handwriting on the wall and went environmental. Again lots of money to be had. Back in the late 1980s US News and World Report did an whole issue on how all the environmental organizations were funded, what they did with the funds and how the organizations used the money. I always found it a bit hypocritical for a environmental organization to have a stock and bond portfolio that included those they were protesting. Or how a supposed not-for-profit organization paid its executive director hundreds of thousand and all their expenses, i.e., condo in D.C., executive suite style offices, limousine to get around D.C., first class travel or even private jets too and from home.

Tom Judd
September 30, 2017 1:07 pm

I’m getting up in years now but I must say that this post has given me great encouragement in finding a solution to my aging problem. Now, I know it’s not a problem unique to myself so the more enterprising reader may wish to seek out the same solution.
And, what is that solution you ask? Well first, before you exhibit skepticism, let me remind you that I have an older sister. So I know, with absolute certainty, that Vampires do indeed exist. My tender, young, innocent childhood was spent in the presence of one – my older sister.
Now, to my solution to my aging problem: I need to get bitten by a Vampire so I can turn into one, thus gaining perpetual life and vigor, and condemn the problems of aging (cataracts, corneal separation, hearing loss, hair loss, arthritis, erectile dysfunction, sagging buttocks) to the trash heap of mortality.
My plan is a simple one. I’ll meet the Vampire in a bar after sundown – of course. I’ll consume quite a bit of alcohol ahead of time so when the Vampire bites me he/she will get a little too tipsy (from the alcohol in my blood) to finish the job: if you know what I mean. But, not too tipsy for the bite to turn me into one of them. Voila; immortality!
Now, there is a concern that the Vampire might like the alcohol and drink a little too much of my blood. But, I’ve got that covered because, prior to meeting the vampire, I will consume strictly Pabst Blue Ribbon or Schlitz.
The problem has always been finding a Vampire other than my sister, my older sister. I went to the most logical source, to every lawyer’s conference I could, but to no avail. Thank you, thank you, thank you. I now know where and who:
College professors teaching climate readiness, or urban planning, or environmental NGOs; all exhibiting the perpetual inability to grow up and age, significant material wealth unaccompanied by the work necessary to acquire it, the superior attitude displayed to mere mortals, the unabashed willingness to do whatever it takes.

Reply to  Tom Judd
September 30, 2017 1:40 pm

I am also old, I also have an older sister. She is also a Vampire.
I drink a lot. Also.

September 30, 2017 1:12 pm

I agree, Allan, it;s a great article. However, you’d have to admit that as useless as the alarmists are in the real world they have been remarkably successful at propagandizing catastrophic climate change and getting governments at every level on the alarmist band wagon, resulting in the waste of those $trillions. There’s little sign of that changing any time soon, at least in my neck of the woods (Canada).

Reply to  jr2025
September 30, 2017 1:14 pm

Note: my comment above was intended as a reply to Allan MacRae (September 30, 2017 at 8:35 am).

Reply to  jr2025
October 1, 2017 6:38 am

Hello jr2025
I cannot agree that Tim’s article is useless. The political reality is that most people are far too stupid to vote, as evidenced by the energy debacle in Ontario under Doltan McGuinty and Kathleen Wynn, and the election of Justin Trudeau in Ottawa and Rachel Notley in Alberta. Global warming alarmism is promoted by scoundrels and supported by imbeciles – there is no real global warming crisis.
Cheap, abundant, reliable energy is the lifeblood of society – it IS that simple. Most politicians are too uneducated to even opine on energy, let alone set energy policy.
As you may know, Alberta has carried Canada economically for the past ~60 years, with transfer payments totaling about $1 million per Alberta family-of-four over this period (includes nominal interest, See Mansell and Schlenker*). This has enabled other regions of Canada to adopt economically destructive policies, because Alberta’s money has made them affordable.
So the reality is that it will take time for truth about the Global Warming $cam to sink in, and further economic destruction will occur before the system corrects itself.
Watch for push-back in te form of civil RICO lawsuits in the USA and class-action lawsuits elsewhere, targeted against warmist organizations..
Regards, Allan
* Reference:
Mansell, Robert L. and Schlenker, Ronald. “The Provincial Distribution of Federal Fiscal Balances” Canadian Business Economics 3.2 (1995): 3-22
Robert Mansell has updated his tables from time to time, and I have them.

Reply to  jr2025
September 30, 2017 2:20 pm

It is going to take a concerted effort to educate Justin Trudeau and convince him that he is being misled by his key advisor, Gerald Butts.

Reply to  Sommer
October 1, 2017 6:31 pm

Ontario is transitioning to a “Clean Energy Economy” where only renewable energy sources will be employed for electric power.
The aim of those opposed to fossil fuels is to reduce Alberta fossil fuel production to almost no production.
Alberta has had to deal with a nasty combination of academics, ENGOs, lawyers, MSM, politicians, scientists and others from across North America whose intentions are to stop fossil fuel production.

Reply to  Sommer
October 1, 2017 8:22 pm

U.S. Senate, Bernie Sanders, Vermont, Nov.14, 2014
Re: ‘Tar Sands Pipeline’
Or internet search.

Ken L in Kelowna
September 30, 2017 1:22 pm

It seems once again that great leaders lead by example. Thank you for nothing, Greenpeace et al. Thank you sincerely, Mr Trump.

September 30, 2017 3:26 pm

Thankyou Tim for a great article .Greenpeace and the green s have a lot to answer for .We are told that climate change will bring more droughts to the world .If that is what is going to happen then surely all dry or drought prone countries or regions should create water storage dams for irrigation and urban water supplies .But what do the greens do in New Zealand and other countries is violently object and demonstrate against water storage projects .In New Zealand this year Greenpeace and their activists went to the High Court to block a dam project in Hawkes Bay and they were forcibly removed from large storage lakes that are being built in Canterbury to store snow melt in the spring to irrigate in the dry summers. I whole heartily agree with Tim Ball’s description of these so called environmentalists as parasites . Do they know where the food comes from on the supermarket .It needs water CO2 and to start with and they are against both .

Reply to  gwan
September 30, 2017 3:52 pm

“Do they know where the food comes from on the supermarket ” – simple answer is no, they do not. They have no idea what it takes to feed the world.
They have no understanding of the complex nature involved in producing, harvesting, and shelving what they take for granted, nor do they understand the vast area of land and volume of water needed just to put it on their plates. It will not sink in until their is a shortage of it, as there is in Venezuela.

H. D. Hoese
September 30, 2017 3:54 pm

I live in Rockport, Texas, and fortunately we are in good shape. However, we just got back from a destroyed friend’s house on Copano Bay. The response has been terrific, competence from many groups. Have not seen any sign of environmental organizations, but churches, private businesses, utilities from numerous states, and even government (Homeland security was out with chain saws a few days after the storm clearing access to and in driveways) are local heroes. If I find organized environmental groups I will report because there are individuals with strong environmental feelings who have helped. I have seen the results of several severe hurricanes, and this one is up there.

Reply to  H. D. Hoese
October 1, 2017 7:00 am

An observation:
Parasites who loudly demonstrate-for-hire and damage public property are by their nature destroyers – they do not show up and help out – that is not what they do – they are more likely to pillage and loot.
People who do help out have much better values, and there are many of them. They are the ones who deserve our support.
Best, Allan
I posted the following just before Harvey hit Houston:
“If Harvey stalls, much flooding will result – many cities in Texas are so flat that flooding is a common occurrence. When I lived in Houston (circa 1997-98), we had several floods in the year, just from normal seasonal rainstorms.”
I deeply regret the severe flooding and the suffering of the good people of Houston, and wish them the very best of good fortune in their recovery.
In 2013, southern Alberta experienced the most costly natural disaster in Canadian history, when a major rainfall event caused severe flooding along all our rivers and inundated downtown Calgary and many suburbs and towns. I lived in the Mission community on the Elbow River, and our condo building was flooded, but we were fortunate – only the three parkade levels were flooded and the lobby and living levels were untouched.
We were out of our building for a month, and stayed with kind friends. When we returned, my five-year-old daughter and I were charged with turning on the power to each apartment as the residents returned – we did about half of the ~110 units in the building. This was necessary because all the fridges were cleaned out and left open to air, and the power shut off in each unit to prevent the fridge motors from burning out. The elevators and emergency stairwell and hallway lighting were all shut down, because some genius had located all electrical services in the basement, which had flooded. I bought my daughter a battery-powered headlamp, which she wore with pride, and we walked up interminable unlit flights of stairs in our 17-story building, locating and mapping the byzantine electrical switch box locations for each unit, and restoring power as the owners returned.
My friends who lived along the river were not so fortunate – many homes were flooded above the ground floor, although few second floors were inundated. Some people were out of their homes for a year or more, during reconstruction. The city has now essentially recovered, although a few flood-relics remain.
In general, the flood recovery was a great success, although it was made worse by foolish and highly selective Alberta government buy-out policies.
The assistance of tens of thousands of volunteers was remarkable – complete strangers helped clean out basements of mud and flood-damaged drywall and insulation, and many homes were drying out and ready to restore within days – this is critical to prevent mold buildup. In Mission, a gentleman of East-Indian descent who ran a flagworks company took charge and organized thousands of volunteers via social media. He loaned us a giant oilfield pump truck, donated by a company in Edmonton, and we used it to pump out our parkade.
I was asked late one night by my Member of Parliament (MP) Joan Crockett to line up some houses for cleanup the next morning. I drove over to George’s house at 11pm and found him standing in mud in a window well, as his friends passed him buckets of mud from his basement and he poured them over his silt-filled back yard. He agreed to accept the help, as long as there were no TV cameras, etc.
The next morning we all met at George’s – my friend Joan, a few other MP’s including Dr. Kellie Leitch, Prime Minister Steven Harper’s wife Laureen and a few others. We finished cleaning out George’s basement – removing all the mud and wet insulation – and there were no TV cameras – just one group snapshot that I recall. We then moved on to clean several other houses, and did about four homes in total by the end of the day. The group then moved south to work at High River, the community hardest-hit by the floods (Note to file: Do not build a town in a place called High River).
There was no looting that I know of, and the volunteer effort was remarkable.
So Houston has a few years of rebuilding ahead, and you will arise stronger than before. Houston is full of kind, decent people – again, I wish you well.
Best, Allan

Reply to  Allan MacRae
October 1, 2017 9:05 am

I would predict your community will see similar flooding within a decade. There are more extreme weather events coming.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Griff
October 1, 2017 9:32 am

Based on what, pray tell, Griff? Neither the IPCC or the NOAA has found any increase in severe weather, and both would claim it existed if any evidence existed.

Reply to  Allan MacRae
October 1, 2017 9:30 am

In Alberta, warmer weather correlates with more droughts and cooler weather correlates with more floods.
If anything, the recent flooding in Alberta (there were two recent flooding events, one mild and one severe) is a harbinger of cooler weather.
On another front:
There were NO land-falling hurricanes in the USA for 15 years – how is that an indicator of wider weather? Wilder weather and catastrophic global warming are both fictions – very-scary-fairy tales.

Reply to  Allan MacRae
October 1, 2017 2:45 pm

“There are more extreme weather events coming.”
What a totally moronic comment, even by your Olympian standard.
Of course there are Skanky, you unpleasant, mendacious little twerp.
There have always been extreme climate events and there always will be extreme climate events.
I notice you haven’t anything to say about the 12 year hurricane drought however, why is that?
Nor have you acknowledged your error about the Arctic ice cap,
Now go and apologise to Dr. Crockford for slandering her.

H. D. Hoese
Reply to  Allan MacRae
October 2, 2017 8:23 am

If anyone doubts the severity of the storm, the AEP utility response, shown here, is probably the most impressive thing I have ever seen. Pole leaning across the street repaired with two (easily obtained) broken 4X4s, by truck from Oklahoma. Sounds crude but we live on a sandy Pleistocene barrier island, would guess that they know about tornadoes.

Joe Bastardi
September 30, 2017 3:56 pm

Parasitic climatic ambulance chasers

Reply to  Joe Bastardi
September 30, 2017 7:17 pm

Good one…!!!

September 30, 2017 7:53 pm

A big thanks to TA for a fascinating posting on Leftists at War. I had imagined this to be the case, but had lacked evidence for it for years.

Reply to  ntesdorf
October 1, 2017 8:35 pm

And do you know what fueled the whole American anti-war movement? It was the draft. College students didn’t want to be drafted and have to go off to war, so they organized and had the MSM solidly behind them. This was the source of their energy: Fear.
In the early stages of the Vietnam war (before 1965), this was not a big problem because the number of American troops in South Vietnam was relatively small.
But when the war really ramped up, the U.S. had to send hundreds of thousands of troops over there and this drove the college students and the MSM into a frenzy, and they did everything they could to undermine the war effort, so they wouldn’t have to participate.
U.S. troops could have finished this war in a fairly short timeframe, had we been allowed to invade North Vietnam and eliminate the source of the problem. But the radical Left controlled Congress and they put all sorts of restrictions on U.S. troops.
So in effect, the American radical Left gave the North Vietnamese a “safe haven” from which they could attack Americans at their leisure, and then run back across the border to lick their wounds when the American troops showed up and started kicking the hell out of them.
That why the U.S. was in South Vietnam for so many years. It didn’t have to be that way, but the radical Left was running the show at that time. Their focus was on getting out of South Vietnam, not winning in South Vietnam.
Even with all the restrictions, the American troops won every battle and finally battered the North Vietnamese so much that they finally came to the Peace table. But it took many more years than it had to take.
NEVER give your enemy a safe haven.
That might seem like plain common sense, but you have to keep in mind we are dealing with delusional Leftists, and they don’t have any common sense. Not then, not now.

Angus Rose
September 30, 2017 10:31 pm

You probably thought it was funny while it lasted, but the end of climate change denial is nigh 🙂

Geoffrey Preece
September 30, 2017 11:34 pm

Wow, not one dissenting voice. Oh well. I’ll give it a small go, at risk of abuse. I don’t belong to Greenpeace and don’t follow what they do. I do however belong to Australian environment groups, and am an environmentalist, greenie. When I want to assist environmental campaigns I go to environmental campaign sites, when I wish to assist with human crisis campaigns I go to human crisis campaign sites. When I went to Tim Ball’s website I saw there was no indication of where to donate to any human crisis and don’t expect there should be. When I went to the Heartland Institute they also had no reference, nor do I expect they should. This blog site has no reference and I don’t expect it to have. Why is an environmental advocacy site expected to do things other than environmental advocacy.
I live on a farm and have embarked on a small agricultural project after many years absence from same farm. We have had the driest, hottest period, since June, on record. We have had to import water for the first time ever. We have solar panels and batteries which normally produce more energy than we consume. I have an electric/hybrid car that is powered mainly, about 90%, by the sun. (I believe these things reduce, not eliminate, my impact on the environment in more ways than just carbon emissions)
Some farmers have, and continue to degrade the land. Others, and I hope I am one, nurture, and try to leave it better than found. I have been involved in farming of the high pesticide, high super phosphate variety, I don’t believe it is a long term solution that leaves the land in better shape.

H. D. Hoese
Reply to  Geoffrey Preece
October 2, 2017 8:51 am

I think many of us would like to return to simpler times with less demand on many resources. I have used a solar panel on a RV for over two decades, works great, but to get much power, you add too much weight. I once did blow a battery, my fault, when the converter failed. This is not a problem that can be completely solved by improved technology, something we knew when this movement started a half century ago. I learned it in a thermodynamics course, and elsewhere. More power to you and hope you are successful. The general criticism is don’t force, especially without due process, taxpayers to pay for it. This has been too commonly applied for many, too often failed, projects. Wish I had my solar panel and water collection system back.

September 30, 2017 11:52 pm

And remember, they’ve got frighteningly- biased researchers in charge of the “official” data sets.

October 1, 2017 2:00 am

A little OT but thought you all might find this interesting and informative about the way things work. My last load was nonhazardous material Cleaning Fluids in metal and plastic drums and caged plastic tanks. The load was going from Easton, PA (think Allentown area) to a place in Indiana. The guy told me that they had to adjust the Bill of Lading because they were shipping less than was anticipated. The reason for the smaller shipment was because they were not receiving all of the product they ordered because FEMA has priority. In particular cleaning fluids for killing and removing mold and mildew in industrial quantities are in short supply because FEMA and the cleaning firms contracted to them for hurricane cleanup have first dibs at the manufactures.

Sandy In Limousin
October 1, 2017 3:50 am

Excellent piece of writing. The only piece of Reality TV on British TV at the moment is “This Farming Life” on BBC, covering a year in the life of half a dozen families farming across Scotland. All take on the travails of farming with good humour and concern for the animals and land in their care. None will ever but rich financially but stand head and shoulders above urbanites intent on making a fast buck.

October 1, 2017 4:21 am

Dr Ball
You’ve hit the nail on the head.
These groups take in billions which they use primarily on campaigning.
This creates a vicious cycle wherby the MSM continue to turn a blind eye to their activities because of the advertising revenues they receive.
Thank you for an informative and very well written post

October 1, 2017 6:20 am

Thank you for speaking the Truth once again, Dr. Ball.
America has a long tradition of con-artists and chumps. Tom Sawyer getting others to whitewash his fence for him is of that tradition. The end to any scam is when the chumps wake up, and Truth is what awakes them.

October 1, 2017 6:25 am

Thank you for speaking the Truth once again, Dr. Ball.
America has a long tradition of con-artists and chumps. Tom Sawyer getting others to whitewash his fence for him is of that tradition. The end to any scam is when the chumps wake up, and Truth is what awakes them.

October 1, 2017 6:33 am

Get this:
Now This:
Clinton Backed Puerto Rico Debt Relief Bill After Lobbyist Donor’s Email
Hillary Clinton formally backed legislation to relieve Puerto Rico of billions of dollars in debt after a top Clinton fundraiser who lobbies for the Puerto Rican treasury raised the issue with her campaign chair, hacked emails show.
Podesta Group president Tony Podesta emailed his brother, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, in March 2015. The subject line was “Puerto Rico,” while the body of the email asked, “Can you call me today re PR. Need advice not action.”
The Podesta Group has represented the Puerto Rico Department of the Treasury since 2013. At the time, Tony Podesta and seven of the firm’s other lobbyists were pushing for passage of congressional legislation to allow the U.S. commonwealth to restructure its debt through Chapter 9 bankruptcy proceedings.
The Puerto Rican treasury has paid the Podesta Group $1.9 million since it enlisted the firm’s services in mid-2013.

October 1, 2017 9:03 am

Greenpeace and others warned that this sort of hurricane was coming.
There are a number of warnings I’ve seen which were even specific about the flood risk to Houston.
and what has the ‘non-green’ reaction been to the hurricanes?
Playing them down, concentrating on damage/level in the US and not out in the Caribbean.
Yesterday I even read here people suggesting the damage to Puerto Rico was because of their failed economy and implying it was their own fault.
Well stand warned: there will be more hurricanes and sea level change.
If Houston and Florida don’t invest now in more resilience, there will be more lives lost.
I think the views of some posters here are contributing to a mood in which people don’t look realistically at what the climate is doing and will aid that unpreparedness

Reply to  Griff
October 1, 2017 2:55 pm

“Greenpeace and others warned that this sort of hurricane was coming.”
It was a hurricane, not even a record-breaking hurricane you buffoon, and no-one was in any doubt that one would occur, and more will occur in the future.
As to the flood risk to Houston, it has been documented for decades, so no surprise there.
Now go and apologise to Dr. Crockford for maliciously attempting to harm her career on behalf of the rich pigs like Gore, Mrs. Clegg and Sheffield who are paying you a pittance for doing their dirty work.
And I think you’re a thoroughly unpleasant individual who gets some sort of perverse pleasure from spreading doom and despondency, I just hope you don’t have any children to infect with your profound pessimism.

Reply to  catweazle666
October 1, 2017 2:57 pm

Oh, and PS, Skanky.
You stand warned too, one of these days YOU WILL be called to account, think on that.

October 1, 2017 11:48 am

In my viewing of the three most recent hurricanes on TV,
not one TelePrompTer reader mentioned
there had been a 12 years period, from 2005 to 2017,
when not one major (Cat. 3, 4 or 5) hurricane
hit the bottom 48 US states.
I guess that was not important?
Climate blog for non-scientists:

Michael S. Kelly
October 1, 2017 3:26 pm

I think David Horowitz identified the real reason the Left is so aligned behind “environmental causes.” In the past, the left always posed as the champion of this or that oppressed group of people. Gaining popular support from the oppressed enabled the Left’s rise to power (their only actual interest of any in life), but being inept at manipulating anything but people, the Left always let down their constituencies. Not that they cared, but in many cases the abandoned constituency would rise up and vanquish their masters.
Horowitz was part of the radical Left in the early 1960s, but divorced himself when he realized what their only aspiration really was: control of all others. About the Green Left, he astutely noted that they had adopted the environment as a constituency because it could never complain when let down. A huge number of Greenpeace, Sierra Club, and other green-left activities have been terribly destructive environmentally. But the environment can’t complain, and no one esle is allowed to because that would make them “against clean air and clean water” (the slightly less pithy put-down they used, much like “denier” today).

October 2, 2017 3:46 am

The radical enviros are the same “useful idiots” who used to call themselves Marxists, until they were discredited by the fall of the Berlin Wall and the breakup of the FSU. They then took over the environmental movement. Some call them watermelons.
Here is their story, as written in 1994 by Dr. Patrick Moore, a co-founder and Past-President of Greenpeace:
Excerpted from “Hard Choices for the Environmental Movement”
written in 1994 by Dr. Patrick Moore
Two profound events triggered the split between those advocating a pragmatic or “liberal” approach to ecology and the new “zero-tolerance” attitude of the extremists. The first event, mentioned previously, was the widespread adoption of the environmental agenda by the mainstream of business and government. This left environmentalists with the choice of either being drawn into collaboration with their former “enemies” or of taking ever more extreme positions. Many environmentalists chose the latter route. They rejected the concept of “sustainable development” and took a strong “anti-development” stance.
Surprisingly enough the second event that caused the environmental movement to veer to the left was the fall of the Berlin Wall. Suddenly the international peace movement had a lot less to do. Pro-Soviet groups in the West were discredited. Many of their members moved into the environmental movement bringing with them their eco-Marxism and pro-Sandinista sentiments.
These factors have contributed to a new variant of the environmental movement that is so extreme that many people, including myself, believe its agenda is a greater threat to the global environment than that posed by mainstream society. Some of the features of eco-extremism are:
· It is anti-human. The human species is characterized as a “cancer” on the face of the earth. The extremists perpetuate the belief that all human activity is negative whereas the rest of nature is good. This results in alienation from nature and subverts the most important lesson of ecology; that we are all part of nature and interdependent with it. This aspect of environmental extremism leads to disdain and disrespect for fellow humans and the belief that it would be “good” if a disease such as AIDS were to wipe out most of the population.
· It is anti-technology and anti-science. Eco-extremists dream of returning to some kind of technologically primitive society. Horse-logging is the only kind of forestry they can fully support. All large machines are seen as inherently destructive and “unnatural’. The Sierra Club’s recent book, “Clearcut: the Tradgedy of Industrial Forestry”, is an excellent example of this perspective. “Western industrial society” is rejected in its entirety as is nearly every known forestry system including shelterwood, seed tree and small group selection. The word “Nature” is capitalized every time it is used and we are encouraged to “find our place” in the world through “shamanic journeying” and “swaying with the trees”. Science is invoked only as a means of justifying the adoption of beliefs that have no basis in science to begin with.
· It is anti-organization. Environmental extremists tend to expect the whole world to adopt anarchism as the model for individual behavior. This is expressed in their dislike of national governments, multinational corporations, and large institutions of all kinds. It would seem that this critique applies to all organizations except the environmental movement itself. Corporations are critisized for taking profits made in one country and investing them in other countries, this being proof that they have no “allegiance” to local communities. Where is the international environmental movements allegiance to local communities? How much of the money raised in the name of aboriginal peoples has been distributed to them? How much is dedicated to helping loggers thrown out of work by environmental campaigns? How much to research silvicultural systems that are environmentally and economically superior?
· It is anti-trade. Eco-extremists are not only opposed to “free trade” but to international trade in general. This is based on the belief that each “bioregion” should be self-sufficient in all its material needs. If it’s too cold to grow bananas – – too bad. Certainly anyone who studies ecology comes to realize the importance of natural geographic units such as watersheds, islands, and estuaries. As foolish as it is to ignore ecosystems it is adsurd to put fences around them as if they were independent of their neighbours. In its extreme version, bioregionalism is just another form of ultra-nationalism and gives rise to the same excesses of intolerance and xenophobia.
· It is anti-free enterprise. Despite the fact that communism and state socialism has failed, eco-extremists are basically anti-business. They dislike “competition” and are definitely opposed to profits. Anyone engaging in private business, particularly if they are sucessful, is characterized as greedy and lacking in morality. The extremists do not seem to find it necessary to put forward an alternative system of organization that would prove efficient at meeting the material needs of society. They are content to set themselves up as the critics of international free enterprise while offering nothing but idealistic platitudes in its place.
· It is anti-democratic. This is perhaps the most dangerous aspect of radical environmentalism. The very foundation of our society, liberal representative democracy, is rejected as being too “human-centered”. In the name of “speaking for the trees and other species” we are faced with a movement that would usher in an era of eco-fascism. The “planetary police” would “answer to no one but Mother Earth herself”.
· It is basically anti-civilization. In its essence, eco-extremism rejects virtually everything about modern life. We are told that nothing short of returning to primitive tribal society can save the earth from ecological collapse. No more cities, no more airplanes, no more polyester suits. It is a naive vision of a return to the Garden of Eden.

October 2, 2017 4:37 am

I went thorough Checkpoint Charlie into East Berlin and East Germany in July 1989 and witnessed the last days of the dreaded Communist Honecker regime.
Here is something I wrote a long time ago on the subject…
Regards, Allan
This article is true. I’ve also been to Cuba, and it is a cesspool of poverty and degradation (Trudeau boys, please take note).
What is truly interesting is that there are still apologists for Castro and Cuba here in Canada, even as Fidel himself has recently admitted that Cuba is a failed state.
They are probably the same “useful idiots” who said that Communist East Germany was a good model for Canada to emulate. I seem to recall several former NDP leaders who tried to sell us that line of BS (the names Broadbent and Lewis come to mind).
I travelled to East Germany, going through the Berlin Wall at Checkpoint Charlie in 1989, shortly before the Wall fell. East Germany was a cesspool too. While not as materially poor as Castro’s Cuba, it was an even more vicious police state where neighbour spied upon neighbour, and nobody felt safe from the Stasi secret police. Those who tried to escape were shot, and allowed to bleed to death in “no-man’s land” between the many barbed-wire fences that formed “the Wall”.
The last person to be shot and killed while trying to cross the border from East to West Germany was Chris Gueffroy on February 6, 1989. He was 20 years old. Rest in peace, kid.

Tom O
October 2, 2017 11:12 am

Thanks, Dr. Ball, for an excellent article. I learned a lot today.

%d bloggers like this: