WSJ Editorial Board Mocks the COP27 Global Warming Flagellants

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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?

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.