Quote of the week: @EricHolthaus calls for seizure of U.S. energy industry

This is epic. Perhaps Eric wasn’t in a lucid frame of mind when he wrote this, or then again, given his political leanings, maybe he was.

His Tweet was in response to Trump’s consideration of a “National Emergency” over illegal immigration and the border wall, and he pivots that to one of the most draconian calls to action I’ve ever seen.

Yes, Eric wants to “force those mf’ers to start building wind turbines and solar panels”.

Apparently he’s out of the loop.

British Petroleum had a whole division called “BP Solar“. In 2010, it closed down the factory at Frederick, Maryland. BP Solar was closed on 21 December 2011 when BP announced its departure from the solar energy business.

Apparently, it wasn’t “sustainable” as we noted on WUWT at the time: Shocker: BP quits solar power industry

Wind turbines? How about Shell’s wind division?

Shell’s onshore wind portfolio includes four joint venture interests spanning six operating wind projects, all of which are 50:50 non-operated ventures (NOVs). Our share of the energy capacity from our US projects is about 425 megawatts. Shell also maintains 50% interest in one offshore wind park, NoordZee Wind, in the Netherlands.

I think what Eric meant was to “force those mf’ers to end oil use and use ONLY wind turbines and solar panels”.

How would that work out?

Well, not so well, as Richard D. Patton pointed out January 1st:

Can wind and solar replace fossil fuels?

In a word, no.

Perhaps Eric should visit Venezuela where seizure of their private energy industry has already been done. Let us know how that worked out Eric. While you are there, have something to eat.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
January 8, 2019 1:43 pm

Nationalize industry, and force the workers in that industry into forced labour.

I have an idea. Let’s call it the Great Leap Forward.

Reply to  Les Johnson
January 8, 2019 2:55 pm

You’re making a very good argument for the better teaching of history. People need to understand what has happened every time people seriously tried to implement a Marxist society.

People also need to understand that a refugee crisis is nothing to be trifled with. link

Reply to  commieBob
January 8, 2019 3:21 pm

Depends on who is teaching the history.

Matthew Drobnick
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
January 8, 2019 6:37 pm

We’ll wait a minute… Does this guy consume anything created by fossil fuels. Seize eh? Let’s seize all his personal assets and force him to live according to the world he desires… No fossil fuels, direct or indirect

AGW is not Science
Reply to  Matthew Drobnick
January 10, 2019 9:43 am

I still want my reality show where each contestant gets his or her own “Carbon Nazi” assigned, who will take anything from the contestant that is made from, is produced with the use of, or in any other way exists or is available due to fossil fuels. Mr. Holthaus can be the first contestant, along with Mr. McKibben.

First thing their assigned Carbon Nazi would do is strip them naked (everything they are wearing is either from synthetic fibers or other materials made from fossil fuels, or fibers or other materials which are grown, harvested, molded or fashioned into cloth and sewn in factories all through the use of machinery powered by fossil fuels and buildings with heat and electricity produced via fossil fuels), grab their cell phones and other “connected” devices (all of which are made with component parts that involve mining done with fossil fuel powered machines, plastic parts made from fossil fuels, etc., and consume massive amounts of electricity (don’t forget all those cellular towers and computer servers being used) that comes from fossil fuels), snatch anything they are about to eat (since that will be the product of farming which uses equipment powered by fossil fuels, transport by vehicles (trains, trucks) powered by fossil fuels, and is kept fresh through refrigeration provided by fossil fuel powered electricity), bulldoze and evict the contestant from their homes (since those would be built from concrete, wood, steel, aluminum, asphalt shingle, etc. all of which involve mining, transport, manufacturing, and construction which ALL involve the use of fossil fuels), and instruct them in the art of finding a long straight stick and sharpening that stick against a rock, to use in the pursuit of their next meal.

Seems like the right way to show them just how “nuclear stupid” they are.

Reply to  commieBob
January 8, 2019 5:21 pm

commieBob – the author of your link appears to be arguing for an open-door policy to immigrants coupled with serious efforts to assimilate them into society without any concern for numbers, on the grounds that is the only way to prevent the would-be immigrants (invaders) overtaking the entire country and its culture. Hardly a viable or appealing solution for either the US or Europe.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Les Johnson
January 8, 2019 7:44 pm

Nationalize industry, and force the workers in that industry into forced labour.

If it looks like fascism, sounds like fascism, and quacks like fascism, it’s probably fascism…

Reply to  Les Johnson
January 9, 2019 1:00 am




Supporting Summary Information:
1) There is no catastrophic global warming crisis – it is a false crisis. Climate is relatively INsensitive to increasing atmospheric CO2.
2) There is no “more extreme weather” happening now than before – also a false crisis. There is no credible evidence to support this allegation.
3) Green energy is not green and produces little useful (dispatchable) energy. This has been proved in Germany and elsewhere.
4) The world is colder than optimum for humanity and the environment – cold weather kills 20 times more people than warm weather.
5) Atmospheric CO2 concentration is not alarmingly high, it is alarmingly low for the continued survival of carbon-based life on Earth.
6) Carbon taxes are destructive and imbecilic, because they do no good and cause great harm, by driving up the cost of EVERYTHING.
7) Most politicians are so incompetent that they should not even opine about energy matters, let alone set policy.
8) Cheap abundant energy is the lifeblood of society – it IS that simple!
9) Environmental harm from green energy schemes includes accelerated draining of the vital Ogalalla Aquifer for corn ethanol production in the USA and clear-cutting of the rainforests in South America and Southeast Asia to grow biofuels. These actions continue to cause huge environmental damage.
10) Green energy schemes have been sharply increased energy costs, vital electrical grids have been destabilized, and Excess Winter Deaths have increased – and green energy schemes typically do not even reduce CO2 emissions.
11) Based on the evidence, including the Mann hockey stick and the Climategate emails, global warming and green energy are the greatest scams, in dollar terms, in the history of humanity. Many trillions of dollars of scarce global resources have been squandered on global warming/wilder weather/green energy falsehoods.
12) A fraction of these wasted trillions could have put safe water and sanitation systems into every village on Earth, and run them forever. About two million kids below the age of five die from contaminated water every year – over sixty million dead kids from bad water alone since the advent of global warming alarmism. The remaining squandered funds, properly deployed, could have gone a long way to ending malaria and world hunger.

Told you so, years ago.

Regards to all for the Holidays, Allan

Reply to  Les Johnson
January 9, 2019 12:27 pm

Ya, they can work on that grand new idea, the farm collective.

Hey, worked great for Pol Pot.

For Cambodians, not so much.

Jeff Meyer
January 8, 2019 1:44 pm

Well! It sounds like he can power some wind turbines all by himself! 🙂

Reply to  Jeff Meyer
January 8, 2019 4:00 pm

maybe not, but I am sure all that hot air could float a balloon.

Reply to  Jeff Meyer
January 8, 2019 5:35 pm

🙂 🙂

January 8, 2019 1:45 pm

Did anyone hear about the us emissions spiking? Any reason for that?

Reply to  Jireland1992
January 8, 2019 1:49 pm

Economic recovery, mostly. I have not parsed the numbers, so that is a guess. Lots of factors built in. Gas has probably peaked at replacing coal. Nuclear plants have closed. Cold winters and hot summers. Lots more transport, with cheap fuel.

Reply to  Leslie Johnson
January 8, 2019 2:18 pm

Yeah that was what the bbc article I read about it said. Is it something we should worry about? I mean the US was doing well with its emission reductions til then.

Bryan A
Reply to  Jireland1992
January 8, 2019 2:32 pm

Wasn’t the “Spike” a 0.5% increase in CO2 output?

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Jireland1992
January 8, 2019 2:42 pm

Don’t worry about it. We are in the middle of an Ice Age and this warm spell will end soon, so enjoy it while it lasts. Nothing we have done so far will have any lasting effect on the weather or climate; the ice sheets will return, it’s just a matter of time.

Tim F
Reply to  Jireland1992
January 8, 2019 2:47 pm

Jill, nice back door entry to alarmism. We should be concerned about a drop in CO2, not an increase.

Reply to  Tim F
January 8, 2019 3:01 pm

Not at all my intention. I am worried about climate change since at this point it’s damned if we do damned if we don’t, but I would never resort to alarmism. Trust me that stuff messed me up something fierce.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Tim F
January 8, 2019 4:08 pm

Worry about the coming end to the current interglacial in our current ice age. If 1992 is your birth year you will be long gone before the glacial period returns, so enjoy, don’t worry.

Reply to  Tim F
January 8, 2019 5:53 pm

“Jireland1992 January 8, 2019 at 3:01 pm
Not at all my intention. I am worried about climate change since at this point it’s damned if we do damned if we don’t”

Read Willis’s excellent article!

Pay close attention to the graphed temperatures back to the end of the last ice age. Especially the temperature combined with CO₂ graph.
No, temperatures did not track with CO₂.

CO₂ is minimally active to a very small segment of infrared radiation.

While water is very active across a large swath of the infrared radiation spectrum.
Plus water is active in all three physical phases, vapor, liquid and solid while being very prevalent in the atmosphere.

CO₂, however, is measured in parts per million in the atmosphere.

All this is before getting into the terrible physical quality of temperature equipment, a horrendous distribution of temperature stations worldwide and very poor installation.

The final data product is massaged and adjusted before calculated into a temperature anomaly that people, animals, plants and wildlife are very unlikely to notice. Especially when every day has a minimum 8° to 15° swing in temperatures and most of the world experiences far greater seasonal temperature swings.

Lastly, the UNFCCC and the IPCC have both admitted the whole global warming climate thing is a wealth redistribution scheme.

John Endicott
Reply to  Tim F
January 9, 2019 12:51 pm

Jireland1992, there’s nothing to worry about. Climate changes, always has always will and there’s not a damn thing humans can do about it. Save your worry about things that humans actually can affect.

Gary Ashe
Reply to  Tim F
January 10, 2019 6:19 pm

ATheoK January 8, 2019 at 5:53 pm

”While water is very active across a large swath of the infrared radiation spectrum.
Plus water is active in all three physical phases, vapor, liquid and solid while being very prevalent in the atmosphere.”

4 phases solid [ visible] liquid [ visible] gas [invisible] and vapour [visible].

John Endicott
Reply to  Tim F
January 11, 2019 5:41 am

you are basically listing gas twice: vapour (or vapor) is “a substance in the gaseous state as distinguished from the liquid or solid state”. whether the gas is visible or not is irrelevant to the fact that it’s still a gas.

John Endicott
Reply to  Tim F
January 11, 2019 6:10 am

Or to put it another way, if you are going to split gas into two categories, why not split solid into 2:
ice: Hard solid
snow: Soft solid

Reply to  Jireland1992
January 8, 2019 5:53 pm

Do not drink the Kool-Aid. The Earth is not a “little blue marble”. This planet is large enough to have not only have it’s own geo-magnetic field but, also, it’s own natural satellite called the moon. Pull yourself out of fantasy land and realize that this is not a “Small World After All”. The miniscule rise in humanities emissions is not going to have the effect that the “Doom And Gloom” crowd would have you believe and make you have nightmares about. Tell your political people to tear down the wind turbines and be happy to do it. It’s ok.

Sam Capricci
January 8, 2019 1:46 pm

I think the comment “his tweet” is appropriate, a tweet is the sound a bird makes and most of these people are bird brains.

Rud Istvan
January 8, 2019 1:51 pm

Eric Holthaus is the nutcase who tweeted AGW was so serious he was not going to have children—until he did.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 8, 2019 2:43 pm

Yeah, typical collectivist hypocrite.

M Courtney
Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 8, 2019 2:56 pm

Nit many people called Eric can do that though.

Reply to  M Courtney
January 9, 2019 10:58 am

That, Mr Courtney, is very offensive … (to somebody, somewhere). You should be embarrassed; maybe even censored.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 9, 2019 7:19 am

We have commented on this guy before after “breakdowns”, he needs support and professional help.

michael hart
Reply to  LdB
January 9, 2019 10:07 am

I do recall him mixing up his blathering talk of global-warming with his “long suffering wife”. It seems she later took the advice I hinted she ought to.

January 8, 2019 1:52 pm

What is it with those … M’Fkcuers ?

Reply to  Kenji
January 8, 2019 3:06 pm

It is a peek at what lies simmering just out of sight. Agw has fanned a fire among a portion of those who believe in the agw concept. Just as the false accusations made against Trump have fanned a fire in a segment of our society which has brought the nation close to the edge of madness, imo.

Reply to  goldminor
January 9, 2019 12:33 pm

Building the new Green Guard; True Believers, ready to spark the next Cultural Revolution.
Mao would be so pleased.

January 8, 2019 1:53 pm

Maybe thetrump wall is quickly approved if fitted with solar panels at the top?

Bryan A
Reply to  HenryP
January 8, 2019 2:34 pm

And Wind Turbines at every Watch Tower spaced 1/2 mile apart

John Endicott
Reply to  HenryP
January 9, 2019 6:23 am

Yeah, just watch the lefties spin and spin if Trump tried to build a “green” wall that doubled as a solar and wind farm.

January 8, 2019 1:57 pm

Why would anyone pay attention to idiots like this? Even the other alarmists should notice that this guy has a screw loose.

January 8, 2019 1:57 pm

Again its just another indication that “Saving the World” is not on the Greens agenda.

Its World Government after the Wests economy collapses. For the history buffs, look up the 1920 tees and 1930 tees which lead to the rise of extreme political parties. The left wing Nazi party. yes it was left wing, was against the right wing Communist party in Germany.

This left and right wing business is the classic “Which side of the fence one is standing”stiff.

Hitler quest for power was against the Communists and the German army backed him. He “Saved “Germany from Communism, but then it went to his head, and the rest as they say is history.

So what do you want, freedom or the Greens version.


Phil R
Reply to  Michael
January 8, 2019 4:59 pm

Just curious, I’ve heard the communists called a lot of things, but “right-wing” has never been one of them. Then again, I’m not familiar with the German communist party.

January 8, 2019 1:59 pm

“Magical Thinking” is quite popular with Mental Defectives like Eric and Fidela Ocasio – Cortez these days . . .

January 8, 2019 2:00 pm

I would like to see Eric live his life without fossil fuels first before even listening to his rants.

Like most progressives he is all hat and no cattle.

Tom Halla
January 8, 2019 2:03 pm

Holthaus is just advocating a slightly faster version of the Green New Deal. Either would lead to a situation like Venezuela.

January 8, 2019 2:06 pm

The biggest truth against such idiocy is:
Wind and Solar cannot even replace themselves. Solar panels and wind turbines eventually need replacement.
Wind and solar systems working at maximum output over their entire lifetimes cannot generate enough electricity to manufacture their replacements for when they wear out.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Rocketscientist
January 8, 2019 2:45 pm

And they wear out faster than their supporters wish to believe.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  Rocketscientist
January 10, 2019 9:56 am

Nor can they generate enough electricity to transport their replacements to the site or erect them, or for that matter maintain and repair them.

Reply to  Rocketscientist
January 10, 2019 3:51 pm

After decades of improvements and innovations, hype-building and eco chest-beating, these are still energy systems that are ultimately a net energy loss to build and use on a large scale.
Solar energy has some legitimate small-scale applications and will stick around on a niche market. Wind energy will stick around only as graveyards of concrete, steel, and fiberglass.

Flight Level
January 8, 2019 2:07 pm

An excellent and revealing illustration of the intellectual illiteracy, frustrations and latent hatred exploited by populist green activists.

All sounds & feels like a copy/paste of the reasons Nazism was given the opportunity to display what it had in back-order.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Flight Level
January 8, 2019 3:17 pm

(I’m paraphrasing here. I don’t remember the exact quote but this is close.)
AOC, The Nut from New York:
“It isn’t important if one is factually correct as long one is morally correct.”

PS If anyone has her actual quote, it would be most welcome.
(The context of it was her complaining about “Fact Checkers” checking stuff she had said.)

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Gunga Din
January 8, 2019 3:34 pm

Here’s what she said:
“If people want to really blow up one figure here or one word there, I would argue that they’re missing the forest for the trees. I think that there’s a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.”
LOL, she even lies about her lying, and then claims that it’s ok to lie, as long as you are “morally right”. IOW, the ends justify the means.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
January 8, 2019 3:55 pm

Think of that in the context of her “New Green Deal”…….And “The Cause”.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
January 8, 2019 4:50 pm

Kind of like, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.”
Or making claims about cost that were too small by an order of magnitude.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
January 9, 2019 12:39 pm

Or, to paraphrase, the ends justify the memes. And she has justified so many hilarious memes.

January 8, 2019 2:10 pm

I think half of what Holthaus tweets is to get likes and retweets, and the other half is to try to get laid.

Steven Stegmann P.E.
Reply to  icisil
January 8, 2019 2:13 pm

Would you want any women that would respond??

Bryan A
Reply to  Steven Stegmann P.E.
January 8, 2019 2:37 pm

Perhaps with 5 drinks and 2 paper bags

John Endicott
Reply to  Bryan A
January 9, 2019 6:28 am

Even that might not be enough depending on what equipment they end up having.

John Endicott
Reply to  Steven Stegmann P.E.
January 9, 2019 6:27 am

as for any “woman” that responded, Eric might want to check under the hood, so to speak, before the getting laid.

Steven Stegmann P.E.
January 8, 2019 2:11 pm

Have any of these “experts” thought about the fact that every wind turbine and solar panel must be backed up by a fossil fuel plant or a nuclear plant for those days that the wind/sun is not up to their predictions. Unless having the grid up only occasionally is ok.
Assuming a 1Mw turbine/solar plant, has anyone estimated the cost of using batteries to store 48 MwHr of energy. The cost of the batteries should include more solar panels/turbines to charge the batteries while the first set powers the grid.

Is anyone aware of turbine/solar that is economical without government subsidies.

Farmer Ch E retired
January 8, 2019 2:18 pm

Maybe if the U.S. energy industry is seized, it could be run by an Army General. With any luck, he could use the wind turbines for target practice.

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Farmer Ch E retired
January 8, 2019 2:45 pm

sarc – no harm advocated

January 8, 2019 2:19 pm

I think the US should have a pilot project on preventing climate change. The purpose of the pilot project would be to demonstrate to Americans how easy it is to live green.

The pilot project would involve the most ardent proponents of climate change action. So all Democrats in Congress and the Senate would be forbidden from using internal combustion engine cars and all airplanes for the next two years. Starting in January 2020 these same people would move into accommodation where the all heat, light, and air conditioning was solely provided by solar panels and or windmills.

Only then could the American people see how easy climate change prevention truly is. 🙂

Reply to  joe
January 8, 2019 2:35 pm

“The pilot project would involve” California & it starts now.

In truth Germany is way ahead of us. A demonstrable failure.

Bryan A
Reply to  JohnOfEnfield
January 8, 2019 2:45 pm

But it MUST also include separation from the Grid sourced Electric Generation.

John Endicott
Reply to  Bryan A
January 9, 2019 6:36 am

Indeed, to be truly a demonstration of what living green means, it has to be completely separated from any non-green power generation – that means no connection to the current grid which has coal, gas, etc in the mix. None of this fraud about only using “green energy” from the grid – the grid is “color blind”, it cannot distinguish between “green” elections and “non-green” elections. so if there is “dirty” non-green generated energy (like from coal for example) anywhere in the grid, you have to consider the whole grid “tainted” with that non-green energy and thus using it would not be an example of living completely green.

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Bryan A
January 10, 2019 8:59 am

In addition, it must include separation from subsidies paid for by taxpayers outside the borders of CA. If CA has such a huge economy as they brag, why shouldn’t they pay for it? Arn’t the coastals sucking the wealth out of fly-over states?

Mike Lowe
Reply to  JohnOfEnfield
January 8, 2019 3:05 pm

As is South Australia!

AGW is not Science
Reply to  joe
January 10, 2019 10:01 am

Oh, but you also have to prohibit “connected” devices – no cell phones, tablets, computers, etc. – no way to keep those from using fossil fuel powered electricity indirectly. Make ’em hunt for or grow their own food too, and without any modern tools (all of which were made with the use of fossil fuels).

Mike H
January 8, 2019 2:32 pm

Holthaus is nuttier than a squirrel’s poop after a 3-day bender through the Planters peanut packaging plant.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Mike H
January 9, 2019 6:04 pm

That’s just nuts.

January 8, 2019 2:39 pm

Oh my God, what economic illiteracy !!

January 8, 2019 3:05 pm

Yes, that’s a good idea, lets separate the generation, so all of the companies who want to generate Green electricity can do sop, then they can put in all of the towers for their distant windmills, and finally they can offer their product to the potential customers.

They will of course be in a position to tell the customers what the cost per unit of power is going to cost, then they can arrange to connect the said customer to the Green electricity. . No subsidies are needed as they tell us that such generation is cheaper than coal.

Yes I know that the whole thing is totally unworkable, but then one can dream, which is what the Greens are good at. Sarc.


Craig from Oz
January 8, 2019 3:14 pm

To refresh my memory on young Eric’s backstory I did a quick search online.

That helpfully provided me with the content of a different twit he apparently sent 2 hours before his ‘state of emergency’ twit.

His words?

“This is exactly what would happen if I ever got elected governor of California.”

Not 100% sure of the context, but the old ‘Everything would be better if only *I* was in charge’ mindset of your typical Left is pretty clearly on display.

The Left – all about being in charge of everyone.

The Right – all about being in charge of themselves.

Reply to  Craig from Oz
January 10, 2019 9:23 pm

Running your own life well is difficult enough. It takes a remarkable combination of both short-sightedness and self-righteousness to think you could run the lives of everybody else well, too.

John K. Sutherland.
January 8, 2019 3:15 pm

All politicians and related ignorant nutters, should have to live on the AVERAGE income for the US and Canada, and then watch how they would quickly smarten up to the real costs of their stupidity. The way it is, they can do all of their stupid things and not feel the actual costs, the way regular folk do, as they are paid too highly.

Richard of NZ
Reply to  John K. Sutherland.
January 9, 2019 12:55 am

As long as it is the Median income, not the arithmetic mean. without those few extremely high incomes most pople would be surprised at ho much lower the “average” income is than published values.

John Endicott
Reply to  Richard of NZ
January 9, 2019 7:51 am

Looking at 2017 numbers:
the US median household income was $60,336

for comparisons sake:
The nominal median income per capita was $31,786.
The mean income per capita was $48,150.

Real median family income was $75,938.
The real mean family income was $100,400

Russ R.
Reply to  John Endicott
January 10, 2019 11:58 am

It pays to be in a “real mean” family. I had three older brothers so I fit into that category.

spalding craft
January 8, 2019 3:19 pm

I’ve become an avid twitter follower, and I’m astounded by the support that guys like Holthaus gets. Mostly from millennial types but some from confirmed advocates like Gleick and AOC. Responsible warmists generally stay away from him.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  spalding craft
January 9, 2019 6:08 pm

“I’ve become an avid twitter follower”


January 8, 2019 3:24 pm

Why wait for the industries to be seized? Just shut down all the power plants, gas stations, natural gas plants, etc and tell Eric “You’re welcome”.

CD in Wisconsin
January 8, 2019 3:33 pm

From my reading his Twitter page and posts on Grist.org, Holthaus openly acknowledges that he is a eco-socialist. He has posted pieces where he is openly hostile to capitalism and insists it has to go.

The dictionary definition of socialism, as I understand it, consists of govt control and operation of all means of producing goods and services. That is also what I was told in the economics course I took in college. I am still not certain how socialism is supposed to be more compatible with environmentalism and the climate alarmist narrative than capitalism is, but I imagine Eric could explain it to anyone who asks him.

The problem for Eric here is that it is seriously doubtful that socialism can’t make wind and solar energy scale up against fossil fuels and nuclear power any better than capitalism has. It is a matter of physics, engineering and economics rather than political and ecological ideology. Eric’s hostility to capitalism probably precludes him from being able to understand that, and it likely makes him look pretty foolish in the eyes of those who do.

To whatever degree people think that the federal govt is dysfunctional now, imagine what things would be like if the feds controlled and ran the entire economy under socialists or Eric’s eco-socialists. Venezuela, here we come!

It is rather sad to see someone like Holthaus become so disconnected from reality and oblivious to logic and reasoning as a result of his emotional and religious devotion to what he believes. Human history is full of people like that. The scary part is when they actually come to power.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
January 10, 2019 10:14 am

It’s easy for him to develop such “views,” because he’s isolated from the guaranteed results of implementing his own madness by virtue of him being fortunate enough to live in a (somewhat) capitalist society. Somebody should sentence him to Venezuela to see his own vision realized.

Reply to  AGW is not Science
January 10, 2019 9:34 pm

Bite the Hand enough times and eventually it stops feeding you. And they always act so surprised whenever it happens.

Roger Graves
January 8, 2019 3:37 pm

Are you sure it was Eric Holthaus? Sounds more like Erich Honecker to me.

Danny Dyche
January 8, 2019 3:41 pm

Capitalism’s demand for endless economic growth on a finite planet guarantees human extinction. It’s how cancer works.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Danny Dyche
January 8, 2019 9:19 pm

In a linear arithmetic world, Danny. Zero sum games dont apply in the real world, only in the designer-brain education the last couple of generations have received. You and most of your generation should be angry as helk at what has been done to you.

Mickey Reno
Reply to  Danny Dyche
January 8, 2019 9:41 pm

Danny, go solve Venezuela’s problems, come back and report your myriad successes, and then we’ll talk about how capable you are of understanding the human condition.

Or keep mentally pleasuring yourself as you’ve done here.

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  Danny Dyche
January 9, 2019 11:59 am

@Danny Dyche: Understand Danny that you are under no obligation to continue living in a capitalist society and system that you do not believe in. Feel free to drop out of it anytime and pursue what you believe is a sustainable green Utopia — perhaps on some deserted and secluded South Pacific island somewhere where there is nothing from a capitalist system to irritate you.

Also understand Danny that your mindset is really nothing new. It dates back some fifty years to 1968 when Paul Ehrlich of Stanford University came out with a book entitled “The Population Bomb.” In the book, he predicted that humanity would start running out of food, fuel and natural resources that would lead to chaotic conditions and massive human suffering before the turn of the 21st century. Millions — if not billions — were supposed to die. Do I need I tell you how wrong he was?

Do yourself a favor and start thinking about something called human ingenuity. I would like to suggest to you that we humans are better at it than you seem to give us credit for.

Russ R.
Reply to  Danny Dyche
January 10, 2019 12:21 pm

Capitalism has allowed countries to stabilize their population growth. Most of the population growth is from third world countries that have not experienced the economic stabilization that political freedom, and free markets create.
Capitalism demands efficient production of products that the public is WILLING to pay for. A good example is the production of microchips out of silicon and intelligence. The planet’s supply of silicon is not limited in any meaningful way. And the free market is the best method for discouraging the use of scarce resources, and allowing the most people to use resources that are produced at large levels of supply.
It is the optimum way to provide the most efficient allocation of resources, that we know of. If you can come up with something better, you will be remembered as the greatest human to live during this period. Good luck with that. Many have tried, all have failed.

Reply to  Danny Dyche
January 10, 2019 10:09 pm

The only limit on economic growth is the limit of human ingenuity, which neo-Malthusian devotees always underestimate. As for “finite planet”, that’s a TBI. True But Irrelevant.

The whole socialist scheme is the real cancer. It requires a healthy capitalist economy to leech from to even pretend to work, it’s bureaucratic bloat grows fat on the inflow of Other People’s Money, and it gradually strangles the productivity of a society’s middle class. The ultimate result: a completely predictable breaking point and a rapid descent into neo-feudalism.

January 8, 2019 3:55 pm

I believe they tried this in Germany quite a bit by getting some nice bloke with a moustache to go to Russia, Romania & the Middle east to try to take over the oil by force.

That didn’t work too great,-
so as part of the USSR , the DDR involved some nice people called STASI & KGB, making a pact with the Russians so they could drive Trabants and Skodas FOC.

It bankrupted the USSR to send Eastern Europe free oil, but it was after all fully seized by the state (much as it is now in Putin’s Russia).

Then they sent Schroder to Russia instead, which Merkel was not too keen on either…

“In 2016, Schröder switched to become manager of Nord Stream 2, an expansion of the original pipeline in which Gazprom is sole shareholder. … German Chancellor Angela Merkel criticized her predecessor, saying “I do not think what Mr Schröder is doing is okay.”

So, not happy with that, they try again by closing all the NPPs and switching to “renewables” en masse & solar panels.
The country has become flooded with high flailing towers which probably aren’t doing a lot since most of Europe is under a winter anticylone, and there’s no sun either in Dec-Jan.

The result is simply German electricity becomes some of the most expensive in the world, forcing businesses to leave for some place where it’s cheaper, and making poor people a lot poorer.

Why can’t they just follow Germany’s examples it’s always been the most advanced nation in the world jawohl!

January 8, 2019 5:14 pm

He is more of a Holtkopf than a Holthaus.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  otsar
January 9, 2019 6:14 pm

He’s certainly a something kopf, probably begins with S, followed by cheiss.

Wiliam Haas
January 8, 2019 5:37 pm

Climate change has been going on for eons and will continue to happen whether mankind is here as not. Climate change is currently so small that it takes networks of sophisticated sensors decades to even detect it. We must not mix up weather cycles which are part of the current climate with true climate change. There is no national emergency.

Considering the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, one can conclude that the climate change we are experiencing today is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and there is plenty of scientific rationale to support the idea that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. So even if there were a climate change emergency, mankind does not have the power to change it.

If people feel that the use of fossil fuels is bad then they should stop making use of all goods and services that make us of fossil fuels because it is their money that is keeping the fossil fuel companies in business. But people are not doing that. In my neighbor if companies stopped providing goods and services that involve the use of fossil fuels, most of us would perish. If the government wants us to stop making use of goods and services that involve the use of fossil fuels then they need to provide a more economical alternative but that is not happening. For example, we had a nuclear power plant not far away but it has been shut down and no effect has been made to replace it. Building more nuclear plants is the only credible way of significantly reducing our dependence on fossil fuels.

Reply to  Wiliam Haas
January 9, 2019 2:00 am

William Haas , thank you for this .I agree whole heartedly with your sentiments .I was born during the second world War and can remember the hard slog before electricity was routed through our farm and we were connected to the grid in 1948 .
My parents then purchased a refrigerator and a washing machine and an eletric stove next to the wood stove ,eIectric lights and a radio.
Send the moderns back to the era before electricity and they would suddenly wake up when most things they take for granted with the flick of a switch suddenly become hour long chores .
Such as cutting fire wood to cook a meal ,trying to keep perishable food cool enough to eat the next day in the summer ,trimming and fueling lanterns for lighting ,and the endless hours at the wood shed cutting kindling and fire wood to keep out the winter cold.
I have to agree wit you that nuclear has to be the way to power the world in the future and that research should be top priority to research molten salt and other technologies and produce plans that are fool proof , safe and at a reasonable cost to build and run.
If half of the money that has been expended on climate change research had been put into nuclear research toproduce cheap safe reliable nuclear power plants we would be a lot better off today .

Hoyt Clagwell
January 8, 2019 8:32 pm

We’ve gone from “Modernization” to “Maduronization”.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  Hoyt Clagwell
January 10, 2019 10:20 am

For Holthaus it’s more like “moronization.”

January 8, 2019 9:37 pm

Two million years ago there were beavers and trees on Ellesmere Island. Their fossils have been carbon dated. Now Ellesmere Island is way up north, opposite the northern end of Greenland. So two million years ago the Arctic was a lot warmer than it is now. And the planet and all it’s life is still here… at least I think we are!

Reply to  joe
January 10, 2019 10:34 pm

Even Antarctica once had tropical forests. Remnants of which are still encased deep in the continental ice sheet.

E J Zuiderwijk
January 8, 2019 10:16 pm

The ad accompanying this item is interesting. It says:

Invest in Renewable Energy

Fully Secured
Asset Backed Energy Bond
Capital at Risk
Govt Subsidy

Have I missed something?

Reply to  E J Zuiderwijk
January 8, 2019 11:06 pm

“Have I missed something?”

Algorithm, a cookie-cutter solution to the problem of targeted messaging -see how well it works?

It’s a ‘model’ output, don’tchaknow?

January 8, 2019 11:45 pm

Time to stop giving this cretin and his likes the time of day, stop quoting the lying braggarts.

kent beuchert
January 9, 2019 1:21 am

The fact that the media would even quote a nobody like Eric, talking about something about which he has no knowledge, tells you what the MSM is all about.

Gary Pearse
January 9, 2019 11:37 am

I’ve remarked that there is more than a little neurosis (I don’trule out psychosis, either) in all activist crowds. Activism issues are those in which some segment of society is perceived as, or interpreted as, or simply ‘appointed’ as victimizers of the “helpless” on a large scale.

This strikes a strong chord with those of weaker constitutions who had unhappy relationships with (commonly) fathers or others and the desire to believe ill of whatever group is ‘identified’ is strong – a fact not lost on political opportunists who can harness this angst for their own agendas. Manmade global warming is the perfect recipe.

My concern is it is like the idea of an institution that’s “too big to fail”. Failure of the satisfying, fulfilling hatefest, brings these unhappy folk down with a crash and and the potential for going over the edge is very real. Recall the epidemic of the so-called climate Blues wrought by the “Dreaded Pause” in temperatures for about 2 decades that ended the careers of a number of climate scientists who became doubtful of the validity of their work. The potential for self harm or harm to others as the rickety framework of climate disaster science continues to falter is very real. Take note of the damage that is becoming apparent with the
brainwashing of school children on the terrors of climate change (recent report on WUWT).

Jack L.
January 10, 2019 11:30 pm

That tweet demonstrates just how indoctrinated some people have become by the global climate change hoax.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights