Essay by Eric Worrall
“… Human beings, the wretches, continue to disappoint the savants at the United Nations …”
Climate Doomsday Is Nigh—Again
And the U.N. says it’s your fault for eating meat, among other sins.
By The Editorial Board
Oct. 31, 2022 6:39 pm ETHuman beings, the wretches, continue to disappoint the savants at the United Nations, and never more than on climate change. The global body announced last week that despite all of the world’s climate sacrifices and trillions of dollars in renewable spending, we’re all still doomed unless mankind makes radical changes in lifestyles and standards of living.
…
According to the U.N. report, all climate policies currently in place will result in warming of 2.8 degrees. … And if Western countries meet their “net-zero” goals? The world would warm 1.8 degrees.
…
The U.N. report suggests taxing foods based on their carbon emissions so that meat becomes so expensive people have no choice but to go vegan. Don’t discount the possibility that the U.S. and European climate left will eventually embrace this idea. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern recently announced that New Zealand farmers will soon pay a tax on their methane-emitting sheep and cow burps.
…
Our sincere advice would to be drop the doomsday act, which people don’t believe, and focus instead on policies to adapt to a warmer planet and mitigate any damage if the worst happens. …
Read more: https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-doomsday-is-nigh-again-united-nations-environment-climate-change-fossil-fuels-11666989086
The modern climate flagellants are worse than the medieval flagellants ever were. I don’t know of any medieval flagellant community which tried to make self flagellation mandatory for ordinary people, while giving the leaders of the community a free pass.
But this is effectively what the UN and green leaning national politicians want us to accept. They want ordinary people to accept all the lifestyle sacrifices, while the elite continue eating all the beef they want, and rack up endless air miles, with multiple annual flights to exotic holiday destinations for their “climate conferences”.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Despite many learned folk pointing out that going Vegan would make sod all difference to the climate.
The whole sodding thing in Egypt will do nothing for climate, so it’s way past time the UN came clean as to what the purpose of these love fests are, apart from holidays for the climate gurus and to put more pressure on the waverers to cough up more climate reparations money.
The UN coming clean? FAT CHANCE.
It is riddled with Communists hell bent on destroying Capitalism, based on : “The End Justifies the Means”
I don’t think they are communists at all. They are more like Princes in hereditary Kingdoms, hereditary aristocrats who live privileged lives overseeing their peasant workers.
To be Communists they would have to promote an equality of distribution of the profits of labor and production. They don’t. They advocate a scaled down reduction in the current consumption of goods and energy throughout society, bit not equally. The rich get Teslas, the middle class rent or are driven by Uber, and the poor walk or ride shared bicycles. The very poor have no place in their vision as they don’t contribute materially to society.
Your distain is warranted as they are totalitarian, seeking to control with top down edicts. But they are not Communists, not even the Chinese-variety Xi defends.
Communism is allways about power and control, only lip service to making things better for the working class
It depends on how you define Communism .Alasdair is correct.
Show me one country in the world that has a communist government that has ever distributed profits of labour and production equably.
It just never happens .
I never went on an OE but I have many friends that did and traveled through the Iron Curtain countries in the 70s and 80s .
All of them described the utter hopelessness and poverty of the general populations of those countries .
Communists might say that that they promote equality but show me one country with a communist government where the general population are better off than countries with free market policies.
Major speakers at some past events have spoken very clearly (not about saving the environment, not about fighting climate change, etc.). It made no difference.
It’s never been about improving the environment. It’s always been about imposing socialism and reducing the population.
Based on experience with elites flying to COP-any number, there is a zero chance that they would go vegan.
It isn’t so much that the COP 27 attendees are the flagellants. Rather, they want you to flagellate yourselves while they watch to make sure you do it thoroughly enough. And you know that no amount of self-flagellation will be enough to satisfy them.
I think the unwashed masses are looking at the elites and saying, “You first.”
Maybe, but the voices of the unwashed masses aren’t heard because they don’t matter. These issues are above their (our) pay grade.
Oh, I don’t know … they seem to spend all their waking hours self-flagellating. It’s amazing they haven’t all gone blind.
These activists imagine that when their desired great reset comes, they will be the ones at the top of the pile.
Folks have to realize that revolutions often don’t stop when their desired goal is achieved. The very nastiest revolutionaries often rise to the top. Stalin would be exhibit ‘A’. He killed, or sent to Siberia, the heroes of the revolution who once dreamed that their day had come.
The Reign of Terror after the French Revolution produced over 16,000 state sanctioned death sentences thru their court system. The number would have been much higher but for people dying in prison while waiting for justice.
The Jan 6 star chamber trials are another example.
So true! No Green government with power will accept the antics of Extinction Rebellion or The Last Generation because, like Trotsky and others wanted, their revolution never ends as perfection is always distant and backsliding revisionists are everywhere.
I think the COP 27 attendees would prefer to be the ones holding the whips. I think they salivate at the chance to flog as many people as possible. The watching of self flagellation is just a prelude to whet their appetite.
WSJ turning against WEF?
The WSJ editorial board is different from the “news” reporters. The editorial board is mainly standard conservative and does not buy the climate change will end the world nonsense. The “news” reporting on the other hand definitely follows the standard trope with regards to climate change.
A few months back there was a a very large story on Sri Lanka and the recent problems with food inflation that caused the prime minister (president? I forget the title) to flee the country. Typical of the news reporting in the WSJ, it mentioned tax cuts and debt repayment as the main reasons. There was a single line in the online edition that mentioned the fact the government had banned fertilizer which affected crop yields. one single line. Curiously, that was the only line that different in the print edition versus the online edition as it was edited out. The print edition never mentioned the fertilizer ban directly.
Any vegans that I have ever treated have been in far worse overall health and had far worse clinical outcomes from multiple disease states than non-vegetarians. Pure plant protein sources are often highly lacking in one or more amino acids, and the quantities required of those plant proteins to make up for it are hardly inexpensive. I can tell a vegan a mile away—bad hair, nails and pale skin due to lysine deficiency.
There is the curious exception of Indian vegans, who remain in good health despite their diet. The reason was found to be contamination of the cereals and pulses with weevils and other insect pests.
Veganism is currently being promoted by MSM, perhaps as part of the Great Reset.
Veganism and vegetarianism are different things, and it’s important not to confuse and conflate the two. There are even differences among vegetarians, some simply choosing not to eat red meat. The more you know….
Abstaining from eating red meat is not a form of vegetarianism by definition.
I also noted this in a group I ran that had many holistic medical and “energy” self-practitioners. No deodorant because aluminum or other skin soluble stuff. No bras, tight clothes because lymph fluid reduction. They were forever complaining of colds or weaknesses or, especially, anxiety, blaming their troubles on the industrialized world of chemicals and phone radiation.
They all needed a solid meal with meat and roasted vegetables besides their salads.
And to get laid.
I normally don’t reply to this kind of BS, but I am going to have to. I am a board certified preventive medicine physician and I have to wonder what kind you are to spout this nonsense. Except for VitB12, you can get all the nutrients you need to live healthy and the B12 is lacking because we don’t eat much dirt with our vegetables. Your nonsense that pure plant protein sources are lacking in one or more amino acid or that you can tell a vegan from a mile away are just nonsense.
I’ve been plant based for almost 12 years. I cycle pretty aggressively for my age, ski, dive, and hike. I am plant based for personal reasons, really don’t care if others want to go that route. Not at all against others eating meat. Good for you. But don’t spout off nonsense in an effort to virtue signal.
Shouldn’t COP27 Sharm el-Sheikh be renamed to COP27 Sham el-Sheikh!
You mean FLOP27 Sham-el-Sheikh.
You mean FLOP27 Sham-all-Shakedown.
Sheikh Rattle and Roll!
Will Bono attend?
(LOL. I would go only he performed)
What is amazing are the references to COP26 which was a standard COP failure with that coal relaxation. What is the agenda this year? How will success or failure be judged? Will the steady rise in atmospheric CO2 be checked by COP27?
No, because the rise in essential, life giving, planet greening CO2 is coming from warming oceans, not anthropogenic sources.
Two problems with that.
The world has only warmed 1 degree, even assuming the oceans also warmed 1 degree, that’s only enough to account for 5 to 10ppm of the CO2 increase.
Secondly, it takes hundreds of years for the oceans to respond to changes in temperature. Remember the 900 year CO2 lag. It’s only been 150 years since temperatures started rising. Not enough time for the oceans to have significantly responded to the increasing temperatures.
The amount of fossil fuels burned have been more than enough to account for all of the increase in CO2. I wish I could figure out why so many people are determined to prove that man cannot be responsible for this rise.
Seems like it could be increasing because of the MWP. We don’t make anywhere near enough CO2 to account for the measured increase.
The data supplied says human source CO2 is TWICE that needed to account for the atmospheric increase of CO2 concentration. 50% of human produced CO2 disappears into CO2 sinks.
Waddaya mean failure? It was a total success. COP27 is here isn’t it? And a much more luxurious location than Glasgow.
Next on the agenda, which luxury resort to hold the taxpayer-funded COP28 jamboree in?
How about Mackinac Island in January?
This will destroy our wildlife. From what I remember from the nursery rheum, “it takes four and twenty black birds to make a pie”.
That’s what I was thinking – quoting this line: “The U.N. report suggests taxing foods based on their carbon emissions
so that meat becomes so expensive people have no choice but to go vegan”Fixed that: “so that meat becomes so expensive people have no choice but to decimate the local wildlife population to get their necessary protein.”Quote:
“Essential nutrients are ones our bodies cannot make; we need to eat them. The nine essential amino acids are histidine, isoleucine, leucine, lysine, methionine, phenylalanine, threonine, tryptophan and valine. If we don’t consume these more or less every day, the body won’t manufacture its own protein-based products efficiently or at all.”
“All animal proteins are complete while only handful plant foods are, including buckwheat, quinoa, soybeans, hemp seeds and chia seeds.”
https://ice.edu/blog/essential-proteins
Many complete amino acid mixes are readily provided by combining the correct plants in the correct proportions (e.g. corn and beans). Is this as good as eating a single source of complete amino acids? If not, why not?
Isn’t eating meat simpler than trying to eat all the right plant-based foods in combination every day? Besides, meat is higher in protein than plant-based foods are per ounce.
Awkward and requires much knowledge and discipline and access to superior food stores. Three necessary but either uncommon or inconvenient things even amongst the middle class majority who are well educated.
It actually is not very complicated. See “Diet for a Small Planet”.
Ingredients are not unusual or difficult to come by.
Many vegetarian dishes are very tasty.
I’m not advocating giving up meat, I’m just trying to correct some of the misconceptions too often printed here.
If rice and beans are complete proteins, please explain the amazing size difference in children born in the 1950s to the children born in the 2000s.
I think the difference is due to better nutrition.
Mainly eggs, milk, meat and affordable veggies and fruit.
What kind of differences?
Let’s start by harvesting the invasive Eurasian Collared-Dove, then move on to the Burmese Brown Pythons in Florida, and more:
https://wildlifeinformer.com/invasive-species-in-the-united-states/
The problem is that these global warmists do not want to think for them selves .
You can explain to them that most of what they are being told ,is unproven junk science .Straight out propaganda with ulterior motives to make people feel guilty of living a comfortable life.
Making use of energy to produce food , goods and services for the good of the country.
You cannot argue with them as they are brain washed to believe the scare stories that happen somewhere around the world every week ,such as storms ,floods heat waves which have been affecting some part of the world since the last major ice age .
I am a farmer in New Zealand and I do have an axe to grind .
I appeared before a zero carbon select committee with very well researched paper but the select committee was a sham .The government had made up their minds to unleash an agenda that will do untold harm to our farming and cripple our country .
Readers here are probably sick of me writing about enteric methane from farmed livestock .
In the above article it try’s to say that animal farming is bad for the world and they would like to ban meat .
This is the biggest lie that is continually parroted by these people and I will show you that farmed animals pose absolutely know risk at all to the world.
All fodder eaten by farmed animals absorbs the gas of life CO2 from the atmosphere to grow.
As the farmed animals digest their food the chew their cud and some methane escapes back into the atmosphere .
The methane is generated by microbes in the animals four stomachs as the microbes digest the cellulose in the forage and multiply rapidly to move through the animals digestive system and are absorbed as the animals food .
The methane is broken down in the upper atmosphere in 8 to 10 years into CO2 and H2O {water vapour }.
Not one additional atom of carbon is added to the atmosphere as the process is a cycle.
Where is the problem ?
I showed the select committee a graph of world methane emissions from 1999 untill 2010 which showed that methane levels were steady for 10 years so where was the problem ?
Then in 2009 methane levels started to rise but farmed animals around the world were steady or declining so they could not be blamed .
The problem was a vast increase in coal mining from a steady 4.7 billion tonnes around the world up to 2008 increased steadily up to 8 billion tones .
Coal beds contain massive amounts of methane which is released during mining through to combustion .
Our government is making a great ado about nothing over these methane emissions which are counted as New Zealands emissions even though 87% of milk and meat produced in New Zealand is exported .
I understand that the emissions on all goods imported into a country plus the shipping are counted as the importing countries emissions .
Could any one please tell me why all our agricultural generated emissions are counted as ours when we export 87% of our food..meat . wool and leather to other countries .
Some one knows the answer.
my sympathys with your struggle
theres only ONE COW needs culling in NZ
I raise cattle .
The party you are referring to would not be hauled off to the local rendering plant.
Scrawny, sad. Not worth the effort.
Yes, the standard response in my experience is “I don’t pay attention to conspiracy theories (unless they are about ‘Big Oil’, automobile companies, Republicans, and other such scum).
The answer? Shut up, she explained. And she has the guns, government propaganda and like-minded media to make the unarmed, voiceless citizens shut up.
From the UN website —–
“The United Nations launched its sustainable development agenda in 2015, reflecting the growing understanding by Member States that a development model that is sustainable for this and future generations offers the best path forward for reducing poverty and improving the lives of people everywhere. At the same time, climate change began making a profound impact on the consciousness of humanity. With the polar ice caps melting, global sea levels rising and cataclysmic weather events increasing in ferocity, no country in the world is safe from the effects of climate change.
Building a more sustainable global economy will help reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. It is, therefore, critically important that the international community meet the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals – and also the targets for reducing emissions set in the Paris Climate Agreement of 2015.
Sustainable development and climate action are linked – and both are vital to the present and future well-being of humanity.”
——————————————————-
And there you have it in a nut-zero nutshell….
What an utter croc of shit.
As usual, the Left tells you what their true goals are when they tell you what they want you to think they are trying to prevent.
As they went from town to town, medieval flagellants would encourage locals to join them. And in finding too strong a refusal some folk were murdered.
I didn’t know that – any links?
It always seems that some zealots are VERY zealous. Remember the academics who were caught starting more CA forest fires.
I wonder if the COP27 event catering was fully vegan, and if it was, how many delegates snuck out for KFC or a burger?
I attended a conference in Halifax in 2019, had nothing to do with climate change. For some reason the organizers decided it should be vegan AND gender neutral. One of the things I like about attending conferences is to enjoy the different foods. I expected great seafood, I got beans and rice, I didn’t eat beans and rice when I was a student in university! Needless to say there was a lot if wasted food and the food store about 2 blocks from the hotel did roaring business. AND all the women used the female only washroom in the basement of the hotel, very long lineups. As far as I know, the profession org whose conference it was has NO gender confused members.
People still talk about that conference, all you have to say us I attended the conference in Halifax for the rants to start
Virtuous intentions are more highly valued than not perfect but decent outcomes.
“The perfect is the enemy of the good” is not acceptable to a Woke/Green leadership class.
They never learn because their is no incentive within their class to accept intermediate outcomes. Intermediate, to them, means “stopped before it succeeded”
And the female conferees didn’t kick the pedo/creeps out of the bathrooms? Are women generally that compliant? I would never allow pedo/creeps to share my daughters’ bathrooms. I’ll never understand why the fathers of female school-age athletes don’t band together to toss the pedo/creeps.
Greta parrots her groomers with the truth about them-
https://www.msn.com/en-au/entertainment/music/greta-thunberg-it-s-time-to-overthrow-the-west-s-oppressive-and-racist-capitalist-system/ar-AA13Ebby
It was never about the science.
As for eating meat, no less than the transcendentalist writer Henry David Thoreau understood a basic, primitive need for humans to indulge, sometimes if not often. The following is in Walden.
“AS I CAME home through the woods with my string of fish, trailing my
pole, it being now quite dark, I caught a glimpse of a woodchuck
stealing across my path, and felt a strange thrill of savage
delight, and was strongly tempted to seize and devour him raw; not
that I was hungry then, except for that wildness which he represented.
Once or twice, however, while I lived at the pond, I found myself
ranging the woods, like a half-starved hound, with a strange
abandonment, seeking some kind of venison which I might devour, and no
morsel could have been too savage for me. The wildest scenes had
become unaccountably familiar. I found in myself, and still find, an
instinct toward a higher, or, as it is named, spiritual life, as do
most men, and another toward a primitive rank and savage one, and I
reverence them both.”
Can the UN just F off and die.
Coal is vegan food for our modern industrial times. Aged a bit for better energy density. So there’s that.
What am I missing? Isn’t meat essentially fully sustainable by the usual definition(s) of carbon dioxide emissions. Yeah, I get it that some traces of carbon (as in, for example, synthetic vitamin E). may be derived from petroleum, but the vast bulk of the carbon in meat belongs in a sustainable carbon cycle with essentially zero added from fossil fuels.
Could someone tap these numbskulls on the shoulder and tell them about this?
Meat is fully sustainable but anti farmed animal activists lobbied at the Kyoto climate conference in 1997 because they believed that farmed animals were releasing methane which would heat the world.
Before that conference it was all about rising CO2 levels that activists and a few scientists believed were caused by man burning fossil fuel .
The UNIPCC went along with this as methane which is a trace gas under 2 ppm in the atmosphere has been rated at 88 times more potent than CO2 which is at 410 ppm.
All the fodder that animals consume has absorbed the gas of life CO2 to grow.
It is only the animals with enteric digestion that release methane mainly cattle , sheep , goats and deer. Horses and pigs do not have enteric digestion .
The process is a cycle and not one additional atom of carbon is added to the atmosphere over a 10 year time frame as methane breaks down in the upper atmosphere in 8 to 10 years into CO2 and water vapour .
If you read my earlier post above you will see that farmed animals pose no threat to rising green house gas levels .
Is it possible to get a link to some reliable source, so that I may send the info to the local dairy farm that is under attack from some lefties?
thanks if you can.
You are just a conspiracy theorist.
See how easy it is to put down that nonsense?
Mostly meat and fat worked fairly well for the Inuit.
If they had unlimited year round blueberries and some kale they might have conquered the world.
/sarc
Flagellants? Or Flatulents?
Both.
Basically, you cannot fit big egos and very big advocacy agendas in a little screen doing Zoom conferencing. It must be a very big resort town with a very big budget to align with the demand for more money and global redistribution of wealth.
Well you have to make sure your gender representation covers every possible base.
It’s going to be fun watching the battle over climate money demands from climate victim poor countries . Worlds biggest guilt trip ever is on the horizon . Appropriate that this will be held in Egypt , one of the world leaders in governance by bribery
Too bad one of the worlds richest benefactors of international plundering , king chuck , won’t be there
The issue with meat production and climate activism isn’t just about direct emissions from the animals. Warmists / sustainists also account for all of the inputs to production, transport, processing and marketing. But the fact is, people have to eat, usually a minimum number of calories a day just to stay healthy (Peta, please no diatribes about what people eat). This is more complex than simply calories- not all are the same. As has been said elsewhere, meats provide humans with many nutrients that are not easily provided by a strict vegan diet.
Plus, vast areas of farm and ranch lands are not suitable for crop production and are best used for livestock production. Advanced economies have developed very efficient systems to get a calf, for example, from birth to table. “Free range” (/sarc) cattle from birth through early development, then finishing with concentrated feeding before slaughter. We get quality, affordable meat products to our tables as part of a healthy diet. Farmers and ranchers are mostly savvy entrepreneurs, supported by solid ag-science, who feed the world and have been improving and refining their methods for the past two centuries.
If we were to get rid of or penalize livestock production, there would be vast subregions and cultures across the world that would be decimated, and overall many more people would go hungry or starve. In my region of Texas, in fact in most of Texas, ranching (cattle, goats, sheep) and poultry production are about all for which the land if suitable.
Also, I have just about had it with people repeatedly talking about eating bugs. Aside from the fact that most are unappealing to people as food, bugs don’t just self-produce en masse and arrive at your table. A switch to bugs would require its own alternative, massive agricultural enterprise in order to feed the teeming masses of people living in cities. Land, food, water, nutrients, and a whole new infrastructure system would be required, and before you know it we would be right back to where we are now. No net gains and crumby food to boot. That’s a lose-lose proposition.
More and more insects will appear on the endangered species lists.
You will soon be required to buy your bugs from a few controlling mega corporations, shipped from out of sight places in the third world.
There will then also be large criminal cartels supplying the black markets.
This will lead to the happy employment of a huge number of people in the “criminal justice” system.
This will insure the arms manufacturers and arms dealers do a brisk business.
The green devils suck, they have no redeeming value.
The COP15 conference in Copenhagen attracted a large number of prostitutes from all over Europe. The local supply was far from sufficient to satisfy the demand. The chair woman of the prostitutes union in Denmark even offered free services for the organizers of the conference to express the unions gratitude for the booming business during the conference.
“… effectively what the UN and green leaning national politicians want us to accept. They want ordinary people to accept all the lifestyle sacrifices, while the elite continue eating all the beef they want, and rack up endless air miles, with multiple annual flights to exotic holiday destinations for their “climate conferences”.
For some reason the MSM can’t see or admit that this is exactly the end result of the Greens plans. As a cynic, I suspect the reason is that the MSM self-identifies as, or hopes to be, the elite that gets to do stuff as they “deserve”, while the rest are peasant-types who deserve what they are allowed by the elites.
It’s weird.
A couple of days late, but I have a query about this item, which the comments so far have not resolved, as far as I can see.
I am from Blighty, not your side of the pond, so I ask this question because I don’t know the answer. I thought that the WSJ was as stuck in the green blob as the Times (London), the Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, the BBC, the Economist (and so on). Isn’t an editorial backing off from all the nonsense, in the WSJ, quite big news, which we should be celebrating?
Sent yesterday to the WSJ Editorial Board:
So, the WSJ Editorial Board says we should, “drop the doomsday act … and focus instead on policies to adapt to a warmer planet and mitigate any damage if the worst happens.”
”Propagation of Error and the Reliability of Global Air Temperature Projections”…
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feart.2019.00223/full
… says that “the worst” is a pipe-dream of incompetents. So also is ‘the worse,’ and all the alternative fever-dreams.
Climate models have no predictive value. Air temperature projections are physically meaningless.
See the attached summary explanation. I have written to you before about this. But journalists everywhere lack the moral courage to follow up.
CO2 emissions warming the climate is the modern witch-craze. Unseen Sabbats, but evidence in every spavined horse. That’s the climate crisis.
Your belief provides the religious context with which the climate flagellants justify their foolishness. Blame yourselves for them.
Pat
Patrick Frank, Ph.D.
email: xxxatxxx.xxx