New Statesman: Rich People Plan to Flee the Earth to Escape Climate Catastrophe

Kardashian Space Station
Kim Kardashian. By Eva RinaldiKim Kardashian, CC BY-SA 2.0, Link. Space Station by Mrazvan22 [CC BY-SA 4.0], via Wikimedia Commons

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

New Statesman author Eleanor Penny believes she has worked out why rich people don’t appear to care about the imminent climate catastrophe.

Who gets to survive climate change?

By ELEANOR PENNY

19 March 2019

As the waters rise, the rich are readying their arks to escape oncoming environmental crisis

In November, as wildfires ripped through California, Kim Kardashian hired a squad of private firefighters to protect her $50m estate in Calabasas. During the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Blackwater security guardsdefended the houses of the hyper rich against feared hordes of looters while their occupants were quietly helicoptered to safety.

Elsewhere, the hyper rich make plans to flee the planet altogether. From Elon Musk’s SpaceX programme to the would-be citizens of space-based micro nation Asgardia, venture capitalist space exploration is being packaged as humanity’s pioneering attempt to save itself from destruction.

These are not anomalies. Private insurance companies like AIG and Chubb have boasted about their increased provisions against the rapidly increasing numbers of natural disasters like wildfires. Others are scrambling to offset their exposureto the gathering effects of climate chaos. As the waters rise, the rich are readying their arks – quietly preparing themselves for climate chaos. If history teaches us anything, it’s that elites build their castles high above the filth.

At its root, elite denial isn’t a result of ignorance or suspended disbelief. Concentrated wealth warps perceptions of crisis and immunises elites against the practical and psychological threats of catastrophe. They are convinced of their own ability to survive the apocalypse: cataclysm is a preoccupation of the poor. 

Read more: https://www.newstatesman.com/world/2019/03/who-gets-survive-climate-change

My first thought was to make some wisecrack about hoping Anthony saves me a seat on the final evacuation mission to Asgardia, but I’m worried climate activists might take my joke seriously.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
148 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
mario lento
March 20, 2019 6:07 pm

I laugh at silly notions that leaving the planet to populate Mars or the moon would be a viable choice. Why not try living in central Antarctica, where at least there is plenty of water and oxygen… There solved a whole plethora of obstacles…

goldminor
Reply to  mario lento
March 20, 2019 6:59 pm

Antarctica? Let’s see them try a go at living in the Yukon for fun and games. It should be geeting warmer there shortly according to them.

Bryan A
Reply to  goldminor
March 20, 2019 7:43 pm

One potential way to ensure that scenario doesn’t come to pass is to legislate any Earth Based business ownership requires terrestrial residency. If Musk goes to Mars, he gives up ownership of Tesla and Space-X. If the ultra Rich move to space stations, they give up terrestrial based business ownership rights.

Rocketscientist
Reply to  Bryan A
March 20, 2019 8:21 pm

yeah right…
and while your at it why not force all business to be owned and operated only by residents of the country in which the business exists.
…hmm that causes a bit of a conundrum with multinational corporations where must the owners live?
BTW which country’s laws are you planing on using? United Nations? (snicker)

Bryan A
Reply to  Rocketscientist
March 20, 2019 10:31 pm

Live anyplace…on planet

MarkW
Reply to  Rocketscientist
March 21, 2019 7:23 am

IF what you demand is good, then extending it to the country level must be better.
Unless your goal is to steal what others have built.

Curious George
Reply to  Rocketscientist
March 21, 2019 7:45 am

The idea of alarmists leaving the planet is basically sound. Let’s speed up the process. They can use some tax dollars of mine, instead of killing birds and bats by windmills.

John Endicott
Reply to  Rocketscientist
March 21, 2019 9:06 am

Rocketscientist: BTW which country’s laws are you planing on using? United Nations? (snicker)

Bryan A: Live anyplace…on planet

Bryan you didn’t answer the question – which country’s laws are you planning on using for this idea (which ultimately means which country are you planning on for enforcing this law). If Germany (or even the EU) passes such a law, that’s fine and dandy for confiscating the wealth of Germans (or Europeans) who decide to live in space, but that will do nothing against Americans, Chinese, Japanese, Australians, etc who do so. (and that’s assuming you could ever get such a law passed).

MarkW
Reply to  Rocketscientist
March 21, 2019 11:19 am

Actually, there are (or at least used to be) countries that did this. They permitted you to leave the country. But you had to leave all of your wealth behind. You could take the clothes you were wearing, and that was about it.
At the time, we called those countries dictatorships that had no respect for human rights. And most of us condemned those countries.

Kaiser Derden
Reply to  Bryan A
March 21, 2019 5:40 am

should be some nice properties available for pennies on the dollar … can’t wait …

Menicholas
Reply to  Bryan A
March 21, 2019 9:49 am

If Musk goes to Mars, he is dead.
There, fixed it for you.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Bryan A
March 21, 2019 10:50 am

IF I were to take you seriously, I would point out that the 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits such a practice. But since we all know you’re joking, I never said anything.

John Endicott
Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
March 21, 2019 11:06 am

You assume the law he wants cares about little things like the constitution of one particular country. For his “idea” to work, he’d need a world-wide law, otherwise these rich people would simply relocate their businesses headquarters to whatever country doesn’t have said law before launching themselves into their space utopia.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  goldminor
March 21, 2019 4:03 am

There are locals in Central Russia that are more remote, less inhabited than Alaska or northern Canada and much more hospitable than Antarctica.

goldminor
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
March 21, 2019 9:01 am

I watched an interesting video a few months ago. It is about a woman named Agafia. She lives alone in the wilderness of Siberia, and has for the last 40+ years. Talk about the strength of the human spirit. This is worth watching. … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFK3DJ7Kn6s

Urederra
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
March 21, 2019 2:06 pm

I heard that in a Russian peninsula called Yamal trees are growing faster due to climate change.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  Urederra
March 22, 2019 3:22 am

During the Holocene’s “Climate Optimum”, trees were growing all across northern Russia, close to the shore of the Artic Ocean. Read more @ http://www.dandebat.dk/eng-klima7.htm

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
March 22, 2019 12:03 pm

Samuel

I am hoping you meant “locales”, not “locals”.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
March 23, 2019 3:58 am

Crispin,

You wondered correctly, ….. my RA afflicted fingers are a constant cause of my mis-keying and mis-spelling and my MS-Word “spellcheck” doesn’t always catch said mistakes.

I am just 7 months into my 79th trip around the Sun and its been a long exciting journey …… and I don’t fret the small stuff too much, only my mistakes or errors involving science really irritate me.

MarkG
Reply to  mario lento
March 20, 2019 7:44 pm

“Why not try living in central Antarctica, where at least there is plenty of water and oxygen”

People probably would be, if international law didn’t prohibit them from doing so.

But it’s not that useful, because the real reason for moving into space is to pull millions of miles between the sane people and the asshats. Antarctica is just a short flight away.

Sheri
Reply to  MarkG
March 21, 2019 4:09 am

Living in Antarctica, assuming that was allowed, would be great practice for Mars or any other place off the planet earth. While there is water and oxygen, which would probably not be true off planet, it’s cold, inhospitable, and they could learn to live with severe claustrophobia, etc, like will occur living on Mars. They could practice bringing in materials one “spaceship” at a time, building the buildings, etc all in preparation for their new lives. Yes, I know THEY won’t build the buildings, but think of the jobs they could create. About the time their great-great-great grandchildren are born, the new utopia in Antarctica will be ready. The earth will still be fine and there won’t be any reason to live there, but hey, they will have “won” the whole climate change battle, right? They have their own compound in Antarctica. Everyone else has beaches in Miami and skiing in Aspen. But they WON. Rich people are creepy weird, you know that?

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  Sheri
March 22, 2019 12:08 pm

Living on Mars would be like living in Yellowknife without the lake and without the summer and without the mosquitoes so thick they move in clouds that darken the sun, followed by blackflies so thick they move in clouds that darken the sun, followed by winter.

Watch “Ice Road Truckers” for a while and consider life like that without the vehicles, fuel and assistance within radio contact. Oh, and no stuff on the trucks either.

Charles Higley
Reply to  mario lento
March 20, 2019 8:35 pm

They may be hyper wealthy but they are not all that bright or well informed. It’s laughable.

Old Ranga from Oz
Reply to  Charles Higley
March 21, 2019 12:02 am

We Aussies are laughing ourselves silly right now, with our newest (and wealthiest) Greens candidate for the forthcoming Federal election in May. Julian Burnside, a wealthy philanthropist barrister, has chosen to challenge our Federal Treasurer for the blue ribbon conservative seat of Kooyong. Climate change, of course, is the current mantra and the topic for a public pre-election panel discussion.

Burnside has brought laughter on himself by giving the instruction “Don’t interrupt!” to a female conservative Senator during a panel discussion on Sky News. I expect that video clip will soon appear in campaign ads, and Burnside may wonder why people find it funny.

MarkW
Reply to  Charles Higley
March 21, 2019 7:24 am

If they aren’t that smart, how did they get so wealthy in the first place?

John Endicott
Reply to  MarkW
March 21, 2019 9:14 am

Their Daddy (or Grand Daddy or so on) was smart. Or at least that’s how the left dismiss all the rich as having undeservedly inherited their wealth. The fact is many rich people (at least here in the states) are first generation rich, having come up with a marketable idea and successfully built a business around it through long hours and hard work. The myth that all the rich were trust fund babies is just that, a myth.

That’s no to say there aren’t any inherited wealth rich, because there are. Lots of those as well. However, the ones that “aren’t that smart” are the ones end up being the last generation rich as they uselessly fritter away the wealth that their parents left them.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  John Endicott
March 21, 2019 11:54 am

I frequently hear, even from my wife who is typically very conservative, that the only way anyone can get rich is by having no morals or conscience, and cheating everyone else out of their money. That’s not to say I like or even respect Jeff Bezos or Bill Gates or even Mark Zuckerberg (while I feel for his former roommate, who may have even come up with the first workable FB, it was MZ that had the drive and determination to turn it into reality, not the hapless roommate) and the list goes on and on, but they didn’t get rich by sitting on their hands and bemoaning how “unfair” the world is! It took a lot of hard work to get each and every one of those companies to where it is today. That’s another misconception us poor conservatives must overcome!!!

wws
Reply to  mario lento
March 20, 2019 8:36 pm

Not to mention that 3/4 of the Earth is still open and available if you’re willing to go the SeaLab 2021 route. Technical challenges, sure, but nearly as many as going to Mars.

MarkG
Reply to  wws
March 20, 2019 8:58 pm

Living on Mars is much easier than living in the deep ocean.

Bryan A
Reply to  MarkG
March 20, 2019 10:35 pm

At least in the deep ocean, you aren’t more than a few miles from fresh air if needed.

Rocketcientist
Reply to  Bryan A
March 21, 2019 9:17 am

I doubt very much if humans will be living at those depths.
I have designed both spacecraft and submarines. The submarines environment is by far more challenging than space. For space habitation the biggest pressure differential is 15 psi. Just descending 33 feet in the ocean exceeds that differential, and it only gets worse as you descend. And, the pressure load is compressive which makes pressure vessels that much more unstable. Then there is the corrosion. Sea water isn’t very nice to minerals and metals in that it dissolves them. Vacuum …not so much, but it is not without its quirks. Low pressures and low gravity will allow some metals to recrystallize and grow whiskers. Thermal control in the ocean is quite different from space as well. While deep space is a cold as you can get (-273 °C ) the only heat loss is through radiation. More often than not the issue with space craft is adequate heat rejection due to electronic equipment heat generation. Using the readily available heat sink of ocean water alleviates this and then some. The coldest the oceans get is about 2 °C, however keeping underwater habitats above the surrounding water temperatures requires a good bit of design not easily accomplished without significant insulation as the surrounding water in also convecting away a good bit of heat.
Both realms challenge the need for life support.

John Endicott
Reply to  Bryan A
March 21, 2019 9:35 am

I doubt very much if humans will be living at those depths.

The same could be said of living on mars. The challenges are different for each, but they are considerable. As such the one closer to home has the better shot at being overcome first if for no other reason than you can try and fail dozens of times here on earth in the amount of time it would take one attempt on Mars to even get started on the red planet (due to the great distances of space one need to traverse just to get people and materials from here to there – Each failure on Mars means repeating that long time with sending the next group of people and materials not to mention the difficulty in remotely recovering information on why the previous effort failed, which would be needed to avoid the same failures being repeated).

James Beaver
Reply to  Bryan A
March 22, 2019 8:09 am

If your submersible has a malfunction and it can’t facilitate egress to the surface, the fresh air may as well be a billion miles away. Quite a few submariners have been killed this way.
— EM1/SS, crew person on an SSN.

John Endicott
Reply to  Bryan A
March 22, 2019 8:55 am

If your submersible has a malfunction and it can’t facilitate egress to the surface, the fresh air may as well be a billion miles away. Quite a few submariners have been killed this way.

True, but if your first submarine malfunctions, you can recover the wreck and analyze the data in order for your second submarine to have a better shot at avoiding that same malfunction. If your first space craft malfunctions and ends up on one-way deep space voyage never to return you don’t have much to go on in order to try and make sure your second space craft doesn’t suffer the same fate. (it’s hard to fix a problem when you don’t know what caused the problem)

While the crews of the two “first” crafts will be equally dead, it’s the crews of the second, and successive crafts whose survival depends on finding out what went wrong the first time.

Craig from Oz
Reply to  MarkG
March 20, 2019 11:03 pm

(thinks…)

I guess so. Mars wouldn’t have a brutal crushing pressure to worry about for instance.

On the other hand, getting to the deep ocean is probably a lot easier than Mars. Hold this heavy weight and step off the boat, please…

Probably best to summarise as Mars has ‘different’ technical issues c.f. Deep Ocean.

John Endicott
Reply to  MarkG
March 21, 2019 9:22 am

Living on Mars is much easier than living in the deep ocean.

For the sake of argument, we’ll say that is true (it’s debatable as the “difficulties” are different on Mars, not absent, and every bit as challenging). Even so, getting to Mars is a longer and tougher task than getting to the deep ocean. And, with the deep ocean, if and emergency happens (you get majorly sick or injured, for example) you aren’t far from the resources you need to mitigate that emergency (specialist hospitals/doctors are only minutes to hours away). On Mars you are S.O.L as any resources not to hand are months away back on Planet Earth.

Reply to  mario lento
March 20, 2019 10:59 pm

The world can do without people such as account executives, telephone sanitizers, public relations executives and opinion pollsters. 🙂

James Bull
Reply to  Roger
March 20, 2019 11:39 pm

So it’s the “B” ark for them then.

James Bull

Trebla
Reply to  mario lento
March 21, 2019 3:52 am

What about 97% of climate scientists. Shouldn’t they be packing their bags too?

Andy Pattullo
Reply to  mario lento
March 21, 2019 8:07 am

Reminds me of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. Personally I am very willing to contribute to a fund to ensure those most precious souls who populate Hollywood, the media and the academia who have selflessly warned us over and over about the end of times, are among the first to be evacuated to space along with the essential telephone sanitizers and life consultants.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Andy Pattullo
March 21, 2019 9:11 am

If you set it up, I’ll bet you could get them to show up.

beng135
Reply to  Joel Snider
March 21, 2019 11:33 am

Build it and they will come. Then fire them off into the heavens.

John Endicott
Reply to  Andy Pattullo
March 21, 2019 11:03 am

And the lawyers, Andy, they can have the all lawyers join them so that when the realize what a mess their misguided beliefs have landed them in, the can sue the heck out of each other.

John Endicott
Reply to  John Endicott
March 21, 2019 11:10 am

OK, some of the above “the”s should have been “they”s. Not sure if it’s my fingers skipping letters, my keyboard having a fuss “Y” key or auto-corrupt acting up (or some combination of all of the above). Whatever the case, It makes me miss that edit button every time something like that happens.

Joel Snider
Reply to  mario lento
March 21, 2019 8:57 am

That’s the thing – you CAN’T laugh at it anymore – besides the fact that there isn’t a progressive warmist on the planet with a sense of humor, there’s the accompanying fact that there is no absurdity that’s beneath them.

RG
Reply to  mario lento
March 21, 2019 9:48 am

Hadn’t thought of your argument before, but it amazes me when people say with a strait face we need to move some place other than Earth. Ignoring the stupidity of thinking a cave on Mars can be a better place to live than earth, my fear is that the middle class will be wiped out to pay for it. As a little boy, I assumed we would be on our way to Mars shortly after landing on the moon. 50 years later, I’m adamantly opposed to human space exploration. Using my money to fund joyrides for rich folks offends me greatly. I’m all for robotic exploration, and big telescopes. None of these will directly benefit me either, but at least the knowledge gained is interesting. I want to know if there are tube worms living on the moons of Jupiter and Saturn today. Seriously, I find the idea far more fascinating than searching for dead microbes on Mars.

MarkW
Reply to  RG
March 21, 2019 11:26 am

Back in the 1600’s, I could see an awful lot of people saying that same thing regarding leaving Europe.

John Endicott
Reply to  RG
March 21, 2019 11:30 am

Using my money to fund joyrides for rich folks offends me greatly

If we ever do leave this rock for another one, why do you think it’ll be the rich folks who will go first. When the “new world” on the other side of the Atlantic was first colonized, it was mostly the lower classes and those seeking to escape persecution for their religious beliefs who were the first colonists. Do you really think the Pilgrims were the ultra wealthy of their time? The early settlers didn’t even have a money economy, instead relying on corn (valued at 6 shillings a bushel) as the currency of exchange.

similarly, the first Martian colonists will likely be made up mostly of the poor and outcast who have nothing to lose by leaving the Earth. Maybe an idle rich dilatant or two that hadn’t entirely thought things through will be in the mix, but they’ll be the exception not the rule.

Warren
March 20, 2019 6:09 pm

Is Anthony rich?

Mike in MN
Reply to  Warren
March 20, 2019 7:17 pm

Of course. Gobs of Big Oil money paid to run this site and to fake all of the articles and comments. I think he already owns a spaceship. How do you think he can afford all of those Bigfoot steaks? By pawning his moon rock collection? Not likely.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Mike in MN
March 21, 2019 2:07 pm

We’re all in the pay of Big Oil.

Bob Cherba
Reply to  Warren
March 20, 2019 7:25 pm

If Anthony’s rich, it’s news to me. And, if so, he conned me out of money to help pay for a couple of conference trips

Warren
Reply to  Bob Cherba
March 20, 2019 9:25 pm

Ha . . .
and me a few seemingly unnecessary small donations.
What a scandal!!

Mohatdebos
March 20, 2019 6:09 pm

Wasn’t that Karl Marx’s explanation for why American workers did not support communism — they had achieved middle class living standards.

-d
March 20, 2019 6:09 pm

Everyone knows that the real conspiracy will send Penny and similar ilk to Mars with Elon Musk so that he is always guaranteed to be the smartest in the room. Ooops!

Hivemind
Reply to  -d
March 21, 2019 3:24 am

I hope they’re taking Alexandria Occasional Cortex with them, or they’ll be missing the village idiot.

Craig
March 20, 2019 6:12 pm

The barbarians will storm the gates long before the uber wealthy will be allowed to jet off and leave us paupers behind.

commieBob
Reply to  Craig
March 20, 2019 6:51 pm

Somehow I am reminded of the French Revolution. Indeed, many French aristocrats were able to escape but most were unable to take their wealth.

If the super rich flee to Mars, my guess is that they will quickly be cut off from their wealth.

Rocketscientist
Reply to  commieBob
March 20, 2019 8:31 pm

They’ll be cut off from pretty much everything terrestrial, for years on end at best. If they didn’t already send it or bring it with them they won’t have it. Presently there’s no flotilla of supply vessels.
There aren’t return boats sailing on every high tide.
BTW the ultra rich didn’t go to the new world, those who went were “lean and hungry” peasants eager to make their fortunes.

MarkG
Reply to  Rocketscientist
March 20, 2019 9:02 pm

Yes, exactly. Few of the ‘ultra rich’ are ready to live a spartan life on Mars.

The people who will go are the middle class, who see the chance to get away from the thieving leftists and start a good life somewhere new.

Which is exactly why the left are so terrified.

As for ‘only things they take with them’, by the time we can live on Mars, we’ll have local manufacturing technology that can make most things we want wherever there are the resources to do so.

John Endicott
Reply to  Rocketscientist
March 22, 2019 9:05 am

They’ll be cut off from pretty much everything terrestrial, for years on end at best.

Certainly for the length of time it takes for “things terrestrial” to travel from one planet to the other.

Presently there’s no flotilla of supply vessels.

Because, presently, there’s nothing to supply. Just as there were no flotilla of trading vessels crossing the atlantic in the centuries before the colonies were started. But once there’s a viable colony established, such vessels will be inevitable (again, as seen though out history).

There aren’t return boats sailing on every high tide.

Again, see above. Now granted, returning space ships are a bit of a bigger logistical hurdle than returning boats were back in the colonial days of the New World. But once a viable colony exists, the ability to have travel in both direction will follow. (the trick, of course, is getting to the viable colony stage which is a whole lot harder than the phrase implies).

Mayor of Venus
Reply to  commieBob
March 21, 2019 11:47 am

And on “Downton Abbey” we saw some Russian aristocrats who escaped the communist revolution to Britain, but again they were no longer wealthy.

markl
March 20, 2019 6:14 pm

We should be so lucky.

Big T
Reply to  markl
March 20, 2019 6:31 pm

I will hold the door for them. Will make more room for normal people.

SMC
Reply to  Big T
March 20, 2019 6:49 pm

If they move smartly, the door won’t hit them where the good lord split them.

Robert
Reply to  SMC
March 20, 2019 7:30 pm

I don’t think this was thought thru,Without an army of subservants,the rich are going nowhere!

March 20, 2019 6:23 pm

The sooner these people leave for Mars or elsewhere, the better off and safer we will be.

Joey
March 20, 2019 6:23 pm

Great idea….kind of reminds me of all the rich people who were on the Titanic.

Tom Abbott
March 20, 2019 6:25 pm

We should encourage all the Alarmists to flee to Asgardia as soon as possible.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  Tom Abbott
March 20, 2019 7:05 pm

It isn’t just this story, but headlines all over the place read like a crazy science fiction story.
Has humanity always been so nuts, or is there some sort of epidemic of madness?

jtom
Reply to  Alan Robertson
March 20, 2019 7:16 pm

Clearly, it is a result of climate change, or perhaps breathing too much CO2. (sarc).

I blame in the Internet. It’s allowing all those with room-temperature IQs to band together and promote each others absurd ideas.

And they have more votes than we do.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  jtom
March 20, 2019 8:59 pm

The bottom half of the bell curve needs love, too.

ATheoK
March 20, 2019 6:26 pm

“Elsewhere, the hyper rich make plans to flee the planet altogether.”

Sure they do… And they plan to wait on themselves to build housing, grow crops, raise animals, clean up personal filth and all of that rot.

Which means they have to bring along fairly large communities of doers, tradespeople, farmers, etc.

Or do these non-achievers plan to develop food replicators and warp drive within the next twelve years?

Just another unicorn fantasy of the progressive left.

H.R.
Reply to  ATheoK
March 20, 2019 7:00 pm

Good point, ATheoK. The rich will need someone to send back down to Earth for more toilet paper when they run out on Mars.

Oh, and pick up another case of Scotch… and a Mocha latte grande… and nachos… and a few bottles of Perrier on the way out the door… and…
.
.
You’re right. There’s gonna be a lot of ugliness and misery for those who are used to the soft life of the ultra rich.

Roy Spencer
March 20, 2019 6:26 pm

I already saw this movie. 2012.

Bryan A
Reply to  Roy Spencer
March 20, 2019 7:46 pm

Thought that was Elysium

Kurt
Reply to  Roy Spencer
March 20, 2019 8:20 pm

It was a book wasn’t it? One of Douglas Adams’ Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy novels I think. But as I recall it was a bunch of hairdressers and bureaucrats that were convinced to be the vanguard sent to colonize a new planet. But hey, first tragedy, then farce and all that.

Richard of NZ
Reply to  Kurt
March 20, 2019 9:06 pm

That was the “B” Ark if memory serves.

Craig from Oz
Reply to  Richard of NZ
March 20, 2019 11:14 pm

Golgafrincham B-Ark.

The plot was that the planet decided that they had a ‘useless third’ of the population and they spun a story of ‘DOOOOOM!!!!’ in order to convince that third to leave.

They ‘divided’ the population into the A-Ark (all the thinkers, leaders, scientists and artists) and the C-Ark (the people who do the work) and then convinced everyone else to get into the B-Ark.

What readers (viewers/listeners… your version may vary) normally take out of this is that many of the population do useless jobs that add nothing to society. Middle managers, telephone sanitisers, used car salesmen – all add nothing and should be buddled up and removed. The B-Ark. Short hand for useless.

What people forget about this story is the casual punch line that the remaining Golgafrinchams were all wiped out by a disease contracted from a dirty telephone, ie, all those thinkers, scientists and great leaders weren’t actually all that smart either.

My take has been if they had sent off the A-Ark the B and Cs would have been MUCH better off. Never trust your Elites.

latitude
March 20, 2019 6:28 pm

she’s a kid >comment image

WXcycles
March 20, 2019 6:30 pm

Eleanor Penny
Henny Penny
Coincidence?

Komrade Kuma
Reply to  WXcycles
March 20, 2019 7:01 pm

Nah, just born again.

beng135
Reply to  WXcycles
March 22, 2019 7:53 am

Penny Robinson.

BarryBrill
March 20, 2019 6:30 pm

There is a better solution! The rich could simply subsidize the building of nuclear power generators to replace coal-fired plants in China, India, Russia, Brazil, and Indonesia. They could all be operating long before the 12-year doomsday arrives and an RCP2.6 (or better) scenario will result. GMST will never reach 1.5°C let alone 2°C.

It won’t cost much – just the difference between the c/kWh for nuclear, rather than coal. MUCH cheaper than flying to Mars! Or would they all rather abandon the Earth than risk a nuclear accident? Has anybody done the math?

Even cheaper is MIT’s new proposal for aerosols in the stratosphere. Only $2 billion per year.

David Chappell
March 20, 2019 6:34 pm

Presumably the poor people to do all the cooking, cleaning and other essntial jobs will be shuttled in daily from earth.

n.n
March 20, 2019 6:39 pm

Women will return to Venus., men to Mars, and babies will be launched into orbit around Pluto, the clump of minerals formerly deemed a planet.

a happy little debunker
March 20, 2019 6:43 pm

Why am I suddenly reminded of the ‘Golgafrinchan Ark Fleet Ship B’?

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  a happy little debunker
March 20, 2019 7:32 pm

Maybe that picture of a kardashian?

icisil
March 20, 2019 6:45 pm

“They are convinced of their own ability to survive the apocalypse: cataclysm is a preoccupation of the poor. ”

Cataclysm is a preoccupation of the mentally unwell. Fixed it.

Steve O
March 20, 2019 6:47 pm

Right. The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is off by a few hundred PPM from some notion of the ideal, so the rich plan to hazard a long space journey to some unknown planet with an atmosphere of methane and cyanide, with no life or food to be found. Good grief.

The author isn’t stupid enough to believe it, but he thinks his readership might be.

Cube
Reply to  Steve O
March 21, 2019 2:50 am

some notion of the ideal…

clipe
March 20, 2019 6:48 pm

New Statesman: The influence might not be positive, but there’s no doubt he has shaped the debate.

new statesman not sure if this is good or bad

https://www.newstatesman.com/global-issues/2010/09/climate-mcintyre-keeper

Gordon Dressler
March 20, 2019 6:49 pm

If Kim Kardashian is going to be on the one-and-only space station life boat, as the article’s picture suggests, I’ll take my chances right here on Mother Earth come what may.

Bruce Clark
Reply to  Gordon Dressler
March 20, 2019 6:59 pm

++ Agree ++

Jon Salmi
Reply to  Bruce Clark
March 20, 2019 7:28 pm

Please, let’s make sure AOC has a reservation on the first ship to Mars.

Tom Halla
March 20, 2019 6:51 pm

Anyone writing for The Onion must have quite a problem, as the left is approaching a parody of itself in reality.

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  Tom Halla
March 20, 2019 7:20 pm

Indeed Anthony’s First of April post will have to be honest and truthful. There’s no way you can parody stupid.

Chris Norman
March 20, 2019 7:06 pm

Meanwhile the Planet continues to cool towards a Maunder Minimum.
Ironic does not cover it.

Sara
March 20, 2019 7:08 pm

I keep hoping they’ll move to another planet and take all their psycophants with them. (Misspelling intentional.) Now someone else has put it into words where they can see it. ‘Bout time, too.

I’ll make sure I stock the supplies of everything. I have plans for a icehouse, since refrigeration won’t be available any more. But I’ll need an icebox to cool stuff, and I still have my great-great grandmother’s oil lamps. They only need new wicks and make a glass “skirt”, which I think I can pick up at a store that serves the Amish communities. Thank goodness I had the foresight to get Hannah Glass’s classic ‘Art of Cookery’, originally published in 1787.

And the times, they are a-changing….

Well, it all looks good to me.

Neil Jordan
Reply to  Sara
March 20, 2019 10:54 pm

No need to worry about lamp supplies. Try Antique Lamp Supply in TN:
https://www.antiquelampsupply.com/
They sell glass skirt lampshades, too. And chimneys and wicks.

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
Reply to  Neil Jordan
March 21, 2019 2:32 am

Thanks Neil, really useful link source. I’ve already got some Victorian oil lamps laid in for when the power cuts start in the U.K. , probably the next severe winter we get. Incidentally I see they supply the incandescent mantle type lamps. My understanding is that these need to be used with caution unless you like breathing in alpha particles.

Sheri
Reply to  Sara
March 21, 2019 4:15 am

Sara: How do you write science fiction with this kind of “reality” existing? Do you write what was “normal” as science ficiton now?

(Note: I do the same with planning ahead. We keep six months to a year of food and other supplies, 3 months of medicines. I’d do more if they lasted longer. Still working on how to make my own insulin, but if some guy did it in the early 1900’s I’m sure I can do so too. We can live 100% off grid right now, though I won’t if I have a choice. For an icebox, underground storage will work in the cooler locations. I use buried coolers in fall to save garden produce until I can get around to processing it. As a friend and I discuss, we grew up or had parents who lived like this. Today’s kids are in deep kimchi when their cell phones die and their social networks evaporate….)

Sara
Reply to  Sheri
March 21, 2019 2:49 pm

Good question, Sheri. I was out most of the day, not ignoring what you asked.

Sci-fi used to be speculation on what was to come, partly based on what the growing span of science provided. Then there was a shift in something, some part of it, that gave it a case of the dismals, and it became speculation on dystopia, rather than utopia. I don’t know if that started with Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’, or with some of Heinlein’s stories that indicated a societal breakdown was underway, or if it had anything to do with the then current events.

However, if you look back into history, it seems as though every time things get tough (bad weather, crop failures, plagues of bugs, weird diseases) , people find themselves wanting to get up and leave for less unpleasant places. It may be a huge natural disaster like the quake and tidal waves that hit the city of Ur, or it might be Noah’s flood or the asteroid that hit Gomorrah.
But subsequent to that, you have dystopic civilizations falling apart in ‘1984’, Fahrenheit 451, ‘Brave New World, the Hebrews’ exodus from Egypt (they were monotheistic and refused to return to polytheism), Heinlein’s ‘Revolt in 2100’, the ‘Hunger Games’ and ‘Divergent’ series, and – yes – the Terminator stuff as well as Star Wars and Star Trek.

So if you look at this pattern which seems to repeat itself in history and in literature and entertainment, then it’s easy enough to set up a story line to follow that will allow the characters to succeed escaping and starting over while the “old system” (for want of anything better) crumbles away. If I have a story that is about love and loss in a time of warfare, that could be at any time in history on this planet, and therefore makes it easy to move ahead in time to the speculative future.

But then you have to ask questions such as: “if I do XX with these characters, will that destroy future alliances that bring this to an end?” or “Is it really necessary to let any of the main characters live?”

It’s also about realizing that there are only XX themes in writing fiction, and the tenor of a story is set by the genre it inhabits.

Sheri
Reply to  Sara
March 22, 2019 8:39 am

Thank you for explaining.

WR2
March 20, 2019 7:08 pm

The propagandists have sadly been very successful in convincing the idiot masses, and themselves, that every normal weather event is another sign of imminent Armageddon. It’s really quite sad. I don’t see this nonsense ending for a very long time. Even a 10 year cold spell will be spun as an effect of climate change.

Editor
March 20, 2019 7:27 pm

Launch the Golgafrincham B Ark!

Zig Zag Wanderer
March 20, 2019 7:29 pm

Ben Elton wrote a book based on this idea. It’s called “Stark” and is quite funny if you like his kind of humour/social commentary. He’s a rabid lefty, but I like his writing.

In the book, all these megarich knobheads end up living on the moon, and quickly discover that all their peers are complete knobheads too, and end up killing themselves out of boredom.

Don
March 20, 2019 7:32 pm

Didn’t know we could leave. I was just going to my second floor of my home with a cooler of beer. Paint me silly.

Gary Pearse
March 20, 2019 7:41 pm

I’m disappointed that a self-described thought provoking publication is ignorant of the fact that this whole climate fantasy was the handiwork of the Champagne socialist billionaires who don’t plan to go anywhere. They intend to run the whole global governance show, and even much multiplied abject poor class are part of their plan. The only thing the Statesman girl got right was that they aren’t concrmerned about the cost of things. Sea level, temperature, and the whole climate shitteree are just fine. The clime skim will soon be over.

Paul of Alexandria
Reply to  Gary Pearse
March 20, 2019 8:57 pm

Oh the efforts he mentioned are quite real. I haven’t quite figured out why Musk wants to go to Mars, but he’s serious about it.

Ill Tempered Klavier
Reply to  Paul of Alexandria
March 21, 2019 11:06 am

He thinks he’s D. D. Harriman, of course.

I burn incense at the altars of Fineline (God of engineers), Zeemoff (God of automation and building contractors), M’affrey (Goddess of Dragons)…

Joel O'Bryan
March 20, 2019 7:42 pm

Reminds me of the movie Passenger.
The basic plot is Chris Pratt (the actor) is on 100+ year trip to colonize another planet with 4,000+ other people in suspended animation including the several hundred crew asleep as well. His pod wakes him up like 80 years early. That plot gimmick is this early wake-up is way too soon, and he can’t control the spaceship, so he’s gonna die in space with the place all to himself over the next 80 years. SO he spends a the first year having the run of the place to himself, with only AI-robot bartender to talk to. Free booze, lots of video games, but no sex.
So he wakes up the lovely Jennifer Lawrence (the actress) to have some companionship and sex. When she finally finds out what he did (intentionally woke her up early, they can’t go back to sleep), she’s beyond furious, but then they go on to save the spaceship and everyone sleeping it away blissfully but themselves (and one poor schmuck crewman who woke up to help them).

Think of Passenger then as a allegory of Saving the Earth – Millennial style.

And then Chris and Jennifer apparently spend the rest of their long lives living it up in this enormous space ship, free booze, lavish foods and probably lots of sex and ZERO responsibility, while everyone else sleeps.

So that movie is a lot like today’s Millennials. They see themselves as heroically saving the Planet from Climate Catastrophe and maybe Trump. Yet they want no responsibility, just a free ride on someone else’s dime for the rest of their life.

So I say, let’s blast them all into space in tin can headed for the outer reaches of nowhere and tell them, “It’s just like that movie Passenger, trust us.”

Toim in Florida
March 20, 2019 7:43 pm

They aren’t going anywhere. Most of them said they would leave the U.S. if Trump was elected President and they are still here.

James Clarke
March 20, 2019 8:55 pm

So Eleanor Penny is intelligent enough to write complete sentences and even put together a series of articles on current issues. There is no sign of a mental handicap in the way she uses the English language. I would guess that her IQ is at least average.

So it boggles my mind to imagine anyone with at least an average IQ could be so utterly ignorant of, well, just about everything. Is it possible that Eleanor really doesn’t know that the ‘climate’ of all other known planets in the universe, not to mention the space between them, is instantly fatal to humans? Does she really believe that the rich have someplace better to go? Can she really be that stupid?

The article has to be a hoax, or some kind of deep state psychology attempt to control people by spreading ignorance, antiscience and class envy like a virus. I personally feel like I am a little dumber for having read this article. I was tempted to read some of her other articles, just to see if they were as equally inane, but stopped myself hopefully before suffering any permanent brain damage.

Streetcred
March 20, 2019 9:13 pm

What’s holding them back, they’re so convinced, they should check out now ! 😉

Killer Marmot
March 20, 2019 9:55 pm

The worst place in the world is more hospitable — and cheaper to live in — than outer space.

Tom W
March 20, 2019 9:56 pm

Didn’t this article come out a bit bit early? It is still 12 days to the beginning of April.

Craig from Oz
March 20, 2019 11:25 pm

The closing paragraph from the quotes above:

“At its root, elite denial isn’t a result of ignorance or suspended disbelief. Concentrated wealth warps perceptions of crisis and immunises elites against the practical and psychological threats of catastrophe. They are convinced of their own ability to survive the apocalypse: cataclysm is a preoccupation of the poor. ”

Strangely, once you get past all the paranoia and Left on Left Hate in the rest of the article, this is actually rather profound.

Our Elite are usually the first to put their Twitter account behind whatever Moral Cause will get them the most free drinks at the next red carpet – or whatever actually motivates them, I speculate – but never seem to grasp why the common masses seem so against the idea. Why?

Concentrated wealth warps perceptions of crisis and immunises elites against the practical and psychological threats.

Increased power prices? Tis only a little bit of extra money. What is $2000 a year anyway?

Decreased travel? Well that will clearly be only for non-important travel. My travel is important.

Uncontrolled migration? These people are humans. They deserve dignity. Also have the gardeners trim the trees again, they are blocking the camera views on the west gate.

The ‘needs’ of our Elite are different, hence the concerns of our Elite also do not match.

The rest of the article looks like paranoid class envy drivel, but the conclusion is worth a second glance.

GRAHAM CLIFT
March 21, 2019 12:36 am

We need to convince the elites that it makes sense to go to the nearest planet. Once they agree, we send them off to that planet. If there are a real scientists they won’t get in cos a trip to Mercury wouldn’t be fun. Those thinking they are going to Mars, well that’s a few less expensive mouths to feed and news feeds to fill. Yeah! Course we will still be left with the pseudo scientists who didn’t get on because they thought venus was closer than Mercury and Mars. For them we will offer a trip to the closest planet to saturn, which is also mercury 🙂

John Endicott
Reply to  GRAHAM CLIFT
March 22, 2019 10:21 am

If they are real scientists, they’d know that which of those three planets is closest to earth varies depending on where the three are in their relative orbits about the sun. When Earth and Venus are on the same side of the sun and Mercury is on the Far side, than Venus is closer to Earth at that point in time. whereas when Venus is on the opposite side of the sun to the Earth, Mercury is closer regardless of where it is in it’s orbit. Thus, on average, mercury is the closest due to it’s orbit not taking it far from the sun.

Average, however, does not mean always.

Same with which planet is closest to Saturn, it all depends on where they are in their orbit. While on average that will be Mercury, it isn’t always Mercury (when Mercury is on the far side of the sun and Mars, for example, is on the same side as Saturn then Mars is closer.)

Again, average does not mean always.

March 21, 2019 1:10 am

If only infamous Kim, of uploading my private experience to become famous, would hop aboard with any other elitist hyprocrite and join MUSK – good luck and good riddens to ……………….

Perry
March 21, 2019 2:04 am

If only all the twitterati would go forth & multiply “Planeta Exitum”, the better life would be for the rest of us.

Jay Rhoades
March 21, 2019 2:53 am

Finally, an explanation for all of the “Great Jobs: In SPACE!” ads we’ve been seeing coming from the skilled trades recruiters and guild halls.

Craig
March 21, 2019 4:05 am

If you’re going to build that thing, why go to all the trouble to do it in space? There are less expensive ways to keep out the unwashed masses.

John
March 21, 2019 4:16 am

Is there something in the air that are making people stupid?

Bill Marsh
Editor
March 21, 2019 4:58 am

Shades of ‘Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy’

Petit_Barde
March 21, 2019 6:15 am

Someone magnanimous should inform them that in order to comply to the GND’s constraints, their spaceships will travel in the intergalactic space thanks to windmills fueled by solar energy and with training bikes as a backup system.

Christopher Simpson
March 21, 2019 7:30 am

So the rich go to Mars and terraform it because that’s way easier and more sensible than scrubbing a bit of CO2 from the Earth’s atmosphere. Or are they going to live in sealed-off colonies? In that case why not just build those on Earth?

There’s so much stupid in this that it actually makes Flat Earthers look intelligent.

ResourceGuy
March 21, 2019 7:33 am

No, just fleeing NY, NJ, CA, and IL…. plus London and Paris is the economical approach.

Doubting Rich
March 21, 2019 8:03 am

Who knew that Ben Elton was the great profit of his generation, rather than an overweight comedian who was quite funny when he avoided banging on about his utterly predictable politics, then faded from notice when he became unable to do so?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Stark-Satirical-Thriller-Ben-Elton-ebook/dp/B0031RS7JU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1553180490&sr=8-1&keywords=ben+elton+stark

kent beuchert
March 21, 2019 8:21 am

What kind of rag is the New Statesman?

michael hart
Reply to  kent beuchert
March 21, 2019 9:35 am

It is notorious in the UK.
The real New Statesman?

God bless John Dunne.

Joseph Borsa
March 21, 2019 8:47 am

If they think life on earth is hard (and getting harder) they have no idea what awaits them on the red planet. Natural selection lives on.

Sun Spot
March 21, 2019 8:53 am

It was an article by David Whitehouse (GWPF) in the “New Statesman” December 2008 that first made me question the climate-change-narrative of that time. The article has since been disappeared by the New Statesmen but the finger print of the article remains at this link. . .
https://www.newstatesman.com/environment/2008/01/global-warming-lynas-climate
. . . the link in this article to the original by David Whitehouse goes to dead air . . .

Joel Snider
March 21, 2019 8:58 am

‘but I’m worried climate activists might take my joke seriously.’

That’s a very reasonable worry to have.

goldminor
March 21, 2019 9:04 am

Off Topic…. the odds are high that Onslow Australia is once again about to get struck by a major cyclone, … https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/700hPa/orthographic=133.71,-21.31,1823/loc=117.373,-18.105

goldminor
Reply to  goldminor
March 22, 2019 8:22 pm

The cyclone draws ever closer to Onslow, currently running at 125 mph and higher.

goldminor
Reply to  goldminor
March 25, 2019 10:52 pm

A close call for Onslow, the cyclone abated a bit north of Onslow, and has since moved west then south into the Onslow area. So lots of rain with winds around 30 mph.

gmak
March 21, 2019 9:10 am

Please introduce her to Occam’s Razor. The elites aren’t worried because they don’t believe the stories of impending doom. Simple as that.

DaveK
March 21, 2019 11:59 am

Well, there’s one small benefit that will befall the rest of us when the elites build out their escape mechanism. They will be pouring a good portion of their wealth back into our economy as they bankrupt themselves in the effort.

Robert W Turner
March 21, 2019 12:08 pm

Can I have your stuff?

Art
March 21, 2019 2:02 pm

Rich people plan to flee the earth to escape climate catastrophe?

Only the stupid ones.

Flight Level
March 21, 2019 2:46 pm

The real wealthy ones acquire islands, store in fuel and build full featured airstrips & mansions then hire shady security corporates to guard them.

Surrounded precisely by the waters that are supposed to rise and drawn the planet unless we pour truckloads of money in the climate scam blackhole.

Waterworld seems postponed as newly delivered attractive high performance capable (private) jets don’t feature floats. Makes me wonder why if massive sea levels rise are putatively unavoidable.

Le
March 21, 2019 4:49 pm

Most climate change researcher use extreme temperature (min or max) to amplify their narrative. Research wise, extreme weather and event would likely be outlier. Unless they occurs frequently then it might be a concern, as it changes other measures such as median or mean, variance. They should use median, mean, or variance to verify their research claim.

Rich people fly airplanes, party all night, and talk about climate change. Now I can also say that computers, phones, data center, electronic devices (these runs 24 hours/day), contributed to global warming, lets all get rid of them. They contributed to high demands of energy, required high demands of coals.

migueldelrio
March 22, 2019 4:50 pm

“Who gets to survive climate change?”

Climate alarmism is the marketing plan for Mars-1 recruitment.

%d bloggers like this: