An anti-climatic response to #okboomer and #COP25

Sometimes, things happen on their own, based on a collective of like-thinking minds. Such is the case here. I’m sure readers are familiar by now with the derogatory label “OK Boomer”. Dilbert Cartoonist Scott Adams mentioned a new name for alarmists on his most recent Periscope – “Ok Doomer”.

Some background from Wiki:

OK Boomer” is a catchphrase and internet meme that gained popularity among younger cohorts throughout 2019, used to dismiss or mock attitudes stereotypically attributed to the baby boomer generation. It is considered by some to be ageist.

Our cartoonist, Josh, was watching Scott Adams Periscope and penned a couple of responses.

The COP#25 conference in a nutshell:

68 thoughts on “An anti-climatic response to #okboomer and #COP25

  1. To be honest I am a bit surprised ‘Oh Boomer’ exists among Millennials.

    It is after all a reply, and in order to reply one needs to be listening or otherwise engaging in the first place.

    I didn’t think Snowflakes were even aware people existed outside of their Safe Spaces.

    • Your mistake is classifying it as a “millennial” vs “older generation” thing, when it’s an attitude that matters, not the age of the people involved. Getting yourself in a tiz about how old everyone involved might be is a quick way to earn yourself boomer status, regardless of age, which is why you’ll occasionally find the insult coming from people older than jimmy carter.

      For what it’s worth, millennials are most often the target of the meme, because they’re so up their own backsides about everything and act a lot like the stereotype of the entitled baby boomer (think nancy pelosi turned up to 11). The most common (but not exclusive) source of the insult is the zoomers, or whatever the generation after millennials is called now, which is why “the 28 year-old boomer” is part of the meme.

    • Wrong. Everybody has an angle as the second cartoon illustrates. Businesses raking in billions in tax payer funded subsidies, grants and free loans are not communists. Most of the scientists are probably left leaning but not commies, they can still smell a gravy train from half way around the world and are happy to fly to meet it. The UN isn’t a communist organisation but that does not mean they would not like to become the de facto world governmentd, outside any law or accountability.

      Most politicians are not communists but are quite happy to pretend to be green, feminist, LGBTWXYZ … or whatever else if they can gain votes, power and and excuse for more taxes. Taxing the air we breathe used to be cynical joke, now they are actually trying to do it.

      Seeing it as all caused by your own personal bogieman issue prevents you from seeing broad and pernicious scope of problem.

      • Remember that most Americans, regard a “Commie” as being somebody who’s politics are to the left of Genghis Khan. They’re incapable of differentiating between Liberalism, Socialism & Communism.

          • There is a huge difference between the three: Communists murder their own citizens (and others) in the millions, Socialists envy that commitment but are usually content to reduce the quality of life of millions to abject misery, and Liberals kill millions by proxy i.e. banning DDT, or other well intentioned disasters.

          • @Suffering. Don’t be too sure there isn’t a connection. If you believe resources are finite and therefore “sustainability” is the key then it follows that the more coloured people there are consuming resources, the fewer resources will be available for your children and grandchildren.

            It can be argued that the continued prosperity of your children requires the culling of populations elsewhere. “Sustainability” pretty much demands it.

          • @JohnB. Your assertions are, um, unsustainable. Only a totalitarian government can distribute scarce resources according to skin color (where on earth did you get that?). Free markets are color blind. Only a communist/socialist/democrat thinks that an economy is a zero sum game. You obviously don’t understand where wealth comes from.

        • Those who lived under Communism, know from experience that the difference between Communism and Socialism is very thin…

        • They’re incapable of differentiating between Liberalism, Socialism & Communism.

          That would be because there isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between them. They’re kissing cousins to each other.

          • The communists will wax quite eloquent on the subtle difference between the various flavors of communism and ridicule as ignorant anyone who doesn’t care as much about said differences as they do.

          • Of course the reason somebody like Adam has this misconception is that he doesn’t understand politics outside of the context where he lives.

            Classical liberalism is most akin to what Americans call conservatism. American socialists have traditionally disguised themselves as liberals, which ultimately resulted in poisoning and reversing the meaning of the term. That is why several people have commented that in the American context, there is little difference between “liberal” and socialist.

          • @Rich Davis
            “Classical liberalism is most akin to what Americans call conservatism. ”

            That is true. An easy “litmus” test to distinguish classic liberalism from modern “liberalism” (socialism) is their degree of support for freedom

            Socialists, communists and all other totalitarian belief systems abhor freedom, which leads to diversity of thought and speech. Lenin said: “While the State exists there can be no freedom; when there is freedom there will be no State.” Obviously, freedom is the antithesis of “equality” (total subjugation by the State).

            Classical liberals, such as Jefferson, believed that diversity of thought and speech were necessary for total freedom, and therefore the State must be restricted, to prevent the loss of freedom, a concept which ‘swooshes’ over the heads of today’s SJ Warriors.

            Diversity of thought cannot be tolerated, the totalitarians say, because the diverse groups would tend to offend the ruling class group, and thus they must be restricted or totally eliminated. Millions of such diverse thinkers were slaughtered by these totalitarians, who consistently call themselves “socialists” (including the National Socialists)

          • My comment here is to Rich Davis who I wasn’t allowed to respond directly. Rich nails it.

            I really think the terms right vs left, or communist-fascist-socialist vs capitalist are all very insufficient and obscure the real distinctions to be focused upon. I prefer to consider the differences among all of these to be between individualism and collectivism.

            Fascism, socialism, and communism are all cousins and all are just various forms of collectivism. The amount of government necessary to prop any of them up is only how excessive the forms of authoritarianism is required to try to keep them going. They all require statist control with the individual subservient to the respective power structure and they all demand allegiance to the state.

            Individualism essentially speaks for itself. It is a form of self-governance where each individual is responsible to respond to any challenges for himself/herself before deferring to a higher level of authority for resolution. As long as the individual is capable of doing this, they are free to engage in the world as they see fit.

        • Most liberals are socialists, and communism is the end result of socialism.
          Of course in the liberal lexicon there are communists, socialists, and the far right.

          BTW, Adam demonstrates the idiocy of your average leftist. They define themselves as good, and everyone else as evil. Ghengis Khan was bad, therefore he must have been right wing. Who cares what is actual politics are. Bad = conservative.

          • Fascism is a mix of Socialism and Nationalism; well documented before the rise of Mussolini who typified the concept and was of course very closely aligned with the Socialists of Germany and Russia.

          • Hans,
            That’s not correct at all. I think you know better. Fascism and Communism are both collectivist ideologies. Both are totalitarian (everything in the state, nothing outside of the state) and authoritarian. Classical liberalism, libertarianism, or standard American conservatism are focused on individual freedom and rights, market economies, and are at least tolerant of religious faith, if not promoting it. Fascism in both Italy and Germany arose as deviant versions of socialism. I am sure that you are aware that the NSDAP was the National Socialist German Workers’ party.

            What in my mind distinguishes fascism from communism is that fascism is socialism for one favored group (thus “NATIONAL” socialism), while communism is international socialism. The Nazi regime based their favored group on race/ethnicity. The Soviet regime based their favored group on class.

            It is really stupid though to put politics and ideology into a one-dimensional continuum. There are MANY factors that distinguish different political viewpoints. To name a few, religious-secular, collectivist-individualist, statist-market-oriented, nationalist-globalist. If you put the Nazis and the Soviets into these categories, they line up pretty closely on all but the nationalist-globalist continuum.

          • Fascism is just another flavor of socialism. They are both of the left. The “National Socialists” were fascist. I suspect your definition of conservatism is the European definition, whatever that is. The fascists were never conservative in the American sense. What did the Nazis “conserve”? They obliterated the old order in their revolution. So did the Italian fascists.

      • D. Anderson wrote:
        “Wrong. It’s all about a Communist revolution.”

        Greg replied:
        “Wrong. Everybody has an angle as the second cartoon illustrates. Businesses raking in billions in tax payer funded subsidies, grants and free loans are not communists. Most of the scientists are probably left leaning but not commies, they can still smell a gravy train from half way around the world and are happy to fly to meet it. The UN isn’t a communist organisation but that does not mean they would not like to become the de facto world government, outside any law or accountability.”

        My turn:
        It’s kind of both – but the drive is for totalitarianism – the absolute control of society by a corrupt elite, who are using the false “climate emergency” to try to convert the last great democracies into Chinese-style dictatorships, where the rulers live like kings and the masses live in poverty. That totalitarian objective has become increasingly obvious in recent months, but it’s been their backstory for decades.

        Of course they have to buy off corrupt academics with fat research grants to promote their scary global warming scam, and structure bloated electrical generation contracts to provide guaranteed income streams for intermittent, near-worthless wind and solar power, and create climate hysteria among the weak-minded and scientifically illiterate – that’s all part of their game plan – and they are executing that plan with skill.

        I also believe that their game plan is about to come off the rails – even the most ignorant members of the public are becoming aware of rising electrical power costs and the accelerating extremist hysteria of the climate fraudsters, and are becoming more skeptical of the wilder-and-wilder claims of the doom-mongers.

        The more clever people will also question how the climate doomsters have failed in every one of their very-scary predictions, some 50 or so false scares at last count. The best objective measure of scientific competence is the ability to predict, and the climate doomsters have a perfectly negative predictive track record – every one of their very-scary global warming and wilder weather predictions has failed to materialize.

        The climate fraudsters solution to their “failed-prediction” dilemma has been to create an ill-defined non-falsifiable hypothesis – where everything that happens is evidence of climate catastrophe. Right-o!
        “A theory that is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific.” – Karl Popper

        Also, I believe that climate is about to get colder as part of a natural cycle, and even the stupidest people will question how “warmer equals colder”. Earth had a brief cooling period at the end of Solar Cycle 23, and we are now at the end of SC24, the weakest in ~200 years, and I believe that more cooling is imminent.

        Bundle up, good people, buy a Honda generator in case the power fails and chop some extra firewood! It’s getting colder out there.

        Regards, Allan

    • Baby Doomers more like. Hey, ageism works both ways! Most of these millennials are barely out of nappies yet think they understand the world better than those of us who have been watching it for over half a century.

  2. Funny and not so funny. The climate realist have very little say/media attention and the credibility suffers….. actually is non existent.

  3. Thanks, Anthony, for posting this. It was nice to end the day with a laugh. And thanks, Josh, for preparing the cartoons. They’re great. Also, many thanks to Scott Adams for coming up with Doomer. Perfect!


  4. Josh has created a modern day Seuss character! This is begging for a ‘children’s book for adults’

  5. The green rush is Epic 😀 Now we need everybody to # them everywhere, on twitter/facebook etc etc… What brilliant work by Josh, these will catch on for sure in the social world

  6. While I think that Scott Adams is very funny and occasionally brilliant I will never watch his periscope again! Someone sent him a reply that CO2 is plant food and he went off on a rant about anyone saying that being at the kindergarten level on climate change and that 97% of scientists agree. Apparently he doesn’t know about the petition signed by over 11,000 scientists including over 3,000 PhD’s that disagree with his assessment. It is almost as if on certain days, presumably after smoking a fair amount of marijuana, he becomes much more hostile and aggressive towards some who disagree with him. His willingness to accept the arguments of those who are “persuasive” rather than telling the truth is a bit problematic for me. He’s brilliant but he ain’t no ROCK scientist! CAGW is A HOAX! CO2 to 1,000ppm!

    • Dont be so hard on the guy. Were Adams to come out with a straight forward denial of CC, I’ve little doubt he’d see pretty much all of his income disappear ? He has stuck his neck out pretty far during the run up to the 2016 election, and since, by appearing to be even handed for Trump.

      Same with Jeremy Clarkson, these guys make their living by entertaining the public, so the best we can expect from them might be a degree of reticence. It might also be worth considering the recent worries about the coming registration to enable commenting here at WUWT, and the guys who rightly wondered about having to use real names ? If us ordinary folks can have Live’s put into the toilet for Crimethink, just imagine how the blob would go after anybody in the public eye.

      • I understand what you are saying, but I tend to agree with Abolition Man. I enjoy Scott Adams, but disagreeing that CO2 is plant food (rather than the temperature knob for the planet) and repeating the idiotic claim of the 97% consensus is anything but “persuasive” to me regarding his own cognizance regarding the debate over the climate.

        Remember back during the 2016 campaign when Adams came out “rhetorically” in support of Hillary Clinton, and he equivocated that he did so for his own safety since he lived in California. Scott equivocates quite a bit and always seems to hedge his bets on taking firm positions.

        Also, I have no fear of having to post my real name here as it seems to be required now even though all of my posts are still going through moderation (why, I haven’t the slightest clue).

  7. As a member of “The Silent Generation”, although we have been called the “Lucky Few”, I have known members from the 7 Wikipedia recognized ‘generations.’ This has been interesting and instructive.
    I think coining the name “Doomers” (and his other activities) should merit Scott Adams a Presidential Medal of Freedom.
    Likewise, Josh should get such an award.

  8. For a minute there I thought they were singling out Okies when they use the term “OK Boomer”. 🙂

    That’s the first I’ve heard of that phrase usage. I guess that’s what happens when you don’t use Twitter.

    I’m not sure how knowledge and experience can be successfully used as a pejorative, but I guess some people who don’t have knowledge and experience will try to do so, which just demonstrates a lack of knowledge and experience (ignorance).

    • For a minute there I thought they were singling out Okies when they use the term “OK Boomer”. 🙂

      • Well, unfortunately, my Windows XP doesn’t do Youtube very well. I think it has something to do with HTML5, which XP doesn’t handle. So, I didn’t get to see what your post was about but it looked like it had something to do with the Oklahoma Sooners football team.

        With a little bit of luck, the Sooners might get into the national football championship this year!

          • LSU under an ex-Buckeye.
            Interesting to see what happens if either meet the present Buckeyes. 😎

            For the international readers, these last comments are in reference to the end of the year US college football playoffs. (The “Buckeyes” refer to Ohio State University.)

          • @Tom for your post below about switching to Windows 7. Although I have always enjoyed Windows 7 and am perfectly contented with it, I keep getting messages from the Window masters that this OS will no longer be supported after January 14th, 2020 at which time I suppose I am expected to migrate to the dreaded Windows 10.

          • Samuel Prentice, from what I’ve gathered, the Win7 status is that it will no longer get security/quality/feature updates, but will still receive Windows Defender (MS’s antivirus) updates.

          • “Given you are still running XP you clearly are not worried about updates, security or otherwise, and support. If so, then a move to Windows 7 would be sensible IMO (IMO XP was the best 32bit OS from M$ and Win7 was the best 64bit OS from M$).”

            You are right on the money, Patrick! I don’t get updates on XP anymore but I know this operating system pretty good and know how to lock it down from intrusion. I haven’t even used an anti-virus program in years, and haven’t had a problem.

            Of course, I have script blockers on my browsers to keep the bad guys from executing their programs, and on the very rare occasion when something gets in (hasn’t happened in a long time), I have ways to get it back out before it can do damage. I would lose all that with an upgrade to Windows 8 or 10, but Windows 7 functions pretty much like XP so I can still keep my computer locked down using it.

            I hate when Microsoft completely changes the functions of their software. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it! They take changing things as a selling point. But it worked just the opposite for me, didn’t it.

            I do have Windows 8 on another computer, which is not connected to the internet at present. I much prefer the XP interface to Windows 8. I guess I could get an emulator, but what the heck, I have the real thing! 🙂

          • Well, my beautiful reply to your post went into moderation yesterday and hasn’t come out as of yet.

            I had praise for LSU and it’s quarterback, Joe Burrow.

            Maybe one of those moderators is an Ohio State fan. 🙂

          • Carl, I think I will just upgrade to Windows 7. Much less of a learning curve. Very litttle, actually.

          • “Tom Abbott December 3, 2019 at 6:04 pm

            Carl, I think I will just upgrade to Windows 7. Much less of a learning curve. Very litttle, actually.”

            Given you are still running XP you clearly are not worried about updates, security or otherwise, and support. If so, then a move to Windows 7 would be sensible IMO (IMO XP was the best 32bit OS from M$ and Win7 was the best 64bit OS from M$).

            Ubuntu is pretty good too IMO and not too difficult to grasp, it has a great UI but I don’t know what sort of apps you need and would they be available under Ubuntu?

            I’d stay away from Win10 (Home or Pro editions) for as long as you can, it’s SH!T IM expert O, but that’s me, it’s my job.

    • As an insult ‘OK Boomer’ does seem a bit lame since mostly it amounts to an affirmation of the obvious. The odds are pretty high that the writer is indeed attempting to insult a card carrying member of the boomer demographic (b. 1944-1964).

  9. The odds are pretty high that the writer is indeed attempting to insult a card carrying member of the boomer demographic (b. 1944-1964).
    Oh boomer I mean bummer. I meant to say the odds are high that the recipient of the alleged insult will be a boomer.

  10. “When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years.”

    ― Mark Twain

    It would seem that the young thinking their “new” thoughts and opinions are superior to their elders is nothing new. It’s also not new that the young slowing learning and reaching the same conclusions as their (sometimes) wiser elders is a result the elders agreeing with them rather than vice-versa.
    (Caveat: Age is not a guarantee of “wisdom” … but it helps!)

  11. But Doom Doom Doom is such a great song and dance intro.
    OK Doomer sort of writes itself from OK Boomer,when the children are blowing off anyone who has a slightly longer time line of experience,especially when the point of view they are brushing aside,mocks their world.
    Finding out that everything you KNOW and FEEL is at best incomplete and at worst flat our wrong..can be real deflating,especially if your whole self image is invested in that narrative.
    From “Proud Planet Saver to Shmuck is 30 seconds.

    • At first I thought you were referencing Eric Burton and the Animals song from the 1960s “Boom, Boom Boom, gonna shoot you right down. Boom, Boom Boom…..”

Comments are closed.