Why so torqued up about Suzuki’s comments? Did you sleep through the first two acts?

From BOE REPORT

Terry Etam

“Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification. A contradiction cannot exist. No concept [wo]man forms is valid unless [s]he integrates it without contradiction into the total sum of [her]his knowledge.”

  • Ayn Rand

This quote might seem esoteric (being from philosophy) or confrontational (being from Rand) but it is actually relevant beyond belief. Here is what happens if you don’t think so.

Calgary has a new mayor, Jyoti Gondek. She must be good at some things – intelligent enough to get a PhD and win an election – but clearly exhibits an inability to think rationally. She has irreconcilable visions running through her head that she laid bare within a week: her first order of business was to declare a ‘climate emergency’, then several days later was enthusiastically welcoming the birth of a brand new discount airline. In case it is unclear to anyone, discount airlines make flying easier and more common, and are to emissions what fertilizer is to plants.

One more head-splitter just for fun: On the campaign trail last year, Joe Biden declared that fossil fuel executives should be thrown in jail for not taking responsibility for pollution caused by hydrocarbon production. This year, Biden is castigating those same executives for not producing more hydrocarbons. The impact on jail sentences of fulfilling his request was wisely sidestepped by his camp.

I could write seven hundred pages of such examples, but you get the point. The same fog has entered the brain of every public figure that adopts the climate emergency narrative. Average citizens pay lip service to the topic but generally ignore it (polls show a majority of citizens claiming to be concerned/extremely concerned about climate change, but in both Canada and the US almost 90 percent would not spend $500 per year to prevent it, and half would not spend more than $100). 

The average citizen can live with this contradiction because they just say, ‘Whatever…” and change the channel/fuel up the car/book a holiday/get on with life. The problem with the contradiction shows up in far more consequential skulls: those of policymakers and activists.

Gondek, Biden, and every politician in between is ramming through policies that directly contradict each other, according to the very statements they make and definitions they accept. The result is the madness we see in mainstream media as it tries to interpret a situation where politicians are declaring that something massively important both exists and does not exist at the same time, where there is an emergency that demands emergency measures, but then pursues policies that can only make the emergency worse.

Activists are the wild card, and that brings us to David Suzuki. For those who might have missed it, Suzuki stated in an interview that if politicians did not change their attitude toward climate change soon, there will be “pipelines blowing up.” A few days later, in some strategic maneuver, he apologized.

It was duplicitous for him to have apologized, and if anyone’s feathers are ruffled about his comments that week, it is the apology they should be upset about. When he mentioned pipelines potentially blowing up, for once he was speaking truth, though he was loathe to get into why. 

For years his cohort has fomented panic by pointing out how screwed we all are without immediate and substantial action (but one example of many – Oct 2021, headline/sub-header in The Guardian: “The climate disaster is here. Earth is already becoming unliveable.”).

Suzuki et al have relentlessly pointed to hydrocarbon combustion as the cause of this hellish future that is ‘now here’. The IEA says there can be no new fossil fuel investments post 2021 if we are to achieve net zero 2050, which would mean producing fields declining precipitously, which would mean truly apocalyptic shortages within a year. Biden knows this, which is why he is pleading for more oil.

However, if one accepts the premise that hydrocarbon combustion is causing a climate emergency, that that hellish emergency is arriving imminently or is already here, and that to prevent it hydrocarbon consumption must be halted as soon as possible, then it is a logical and moral imperative that consumption be stopped involuntarily, via sabotage if necessary, because humanity is refusing to do so voluntarily. Don’t jump on my head for calling it a moral imperative; here it is from the horse’s mouth, a Guardian article called “The moral case for destroying fossil fuel infrastructure”. There are others; the New Republic website ran a story called “The Climate Case for Property Destruction”. I’ve yet to see a fact-check site or social media moral police force take issue with either of these pieces.

It is profoundly evident that citizens and governments will not stop consuming hydrocarbons any time soon; in fact hydrocarbon usage is increasing year over year. As a significant example, the entire continent of Africa – 1.2 billion people – is just growing into its dedication to developing vast hydrocarbon resources. Much of the world’s population is no different; they wants lights and refrigeration and air conditioning and roads and parking lots more than they want to slash emissions. They may want to do all that in the most environmentally friendly way, but, like their western cousins, they won’t sacrifice a shot at a comfortable life.

What of the other others though, the not inconsequential number of people that are convinced of impending climate doom? They certainly exist – “eco-anxiety” or “eco-distress” are now syndromes recognized by the American Psychological Association, and the media’s sensationalistic take on the subject fuels the fire like gasoline. Given their fear is so real that it has a name, is Suzuki’s recanted pipelines-blowing-up warning relevant?

Not only is it relevant, it is happening already in one form or another. In October, activists attacked a remote Enbridge Line 5 pump station site. Numerous eco-distressed youths cut through a site fence to sabotage the pipeline. The dangerous stunt was of course destined for social media; one strapped on a very nice guitar and played a very bad song while a fellow cast member randomly and dangerously turned valves. The whole thing was streamed on Facebook for that afternoon’s scheduled pyre-dancing. 

They had no clue what they were doing and only by chance did they not hurt themselves. Only the lack of a proper fireball separated them from what Suzuki described as coming soon. Only by sheer dumb luck did nothing explode. It surely could have, and this event predated Suzuki’s talk. So he was not wrong at all. Eco-terrorized people are already trying to sabotage infrastructure in one way or another, but the media mostly ignores it because they have not yet succeeded in causing an actual explosion. Fireballs bring eyeballs. Until then, don’t bug us.

So what was so offensive about Suzuki’s statements the other week? Nothing. Suzuki’s words were just notice that the juggernaut of fear-mongering was bearing fruit – “Hey everyone, you know, I’ve been agitating people for years and frightening them and demanding action, and now it looks like they are starting to listen to me, so better watch out.” The nihilistic anti-fuel stance he has had for years is the problem, not telling people that things might start blowing up. That train has left the station, as evidenced by articles cited above now unchallenged in the mainstream media.

The phrase climate emergency crept into the global lexicon because extremists ran wild, unchecked. We now have horror-inducing descriptions of every weather event. A heat wave is a heat dome. Abnormal rainfall is now an atmospheric river. A lack of wind in Europe is global stilling. A rapid pressure change over the ocean is now a bomb cyclone.

Each term cements the feeling of anxiety, by design. Each uncensored and unobjected-to exhortation to ‘do something’ ratchets the tension until it is acceptable to declare a moral imperative to destroy fossil fuel infrastructure. Don’t pretend these notices don’t get noticed. They do. While Trump gets banned, children read Guardian articles for class projects. Who should teach them what is a moral imperative, you or The Guardian? 29dk2902lhttps://boereport.com/29dk2902l.html

An emergency is an emergency. Words mean something. Definitions mean something. The political shape-shifters have seized the cause of the environment and are debasing language to achieve political goals. Politicians blindly participate because they are frightened not to, and incapable of thinking their way to any sort of clarity. 

Is there a climate emergency, caused by burning hydrocarbons? I take people seriously when they say that they believe that, and I believe that children and the energy-uneducated will believe it also, because ‘science’ and the media and the government says so. Then they will start smashing stuff up, because they are doing the right thing to prevent an apparently rapidly-escalating climate apocalypse. Why is anyone surprised at this?

My opinion is that hydrocarbons are, at present and for a long time yet, life-sustaining. Hydrocarbons provide 80 percent of the world’s energy needs (same percentage for decades) and underpin everything we use, almost all of what we eat, and heat/cool our worlds as needed.

If there really is an emergency close at hand, it is due to a lack of hydrocarbons for the world, not too much. I believe this position is more credible and tenable because a hydrocarbon-centric view does not preclude wind turbines, or solar panels, or Teslas – it simply says they have a place that will grow over time.

A climate-emergency-centric view holds no such breadth – the more one believes in the emergency, the more one must act to prevent apocalypse, which means putting a stick in the hydrocarbon wheel however your little noggin deems is necessary. Glory awaits those who do.

As an energy industry, we have a job to do: provide reliable energy in the cleanest way possible, and, as reality allows, begin transforming the system to accommodate new energy sources in a way that does not impede the ability of the existing system to do its job. That is it.

Clarity is not just important, it is critical. Either leaders back down and admit the value of hydrocarbons in today’s society, or radicals will reinforce the idea that hydrocarbons are killing us all. Wise leaders will engage the existing system, energize it and utilize it. Weak, poor thinking leaders will continue this impossible dance in their heads, preaching a climate emergency while demanding more hydrocarbons and more emissions generating activity that citizens want. The more the climate emergency belief takes hold, the stronger the moral imperative to smash hydrocarbon infrastructure. Faulty thinking has consequences.

Clarity in energy thinking IS available. Pick up “The End of Fossil Fuel Insanity” at Amazon.caIndigo.ca, or Amazon.com. Thanks for the support.

Read more insightful analysis from Terry Etam here, or email Terry here. PS: Dear email correspondents, the email flow is wonderful and welcome, however I am having trouble keeping up. In past I replied to everything but am getting stretched. Apologies if comments/questions go unanswered; they are not ignored.

4.9 24 votes
Article Rating
123 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
richard
November 30, 2021 2:26 pm

4 houses Suzuki. “Perhaps most interesting is a property on Nelson Island of which Suzuki is one of several co-owners listed on a B.C. land title registry, another of which includes Kootenay Oil Distributors”

Last edited 1 month ago by richard
Nick in Vancouver
Reply to  richard
November 30, 2021 3:52 pm

His Kits mansion was valued at 8 million in 2013 and I read that he has (had?) a holiday home in Queensland, Oz. Being a “climate” hypocrite sure pays, eh?

SxyxS
Reply to  richard
November 30, 2021 5:10 pm

so why isn’t this guy destroying his own property first or let refugees live there for free.

Bob Hunter
Reply to  richard
November 30, 2021 7:47 pm

For our Non Canadian Friends: Calgary’s new mayor, Ms. Gondek supported Canada’s oil industry before she was elected, which is not surprising considering her husband is an engineer and has worked his entire career in Canada’s oil patch.
AND
Dr. David Suzuki (PhD Zoology-U of Chicago) for the last 40 years has hosted the TV Show “the Nature of Things” on CBC. CBC is funded 70% by the CDN Taxpayer.
Does make me wonder how Canada’s largest export industry by a wide margin is so despised by those who are paid by the CDN taxpayer.

DMacKenzie
Reply to  Bob Hunter
December 1, 2021 3:06 pm

Gondek has a Ph.D in urban sociology, and if its not a Ph.D. granted by STEM, well its a shame a tree died to make the paper. Her first act as woke mayor was to declare a ‘climate emergency’….And Suzuki was given an honorary degree by the University of Alberta, Edmonton in 2018. One law firm cancelled their annual $40K donation. Many alumni voiced their opinions and closed their checkbooks, costing the UofA hundreds of thousands in donations. Greta showed up a year later and there was no mention of an honorary degree for her.

Sommer
Reply to  Bob Hunter
December 6, 2021 9:35 am

Suzuki’s producer of ‘the Nature of Things’ was Jeff Silverstein.

https://ca.linkedin.com/in/jeffsilversteinradiuscommunications

November 30, 2021 2:26 pm

It’s hard to claim there is a climate emergency (in Calgary, Alberta, or in Suzuki’s BC) when design rainfall intensites have not been changing (per Environment Canada’s Engineering Cliamte Datasets): https://www.cityfloodmap.com/2020/07/can-we-use-daily-rainfall-models-to.html … and annual maximum series show few statistically significant increases in those provinces or other regions of Canada: https://www.cityfloodmap.com/2020/06/yes-were-getting-more-extreme-rainfall.html

DMacKenzie
Reply to  Robert Muir
November 30, 2021 5:45 pm

With a couple of degrees of global warming in Calgary, it would have about the same climate as Cheyenne, Wyoming….and you wouldn’t even be able to drop a sweater out of your closet…so much for the crisis, and for that matter, adapting to it as well…..

RickWill
Reply to  Robert Muir
November 30, 2021 5:51 pm

It would be interesting to see how many design codes have been changed due to observed climate trends. Some time back it appeared northern Australia was getting more rain, then a few years of low rains levelled it out. Same with cyclones across northern Australia. Rural temperatures are lower than the 1890s in most of Australia.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  RickWill
November 30, 2021 7:22 pm

It is easy to check on 120-year-old maps of the Koppen Climate zones and compare them to current maps of the same.
Here is what you will find: They are virtually identical. Nothing has changed much, if at all. Whatsoever.

I’ll bet none of these climate Nazis even have any idea that the planet does not have “a” climate. Just like it does not have “a” weather.
Like politics, all weather is local, and hence so are all 30-year averages of weather, (which is the definition of climate), also local.
There is no such thing as a global climate.
Abject ignorance of that which they speak of is the defining characteristic of warmistas.
They do not have a single correct notion or actual fact inside their heads, even if you add them all up and distill the sum total of their collective knowledge.
What they know that is actually so would not fill a shot glass.

Rick C
Reply to  RickWill
December 1, 2021 8:31 am

In the US the most significant changes in the model building codes (adopted by almost all jurisdictions) have been:

  1. post hurricane Andrew changes to Florida and gulf coast codes to increase design wind speeds along the coast and require building protection from wind borne debris impact.
  2. The development and increasingly restrictive energy efficiency and green building design requirements.
  3. addition of requirements in areas prone to wildland fires to reduce ignitability of buildings. (Apply mostly in arid areas of Western states.)

There have been, as far as I know, no significant changes in weather or temperature related design requirements such as winter or summer design minimum/maximum temperatures used to specify HVAC capacity. I would also note that many of the energy efficiency requirements were introduced in the wake of 1970-80’s oil shortages.

There are, of course, activists groups and government agencies such as DOE that constantly push environmental activist proposals to make codes more restrictive. There is, however, some pushback both from the building industry and local and state code bodies who recognize the need for affordable buildings.

J Mac
November 30, 2021 2:29 pm

I think, therefore I deeply appreciate abundant, low cost fossil fuels.

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  J Mac
December 1, 2021 12:20 am

And cannot comprehend the cognitive dissonance of leftards.

Steve Case
Reply to  Chaswarnertoo
December 1, 2021 12:54 am

“Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification. A contradiction cannot exist. No concept man forms is valid unless he integrates it without contradiction into the total sum of his knowledge.”

  • Ayn Rand

George Orwell coined the word “doublethink” to describe holding contradictions as true.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Steve Case
December 1, 2021 4:35 am

I see what you did there. 🙂

MarkW
November 30, 2021 2:31 pm

It may be mandatory now days, but adding the [her]his, inclusive language, really gets in the way of understanding the quote.

George Daddis
Reply to  MarkW
November 30, 2021 3:54 pm

Agreed!
I had to look up the quote and Ayn did NOT include the “inclusive” language in Atlas Shrugged.
If some one edits a quote in this manner, they should annotate the change similar to “emphasis added”.
Otherwise the editor is adding a context about the original authors “political” position that did not exist.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  George Daddis
December 1, 2021 4:36 am

Other than this abuse of the quote, I thought this was a very good article.

David Long
Reply to  MarkW
November 30, 2021 3:56 pm

Plus it’s so easy to do away with that BS: “Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification. A contradiction cannot exist. No concept a person forms is valid unless they integrate it without contradiction into the total sum of their knowledge.”

George Daddis
Reply to  David Long
November 30, 2021 4:55 pm

The objection is still valid. Without revealing the additions to the quote, the context is less clear to readers not familiar with the philosophies of Rand.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  David Long
November 30, 2021 11:05 pm

Except that “a person” (singular) cannot be “they” (plural).

menace
Reply to  David Long
December 1, 2021 7:14 am

Non-specific pronoun references to a person in the masculine form is regarded as non-gender specific, so a hypothetical “he” can be taken to mean “he or she” by the reader. If Ayn believed that such masculine pronoun in language were somehow misogynistic she would have taken care to write it that way herself. We should not modify history because a minority of people think the language we’ve spoken for hundreds of years is no longer PC.

Reply to  MarkW
November 30, 2021 4:43 pm

I had to re-read it many times

Rory Forbes
Reply to  MarkW
November 30, 2021 6:08 pm

I’m not sure anyone has the authority to compel language whatever the political reasoning. English language conventions evolved to provide clarity. Reversing that trend to help someone’s hurt feelings or personal vision of PC censorship is idiotic.

Martin
Reply to  Rory Forbes
November 30, 2021 6:35 pm

Atmospheric River??? Never heard of such a thing!

Last edited 1 month ago by Martin
John Hultquist
Reply to  Martin
November 30, 2021 7:34 pm

 Pineapple express
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pineapple_Express

or see
Cliff Mass weather blog

MarkW
Reply to  Martin
November 30, 2021 7:46 pm

Have you lived on the US west coast?

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Martin
November 30, 2021 8:58 pm

Atmospheric River??? Never heard of such a thing!

I have no idea what post you’re responding to.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Rory Forbes
December 1, 2021 4:44 am

I think Martin is referring to the general article. Why here, I don’t know.

You said:”English language conventions evolved to provide clarity.”

That’s exactly right, and I’m sticking to convention. Radical leftists can go fish.

David Middleton(@debunkhouse)
Editor
Reply to  MarkW
December 1, 2021 5:20 am

When I saw that LinkedIn added a pronoun “feature,” I listed my preferred pronouns as: Dude, Bro and Hey You!

DonM
Reply to  David Middleton
December 1, 2021 9:21 am

Master, Sire, & Boss

Tom Abbott
Reply to  David Middleton
December 2, 2021 9:07 am

You mean they actually provide those options?

MarkW
November 30, 2021 2:37 pm

The phrase “atmospheric river” goes back decades as does “bomb cyclone”.

Last edited 1 month ago by MarkW
Ron Long
Reply to  MarkW
November 30, 2021 5:08 pm

Yes, but the term “fart weasel” is quite new.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  MarkW
November 30, 2021 7:29 pm

Yes, Mark, I was thinking that point could have been better made with more apt examples.
Anything worth doing is worth doing right, especially if it is a rant against warmista jackassery.

David A
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
November 30, 2021 7:46 pm

While true, those phrases are now used very broadly and in conjunction with CAGW articles.

David A
Reply to  David A
November 30, 2021 7:51 pm

Overall a very good post. My objection was the nod to solar and wind growing in the future. They really have no rational role in grid energy. ( Certainly not extending them beyond their current harmful levels.) It is Conceivable that some future breakthroughs could make them viable, yet that is sheer speculation, and currently unwarranted speculation. I have zero issues with individuals getting solar on their own for off grid applications. Or paying their own way on grid.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  David A
December 1, 2021 5:39 am

“My objection was the nod to solar and wind growing in the future. They really have no rational role in grid energy.”

I agree. Even if CO2 did need regulation, they would not be the solution.

Of course, there’s no evidence CO2 needs regulation, so wind and solar are actually counterproductive to a bright future.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  David A
December 1, 2021 5:10 am

These descriptions are definitely used to try to scare people now, and some of the people who report on it act like these weather phenomenon are something new and of course, they tie it to CO2 and Human-caused Climate Change.

I just saw a new poll out where 44 percent of young people say they are not going to have children because of their fear of climate change disaster. That’s up from 37 percent in the previous poll.

The climate change scaremongering is working for a segment of the population. The kids don’t have any way to put this all into context, and now they fear they won’t grow up. All because people are lying to them on an international scale.

What these kids need to understand is just how wrong these climate change scaremongers have been in the past with their predictions of doom.

Kids, these doomsters have been wrong EVERY time they have predicted climate change doom.

Every time, kids.

They are just as wrong now as they have been in the past. Relax and live your life. Stop listening to these climate change charlatans and their gullible followers. They don’t know what they are talking about. They couldn’t prove one thing they claim. They want you to take everything they say on faith.

Don’t do it!

Last edited 1 month ago by Tom Abbott
Jim Gorman
Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 1, 2021 5:43 am

I work at a high school as a tutor. Climate change is just a convenient excuse for not wanting kids. It is really based in being raised as THE MOST IMPORTANT being on the world, e.g., narcissism. Kids from big families learn quickly that they are not the only person alive that matters. With only one or two kids that lesson just isn’t learned. Their enjoyment becomes more important than propagation.

menace
Reply to  MarkW
December 1, 2021 7:22 am

I like to imagine it may have originated by a public relations type person.

“Explosive cyclogenesis???” – nobody will understand that, how ’bout we just call it a “bomb cyclone” instead!”

Richard Patton
Reply to  MarkW
December 1, 2021 9:37 am

And those terms were not created to ‘prove’ a ‘climate emergency.’ They are well-defined meteorological terms.

Len Werner
November 30, 2021 2:37 pm

Ever read a little book from the 60’s titled ‘Ultimatum: Oil or War’? The western world is following the script perfectly, except it won’t be the US entering Canadian parliaments and communication stations and police and corporate headquarters–it will be China entering and taking over both.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Len Werner
December 1, 2021 5:41 am

The Chicoms may have a tough slog in the Lower 48.

We are willing to fight for our freedom.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 2, 2021 9:27 am

The biggest selling movie in Chinese history and one of the biggest in the world is a new Chinese movie about the battle of the Chosin Resevoir between American and UN forces and the Chinese military during the Korean War in the 1950’s.

The movie casts this battle as a great victory for the Chnese, but it was anything but. The Chinese outnumbered the Americans four to one, and the battle was fought under horrendous conditions -38F and ice and snow. The Americans used the frozen resevoir as a highway to consolidate their forces. Despite being outnumbered, the Chicoms couldn’t finish off the Americans when they had all the advantages.

The U.S. marines said as long as they had ammunition for their Quad-Fifty machine guns, and their tank-mounted, dual Bofors, rapid-fire cannons, they would mow the Chicom humanwave attacks down like wheat in a field.

The Chicoms can’t even find a true modern victory to portray in their military history. They have to lie and make things up.

Lies won’t help them much on the next battlefield. That’s when reality sets in.

The Chicom military does not have a history of winning in modern battles. The Japanese defeated them. The Vietanmese defeated them. The Americans defeated them.

The U.S. military *does* have a history of winning in modern battles. It makes all the difference in the world.

Lots of fools throughout history thought they were pretty tough, but they found out differently when it came right down to it. The Chicoms ought to think about that, although I doubt that will get past Xi’s Big Ego. Too bad.

Bob
Reply to  Len Werner
December 1, 2021 7:29 am

Methinks the “China will take over” knee jerk thinking is overblown or at the very least oversimplified. I’ve seen arguments that China may in fact be a paper tiger and could go down any moment. Reminds me of the “Japan will take over” scare in the 80’s, and we all know at this point that Japan actually went bust around 1989. That being said, I’m no seer so don’t blame me if China does eventually take over

Len Werner
Reply to  Bob
December 1, 2021 8:04 pm

I do hope you and Tom are right, but the US did just elect Biden and Harris, and you have a dangerous proportion of wokeness in the population. But after all, ‘Ultimatum’ was just a book…like 1984, Animal Farm and Atlas Shrugged–none of which remain as even semi-fictional works.

And lest I’m misunderstood, the Biden-Harris statement does not imply a support for anyone else that ran; just like in Canada the choices are getting dismally depressing.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Len Werner
December 2, 2021 9:15 am

Trump has a higher approval rating among Republicans now at 95 percent approval than he had when he was president, at 88 percent approval.

There are actually several good Republican choices for the next president. So don’t give up the ship.

Doug Huffman(@doughuffman)
November 30, 2021 2:45 pm

What is the common element: David Suzuki, Michio Kaku, Neal DeGrasse Tyson, Bill Nye?

Forrest Gardener
Reply to  Doug Huffman
November 30, 2021 5:10 pm

Are they all examples of carbon based life forms?

Martin
Reply to  Forrest Gardener
November 30, 2021 6:36 pm

Lol…

Brad-DXT
Reply to  Doug Huffman
November 30, 2021 5:29 pm

Smart dumb people, or is it dumb smart people? Scam artists also comes to mind, in my opinion.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Doug Huffman
November 30, 2021 7:30 pm

They are all people who are so incredibly not even wrong, they should just shut their frickin’ fat yappers.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
December 1, 2021 5:45 am

Bill Nye just did some kind of advertisement for Joe Biden.

Idiocracy. Malevolent Idiocracy.

bonbon
Reply to  Doug Huffman
December 1, 2021 3:14 am

The realize the common conservative ¨Go Woke, go Broke¨ really means ¨Get Woke or go Broke¨. Notice these are not broke.
This was nicely pointed out at revolver news recently.

Richard Page
Reply to  Doug Huffman
December 1, 2021 2:21 pm

They are all media/attention whores?

Len Werner
Reply to  Richard Page
December 1, 2021 8:11 pm

They all talk for a living. Lips move, jaws wag, noise comes out of the larynx–that’s it, just…talk. None of them could saw a log into lumber or build a house, install a well, grow a carrot, or even get rid of their own waste. That’s ‘elite’?

Tom Halla
November 30, 2021 2:49 pm

The nihilistic terrorists of Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Five are more and more credible.

Jeffery P
November 30, 2021 2:52 pm

Biden’s request for more oil and gas production is a put-on. It’s for show. It’s purely political to slow his dropping approval rating. He has no intention of helping domestic oil and other fossil fuel producers. He just wants to pretend he’s doing something while actually doing the opposite.

The intent is to make conventional fuels prohibitively scarce and expensive. This will force public adoption of impractical green energy. He has to do this to satisfy the radical left and the big money donors who put him in power.

Kemaris
Reply to  Jeffery P
November 30, 2021 4:32 pm

Dont worry, it’s just going to lead to Republucan landslides in 2022 and 2024, leading then to the Second Democrat War starting in 2025 (the first was 1861-65, but I think we’ll be able to wrap this one up more quickly because these Democrats are, with the exception of their gangbanger conscripts, afraid of guns).

Reply to  Jeffery P
November 30, 2021 4:44 pm

Economy killer POTUS

DMacKenzie
Reply to  Jeffery P
November 30, 2021 5:52 pm

The job of governments is to do things that HELP citizens by taking a few tax dollars and putting them to responsible use beneficially for society. When people find their home heating and electricity bills to be “non-beneficial”, they will force politicians to rethink how they are “helping” citizens.

DaveS
Reply to  DMacKenzie
December 1, 2021 5:15 am

Unfortunately that’s not how politicians in government see it.

Bob
Reply to  DMacKenzie
December 1, 2021 7:38 am

Agree. The authoritarian governments we have in many countries right now are the result of citizen complacency, itself the result of so many years of relative easy and comfort. As comfort goes down, one would expect citizens to get more involved. The game is on.

TonyG
Reply to  Bob
December 1, 2021 9:45 am

“The authoritarian governments we have in many countries right now are the result of citizen complacency”

“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”

Harkle Pharkle
Reply to  Jeffery P
November 30, 2021 7:55 pm

The intent is to make conventional fuels prohibitively scarce and expensive. This will force public adoption of impractical green energy. He has to do this to satisfy his Chinese masters

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Harkle Pharkle
December 1, 2021 5:57 am

Chicom Blackmailers.

That investment the Chicoms made in Joe is paying off handsomely now. They got ole Joe cheap. The Russians got ole Joe even cheaper.

We have a mentally deficient, corrupt president who must kowtow to our greatest enemies. What could go wrong?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Jeffery P
December 1, 2021 5:51 am

“Biden’s request for more oil and gas production is a put-on. It’s for show. It’s purely political to slow his dropping approval rating.”

Along with requesting more production, Biden is raising the costs to the oil producers. So, you are correct, it’s all for show because high gasoline prices are hurting his approval ratings. He wants to look like he is doing something for the little guy, while doing just the opposite.

Less than a year to the next election. Time’s running out on Joe’s majority.

I’m hoping impeachment is just around the corner.

Doug Danhoff
November 30, 2021 3:08 pm

And every storm is given a name no matter how innocuous it is.

Andy Wilkins
Reply to  Doug Danhoff
December 1, 2021 5:18 am

Here in Britain the Met Office has started naming wind.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Doug Danhoff
December 1, 2021 6:01 am

I’m still trying to figure out how long a thunderstorm keeps its name. Does the name change as the storm crosses into another country?

Storm naming is just another dirty trick the alarmists are trying to use to equate every thunderstorm with being a hurricane over land. All because of CO2 and climate change, of course.

Manipulating the language to manipulate the mind. This is how propaganda works.

Mike Edwards
November 30, 2021 3:11 pm

Just what is the “Climate Emergency”? Can anyone provide a good explanation of it?

MarkW
Reply to  Mike Edwards
November 30, 2021 4:56 pm

The emergency is that the climate is not doing what the models predicted.

Doonman
Reply to  Mike Edwards
November 30, 2021 7:01 pm

Since climate is defined as weather over a 30 year period in a given area, a “climate emergency” is 30 years of weather emergencies, but only in a given area.

So the solution is to control the weather for 30 years in given areas. Good luck with that.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Mike Edwards
December 1, 2021 6:04 am

There is no climate emergency. The emergency is a figment of the imagination. It is not based on facts. If you have to ask what it is, then you are seeing the same world I’m seeing. One where there is no climate emergency, just a lot of climate change hyperbole.

Mike Edwards
November 30, 2021 3:22 pm

I watched a program about tourism on Iceland earlier this evening. One of the presenters took a tour to one of the glaciers (it was Langjokull, which is actually an ice cap). At one point he agonised about the modern day retreat of the glacier, pointing the finger squarely at human CO2 emissions as its cause, and indicating that the very tourism he was engaged with is a good source of such emissions.

The real irony in all this is his unawareness that some 6,000 years ago, the Langjokull ice cap didn’t exist. A recent scientific paper demonstrated that during the Holocene climatic optimum, roughly between 10,000 and 6,000 years ago, none of the current Icelandic ice caps existed and they only grew substantially in much more recent times.

Reply to  Mike Edwards
November 30, 2021 4:46 pm

Unfortunately history is only as old as he is

H.R.
Reply to  Steve Clough
November 30, 2021 6:49 pm

Ummmm, more like, “history is only as old as the current narrative.”

mkelly
Reply to  Mike Edwards
December 1, 2021 4:02 am

Thought you might be interested.

Ancient tree stumps found under Breiðamerkurjökull glacier in Southeast Iceland are confirmed to be roughly 3,000 years old. RÚV reports.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  mkelly
December 1, 2021 6:11 am

So Iceland was warmer 3,000 years ago than it is now.

That probably means the rest of the world was warmer then, too.

We need more tree stumps to confirm.

So, we are *not* living in the hottest times in human history today. The alarmists have it all wrong, don’t they. Tree stumps don’t lie.

WXcycles
November 30, 2021 3:40 pm

The greenie global warming hysterics have always been fundamentally aligned with the Ted Kaczynski manifesto (Una-Bomber). What they say and think is indistinguishable to what he said, so there’s no surprise threats, violence and terrorism are the ultimate endpoint to all the crazy nutbags pushing the “climate-crisis” doom baloney.

Only this time media, politicians and even grandstanding ignorant school-dropouts are cheering and enabling all the mini-me Ted Kaczynski’s out there.

Suzuki is a total disgrace, another totally insane greenie-fundamentalist ‘academic’, who dreams of setting of bombs to harm humanity. I have no doubt that if he could, he would.

https://unabombermanifesto.com/Industrial-Society-and-Its-Future-Theodore-Kaczynski.pdf

And totally wrong.

Ron Long
Reply to  WXcycles
November 30, 2021 5:10 pm

Remember, when you encounter/confront greenie loonies in an act of environmental sabotage, two things: 1. state loudly “you are under citizens arrest for felony level destruction”, and 2. shoot the cameraman first.

SxyxS
Reply to  WXcycles
November 30, 2021 5:34 pm

Well ,i read the manifesto.
Either it was wrong translated or massivly edited(or i completely missunderstood it)
otherwise your comment is wrong .

Besides some very intersting analysis and very accurate predictions he was mostly bashing the left for their views(and only once the right) and was predicting the rule of technocracy and dehumanization of people as result of technology.
And considering how old the manifesto is i can not believe hippies would follow his arguments,except self sufficientie and bombings.
( or are you confusing him with Alinsky)

Disputin
Reply to  WXcycles
December 1, 2021 2:46 am

“nutbags”

Scrota?

bill Johnston
November 30, 2021 3:42 pm

I will undoubtedly be called hard-hearted but I would shed no tears if someone trespasses, sabotages infrastructure and is grievously harmed in the process. I firmly believe in the concept of “play stupid games, win stupid prizes.”

commieBob
November 30, 2021 3:46 pm

Here’s another example.

Alberta wanted to expand a pipeline so it could get its oil to tide water. The British Columbia (BC)government blocked that. The Alberta government said, OK, we’ll turn off the taps on BC’s oil supply. BC squealed like a stuck pig and the threat went nowhere.

Now we have the Transmountain pipeline that supplies BC out of service because of landslides. That constitutes a national disaster and they’re pulling out all the stops trying to get the pipeline back in service. link

Steve Case
November 30, 2021 3:46 pm

About half way through, the did a [Ctrl F] on “nuclear” and it came up 0/0 so that’s where I stopped reading. So I did a word count – over 1700 and nothing about nuclear.

Leo Smith
Reply to  Steve Case
November 30, 2021 7:19 pm

He probaly spelled it noocooleer

Orrin
November 30, 2021 3:56 pm

Thank-you for for this post, and the reminder contained therein as to why I continue to read critically WUWT. The abject stupidity of the recent https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/11/29/maine-researchers-breeding-a-global-warming-resistant-potato/ post that pooh-poohed on an article that described a local challenge/mitigation issue had my finger hovering over ‘delete’.

Thank-you again.
Orrin

PaulH
November 30, 2021 4:05 pm

Dr. Suzuki said, “…We’re in deep deep doodoo and they’ve been telling us, the leading experts, for over 40 years. This is what we’re come to, blah, blah, pipelines, blah…”

He’s right! His “leading experts” have been dead flat wrong for 40 years. I don’t doubt they will continue to be wrong for the foreseeable future.

AndyHce
Reply to  PaulH
November 30, 2021 6:03 pm

As has been pointed out many times, the”climate” issue is a means to an end and that end has nothing to do with earth’s climates, the beliefs of useful idiots not withstanding.

Last edited 1 month ago by AndyHce
Robber
November 30, 2021 4:49 pm

Would all those who believe we are living in a climate emergency right now, please turn off your power, your phone, your heating, your car. There, feel better now?

Forrest Gardener
Reply to  Robber
November 30, 2021 5:14 pm

And whatever you do if CO2 is the enemy of mankind, stop breathing out.

Mike
November 30, 2021 4:57 pm

Suzuki et al have relentlessly pointed to hydrocarbon combustion as the cause of this hellish future that is ‘now here’.”
Climate science now gives us time travel.

n.n
Reply to  Mike
November 30, 2021 7:48 pm

Hydrocarbons, one step forward. The “hellish future that is now”, two steps backward. Perhaps he meant “NOW” and the sequestration of carbon-base lives for light, social, and fair weather causes.

menace
Reply to  Mike
December 1, 2021 7:52 am

Um, so what would the world be like today without hydrocarbon combustion (and all the associated by-products like fertilizers, plastics, etc.)?

Highly agrarian society, mostly subsistence farmers.
Average lifespan under 50 (not even counting the ~40% infant mortality).
Unsustainable deforestation and wood burning.
Whales hunted to extinction for lighting.
Widespread enslavement of animals.
Wild animals hunted to extinction.
Cities up to the neck in horse manure, garbage and sewage.
Poor water quality, polluted streams
High particulate air pollution in urban areas in winter
No refrigeration for the common man or industry.
Lack of diversity in diet, including substandard meats highly salted and preserved.
Far less scientific and medical progress.
No TV, computers or smart phones.
(you could go on and on)
Certainly not a world that can support billions.

One man’s hell is another man’s Utopia?

Mike Dubrasich
November 30, 2021 4:59 pm

Dave Suzuki jumped the shark long ago but apparently is aching for another 15 minutes of fame. So he pumps himself up to be the new Alinsky/Unibomber/Charlie Manson of the Violent Crazies.

There’s a very long list of eco-terrorists and terrorism. It’s not a new thing. However, if Dave wants the mantle, let’s give it to him. And the next terrorist act can and should be blamed on him. Let Dave reap his own whirlwind. There are plenty of max security prisons with vacancies.

RickWill
November 30, 2021 5:46 pm

are debasing language to achieve political goals.

“renewable energy”. that is the most debased “noun” of modern times. It is so deceptive. It has even been given authority by dictionary definition-

any naturally occurring, theoretically inexhaustible source of energy, as biomass, solar, wind, tidal, wave, and hydroelectric power, that is not derived from fossil or nuclear fuel.

The current method of extracting wind and solar are UNSUSTAINABLE. The energy collectors and associated storage require more energy in their manufacture than they can produce during their lifetime.

The materials intensity to extract and store current wind and solar energy for later use is more than 100 times the materials intensity of a gas fired generator.

Dennis
Reply to  RickWill
November 30, 2021 6:06 pm

They should ask a sailing boat owner about renewable energy efficiency and reliability, and that the wind is free.

Leo Smith
Reply to  RickWill
November 30, 2021 7:23 pm

Well that is a massive fail then. All renewable energy so called is derived from nuclear.
What do they think the sun is? a ball of hot coal?
How do they think the moon was formed? Gods little dumplings?

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Leo Smith
December 1, 2021 12:23 am

I doubt they know.

n.n
Reply to  RickWill
November 30, 2021 7:44 pm

Renewable drivers. Disposable converters. Intermittent energy. The disparately distributed rare earth elements. Shared, shifted responsibility. A provably false myth for our times. A veritable Green blight on the environment.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  RickWill
December 1, 2021 7:51 am

“Since 2010 the average amount of minerals needed for a new unit of power generation capacity has increased by 50% as the share of renewables has risen.”

From IEA document ‘The Role of Critical Minerals in Clean Energy Transitions’ May 2021

Ted
November 30, 2021 5:47 pm

It’s not that leftist politicians can’t think logically, they just prefer to lie. As a further example, many on the left bemoaned why no one (i.e. rich bankers) went to jail for causing the economic crisis in 2008 while at the same time they all knew the banks were following the rules those same politicians had created and/or enforced.

Pat from Kerbob
Reply to  Ted
November 30, 2021 8:16 pm

The bankers aren’t stupid. Government policy created this sub-prime crisis and so they do what smart people do and they tried to get the garbage off their books.
Then the music stopped.
The sub0-prime crisis was set in motion much earlier and maintained by both republicans and democrats because who will get elected telling people they cannot own a house?

Dennis
November 30, 2021 6:01 pm

Similar to Australia’s Tom Foolery who predicted enough rain would never fall again to fill the dams, and since that comment the dams have filled a number of times and floods have been experienced (Australia the land of droughts and flooding rains), David Suzuki visited Australia and predicted that life as we knew it would come to an end by 2000 because of climate change and warming.

During the 1990s he visited again and was asked about his earlier prediction and what were his thoughts on the situation, Port Jackson – Sydney Harbour had been cleaned and oil refineries and other sources of pollution removed, and Suzuki with some hint of embarrassment admitted that it was looking good.

RickWill
Reply to  Dennis
November 30, 2021 8:26 pm

Whenever I see the East Coast of Australia with flooding rains I think of Flim-Flan.

I predicted the flooding rains in early 2020 when parts of the east side of Australia were burning – admittedly flooding not necessarily this year. I was not alone in my prediction. A long range weather pontificator, Dorothea MacKellar. predicted floods to follow droughts in 1911-

I love a sunburnt country,

A land of sweeping plains,

Of ragged mountain ranges,

Of droughts and flooding rains.

I wonder how such a silly concept as the “greenhouse effect” has gained such traction. Utter cow manure.

Dennis
Reply to  RickWill
November 30, 2021 8:55 pm

The main water supply for Sydney comes from Warragambah Dam and as the population has increased more than doubled since the dam was completed, and taking into consideration to regular period of drought here, the State Governments have proposed raising the dam wall to increase holding capacity.

Right now the dam is over flowing again and properties below are at increasing risk of flooding and many already have been.

Another UN interference factor, POTUS Trump identified UN interference in the affairs of member nations and during an address to the UN in New York said the interference must stop. He was of course alluding to treaties and agreements signed between the UN and member nations. In the dam example the raising of Warragambah Dam wall is being resisted by Greens and other UN fellow traveller globalists based on Agenda 21 – Sustainability and related legislation and regulations here.

No new major new dams have been constructed in Australia for over thirty years despite population growth, sites set aside by State Governments years ago, I can recall three sites in New South Wales set aside during the period 1965-1976, now locked away in registered with the UN National Parks, previously State lands.

In my opinion the UN has expanded far beyond it’s original charter created just after WW2 when the UN was established. The UN has been infiltrated and is now directed and controlled by officials who are behaving like an unelected world government.

Sad for me to admit the treaty/agreement signing plan the UN adopted was created by an Australian Labor Party (and Communist) Attorney General Evatt, a lawyer.

I trust that it is not too late for the younger generations to reject this threat to democracy.

tygrus
Reply to  Dennis
November 30, 2021 9:48 pm

There are other dams which aren’t full. It would be great if we had a water grid to move some water around. Windamere Dam is about 40% and barely moved in the last 6months (risen by 6% of capacity), it’s like someone pulled the plug on the inflows despite decent rainfall.
https://www.waternsw.com.au/supply/visit/windamere-dam

Connect Warragamba through Blue Mountains to Windamere, to Burrendong, to Dubbo & beyond. We should have some metal pipes & water tanks buried underground along potential fire breaks & ridges. Don’t bother trying to fight huge fires in the middle of nowhere with overgrown/blocked fire trials, no water nearby to access & just 1500L if you’re lucky.

Dennis
November 30, 2021 6:04 pm

Billionaire descriptions include tech billionaires and many others, isn’t it long overdue for climate billionaires to be identified?

After all, governments using taxpayer’s monies are a major source of their wealth creation.

Pat from Kerbob
November 30, 2021 8:01 pm

There is no doubt that our new mayor Gondak is a bubblehead, but she is in good company.
The cognitive dissonance in these people is deafening.
In years past both Victoria and Whistler in BC, places who’s economies are 100% dependent on tourists, have declared climate emergencies.
And in both cases the climate emergency declaration appears on the same websites that brag about how many tourists came in the past, and how many $millions they are spending to attract more now.
Watch if the USA spikes the old rule that cruise ships heading from usa pacific coast cities have to stop by BC on the way to Alaska. The screaming will be deafening. Or maybe that will be my laughter.

All of these people, along with Trudeau and so many others, fulfill the description given them by journalist George Jonas years ago, “educated beyond their intellectual means”.

They think they are so smart but they cannot process what they take in and so say stupid things one after the other.

Sunsettommy(@sunsetmpoutlookcom)
Editor
November 30, 2021 9:37 pm

1972 clip of David Suzuki comparing humans to maggots

He has been very weird for a long time.

Bruce Cobb
December 1, 2021 12:58 am

…a hydrocarbon-centric view does not preclude wind turbines, or solar panels, or Teslas – it simply says they have a place that will grow over time.

In my opinion, the above statement ruins a perfectly good article. It is a strawman, and doesn’t belong. The issue with those things is that about the only reason they are here is because of the climate scam, and are being forced on society. Market forces did not create those things.

michel
December 1, 2021 1:21 am

The article draws attention to a social phenomenon which has become increasingly visible over the last few years. Its not confined to climate, similar things also occur in the race and gender debates.

One, people advocate doing things which, if they believe what they claim to believe, are exactly the opposite of what’s needed. This is Biden demanding more oil production, Gondek’s welcoming of a budget airline.

Two, people advocate doing things which cannot according to their theory have any effect on what they claim to believe is the problem. For instance, turning off standby power because climate. Eating less meat because climate.

Three, they refuse to advocate things which, according to their theory, are essential and effective to reduce global emissions. For instance, real reductions in emissions by China and India.

Four, they refuse to advocate doing things locally which, if they really intend reducing local emissions, would be necessary and effective. For instance, moving the population into well insulated dense urban housing and the abolition of the car industry and all the concomittant changes this would require.

Having observed the pronouncements of the climate activists and their followers over a couple of decades now, I am driven to the following view of what’s going on.

People utter the predictions of doom, like the Guardian they enforce a vocabulary of emergency and global heating, like the BBC they ban all coverage of any dissenting point of view. Indeed, all the UK mainstream media ban any questioning of the emergency doctrine. But no-one really believes any of it. People are not saying these things to argue a believed point of view. They are performative utterances testifying to membership of the righteous.

They are then very disconcerted to find that their ideas have got enough traction to start practical people moving to actions based on them. Like banning ICE cars, like converting the country to unreliable wind and solar based power generation. Like the absolutely insane British idea of trying to convert natural gas use to hydrogen.

The reason these mad ideas seem attractive is that they are felt to be in the category of testifying. But when you get into the practical details of implementation you find they either don’t work at all or have the opposite effects from what was desired. Does anyone really believe that converting the Drax power station to woodchips imported from Georgia does anything at all to influence either global emissions, global temperatures, or even British emissions?

They only discover the impracticality or nonsense of their programs when forced by the waves of opinion they have generated to move to action based on it. Previously they have not found it necessary to do any analysis of implementation, because all they were doing was testifying.

Its a bit like how we end up explaining that men can get pregnant and give birth, or in a more fundamental example, its how a wave of opinion and feeling can give rise to the decision to go to war, without ever having done proper analysis of whether war against this opponent right now is either sensible or necessary. We started out testifying to our patriotism, and to our surprise ended up reading casualty lists and paying raised taxes.

This is how it is with climate. AOC advocated the Green New Deal in a spirit of testifying. No-one would have been more astonished and dismayed than her by the consequences of actually trying to implement it. We have allowed advocacy of policy to be used as the currency of testimony to membership of the righteous, and then are surprised when the policies advocated are nonsensical.

michel
December 1, 2021 1:50 am

I think the root of the problem is that we are graduating recent generations with no exposure to evidence based argument. The liberal arts have been taken over by impressionistic advocacy approaches. There is a general acceptance, fuelled by post-modernism, of moral and epistemological relativism. What is right or true is right or true for me, may be different for you, and what you assert is only testifying to your particular sex, race, nationality, class position.

And so we get large numbers of English or Media Studies graduates firmly convinced their views on how to run the grid are as good as anyone elses. This is where the confusion between testifying and asserting comes from.

It also is the origin of the idea that you can refute an assertion by treating it as a performative utterance testifying to group membership. Dismiss the group, and you feel you have refuted the idea. if the idea is a difficult one, conceptually, you can now argue that this kind of argument is racist, sexist, nativist…etc. Like calculus!

People with no training in logical thought and the assessment of evidence don’t even know this is possible. They really do think assertion of group membership is all there is. Don’t go anywhere near a bridge they have built. It can be as anti-racist and diverse and climate friendly as you like, its going to fall down.

I am afraid it is going to take a generation’s worth of civil engineering disasters, such as those under way in the UK’s Net Zero project, to bring us to our senses. That they will happen if the project is seriously pursued isn’t in doubt.

William Golding, in The Spire, did a fictional account of this conflict between passionate fantasy and reality – in that case, gravity and the foundations of a building.

Steve Kardas
December 1, 2021 5:48 am

Suzuki has a net worth of $25 million and has a mansion worth $8.5 million plus a few other residences worth millions. His wealth will make sure HIS life style will be unaffected as the leftist intentionally drive up the cost of energy and devastate the lives of the little people struggling to make ends meet. Susuki is another incredibly rich, phony Climate Change Scold hypocrite.

Sara
December 1, 2021 6:23 am

So when does this totally bogus obsession stop resembling the Man Who Wasn’t There?

Yesterday, upon the stair,
I met a man who wasn’t there!
He wasn’t there again today,
Oh how I wish he’d go away! – Antigonish: W.H. Means/1899

Most of us try to use a little common sense about the real world, our so-called natural world, where we grow gardens, mow lawns, take the kids to the forest preserve to identify wild plants and birds and bugs and maybe see a leopard frog or two, or some turtles, sunning themselves. We may even take them fishing at the nearby lakes where it’s allowed by the forest preserve district, or take them to a spot at dusk where they can see fireflies in the summer and hear the bullfrogs and leopard frogs croak.

But these numbskullions, e.g., the “Inhoomans” described in the article, seem to have no contact with the real world, with the places that people like me know about and enjoy, where we can find baby frogs barely the size of my little fingernail, and goose/duck pairs raising their families, ID birds like the brown treecreeper (and the Mrs. Treecreeper) nesting in a willow along the river trail, ID wildflowers and the occasional green-eyed Longhorn Bee (gorgeous!).

The Real World frightens the living daylights out of them, a lot! I’m beginning to think that they are so utterly frightened by it that they have nightmares about it and that is why they are so destructive. They do NOT want to “save the planet”. They want to make it uninhabitable.

Just my view, but the more I run across this “need to destroy”, the more I’m convinced of that. Prove that I’m wrong.

Last edited 1 month ago by Sara
John K. Sutherland
December 1, 2021 7:13 am

Very good article.

TonyG
December 1, 2021 8:45 am

Also from Rand, and equally relevant: “Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think that you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.”

Matt
December 1, 2021 12:26 pm

People like Suzuki have staked their reputation on their climate misconceptions and thus will never ever admit they are wrong.
“It is easier to fool people than convince them they were fooled”

observa
December 1, 2021 1:59 pm

The moral case for destroying fossil fuel infrastructure? Too easy once you’ve earned everything out of it-
Norway wealth fund calls on companies to act on climate (msn.com)

Dean
December 1, 2021 3:50 pm

“Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification. A contradiction cannot exist. No concept [wo]man forms is valid unless [s]he integrates it without contradiction into the total sum of [her]his knowledge.”

Maybe.

With the sum of shim’s knowledge being based on hugely cherry picked facts/feelings, its pretty easy to hold any old crap as valid.

If you want to get to really worthwhile knowledge you need to test what you think you know for falseness. This is beyond the scope of people who think a religion is science.

Edward Katz
December 1, 2021 6:23 pm

Suzuki is as phony as a 3-dollar bill. He owns 4 personal residences, and has 5 kids; yet he’s on a plane at least once a month preaching how we have to renounce fossil fuels,keep the global population down, and adopt simpler lifestyles that consume less. Whenever he starts his hysterical ranting about climate emergencies, he gets the horselaugh; and it’s a good thing the CBC exists because no other network would give him any air time.

%d bloggers like this: