To defeat ISIS and the jihad, we need a successful climate-change conference. Really.

November 17, 2015
No way!!

Are you nuts??

I’m not sure what’s worse: that some moron could write such a smarmy, morally bankrupt piece of leftist, eco-warrior drivel, or that the author is French:

“However, people forget that the war that’s been declared on us is also psychological. The report released by ISIS to claim the massacre in Paris uses all the tools of conditioning and psychological manipulation: a turning of tables, presenting the Islamic State as a victim instead of an assassin, while promising to continue to spread terror, and criticizing policy makers for creating internal divisions– a criticism intended to bring about self-doubt.

“Our first response should be to understand this psychological tactic, so that we don’t allow them to win. No, we do not have to be guilt-tripped into fighting these barbaric groups that slit throats, rape, torture and kill innocent civilians in the most cowardly ways possible. No, our values are strong enough to refuse to sink to their level, and instead, to turn towards reinforcing national unity against their aggression. No, we do not doubt that enlightenment and democratic progress are strong enough to stand up to such behavior, which is sending us back to prehistoric times. No, we are not afraid, and it’s because we have no doubt that we will continue to live as we choose, and to defend the policies (1) that we believe to be essential.

You can almost see the progressive bogeyman forming in her mind: naturally, anyone advocating a robust, forceful, and yes violent response to ISIS’ massacre of hundred in Paris will, acting out of guilt, inevitably sink to the level of barbarity shown by these jihadist savages. The insulting moral equivalence aside, this is just delusional: modern Western militaries, while deploying awesome power, go out of their way to avoid civilian casualties when at all possible. And to imagine they would “sink to the level” of ISIS is to indulge in leftist fantasy worthy of The New Republic.

But wait! It gets better!

After this fool has warned us against being guilt-tripped into destroying maniacs who had just murdered hundreds (and want to kill far more), she offered up a better solution, one sure to end the jihad once and for all. What this crisis calls for is… (drum roll)

… a successful climate-change conference! We’re saved!!

Amongst these is the climate change issue, which will determine, in the long term, the survival of mankind, and, in the short term, the demographic balance. Because, contrary to what many people would say –especially those who are excited about averting the dangers that an agreement on climate change may pose for them– there are definitely several undeniable links between these barbaric and fascist acts by radical Islamists and the climate.

Lord, where do I begin? I… I can’t even.

Has climate change played a roll in the movement of peoples and been a cause of turmoil? Quite likely. I’m a bit of a geographical determinist when it comes to history and, sure, famine caused by a lack of rain could lead one group of people to attack another in order to take their more fertile land. I won’t claim that hasn’t ever happened.

But, not only is it cynically, foully exploitive of this former environment minister to use the atrocities in Paris to pump up the climate conference scheduled to take place there soon, but it ignores the far more real reason (2):

The attacks were the result of Muslims choosing to wage jihad against non-believers —as their religion demands— in return for great rewards (including sexual) when they reach Paradise, and not in some “acting out” against an imaginary carbon-dioxide demon.

Really, just how soul-dead and ideologically botoxed do you have to be to see hundreds of your countrymen murdered and think “I can use this to rally people to my fading cause and use it to boost my statist agenda!”

I’m surprised she isn’t a Bernie Sanders adviser.

via WUWT

Footnote:
(1) By the way, one means to spot the statist is when they prattle on about “defending policies,” not their country or their people or their civilization. Government is all that counts, baby.
(2) Come on, you all know what I think about anthropogenic climate change.

 

 


How biofuel-mania kills

October 12, 2015

satire Good Intentions

This is excerpted from a longer post at Power Line discussing a report pointing out the benefits of CO2 (hint: it’s plant food) and the nonsensical hysteria climate cultists try to spread about it. Proving the point about roads paved with good intentions, the insane pursuit of biofuels has lead to nearly 200,000 premature deaths:

Between 1990–92 and 2011–13, although global population increased by 31% to 7.1 billion, available food supplies increased by 44%. Consequently, the population suffering from chronic hunger declined by 173 million despite a population increase of 1.7 billion. This occurred despite the diversion of land and crops from production of food to the production of biofuels. According to one estimate, in 2008 such activities helped push 130–155 million people into absolute poverty, exacerbating hunger in this most marginal of populations. This may in turn have led to 190,000 premature deaths worldwide in 2010 alone. Thus, ironically, a policy purporting to reduce [global warming] in order to reduce future poverty and hunger only magnified these problems in the present day.

In the United States we’ve seen increases in the prices of food due in part to cropland being diverted to biofuels, instead of producing feed for cattle or vegetables for the produce sections of our local markets. But, we’re lucky: thanks to a marvelous transportation system, food can still be brought in by land and sea. For the subsistence farmers described above, it’s not an inconvenience: it’s a matter of life and death.

I’ve said before and I’ll say it again: Heaven help us against those trying to “save” us.

PS: The whole report is available at Watt’s Up With That.


(Video) The truth about CO2, and the corruption of Greenpeace

July 27, 2015

Two videos today from Prager University, both narrated by Dr. Patrick Moore, a PhD in Ecology from the University of British Columbia and one of the founders of the environmental activist group Greenpeace.

In the first, Dr. Moore discusses the nonsense surrounding the almost superstitious dread of carbon dioxide among climate alarmists. Notably, and as has been mentioned several times on this blog and elsewhere, Dr. Moore points out the inconvenient truth that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has in the past been up to ten times higher than it is now, without the world ending. That, in fact, we are still in an era of relatively low CO2 concentrations. Also, he mentions a truth so obvious that only climate hysterics need to be told it: CO2 is plant food. In fact, the ideal atmospheric concentration of CO2 is 4-5 higher than it is now. We can already see the benefits of increasing CO2 as the Earth grows greener, contrary to the Cult of Climate Change’s dire predictions.

But enough of me ranting. Here’s Dr. Moore, not ranting:

The second video is Dr. Moore’s tale of how he came to be a founder of Greenpeace, in its day an organization dedicated to a mix of scientific conservationism and anti-war politics. He relates how the movement changed over time to an anti-scientific, almost anti-human dogma, which at its farcical worst declared banning the element chlorine as a goal, going so far as to label it “the Devil’s element.”

Nothing religious or cultish about that.

Here’s Dr. Moore explaining why he finally had to leave Greenpeace:

That’s the trouble with organizations that get captured by their most ardent activists: they drive out the moderates who could act as a brake on their worst tendencies, which, left unchecked, wreck their credibility.


Greenpeace: We Spit on Your Sacred Spaces

December 14, 2014

The clueless narcissism of the self-proclaimed “activist” is at once both infuriating and amazing.

Big Picture News, Informed Analysis

Desecrating cultural and religious monuments is normal Greenpeace behaviour.

Nasca_lines_greenpeace screengrab from the BBC website (click)

Activism is about persuasion. It’s about using moral arguments to change people’s minds which, in turn, changes the world.

For moral arguments to be successful, we need to already inhabit the same approximate moral universe. Some things are sacred. The ends don’t justify the means. This isn’t rocket science, but apparently it’s news to Greenpeace.

In Peru, where a UN climate summit is currently taking place, the Ministry of Culture says Greenpeace activists have desecrated an important cultural monument.

The NazcaLines are a collection of approximately 300 figures etched into the Peruvian desert more than 1,500 years ago. In the words of vice-minister Luis Jaime Castillo, an archeologist by training, the figures

are absolutely fragile. They are black rocks on a white background. You walk there and the footprint is going to…

View original post 244 more words


Australia: Tony Abbott spends money on environment, makes Greens shriek in anger

December 3, 2014
Tony Abott Australia

“Has no time for BS”

 

Because, you see, he’s spending the money on actual environmental projects, rather than giving it to UN bureaucrats who will attend meetings, issue reports, travel in Mercedes…. and ask for more money.

And that won’t do:

This is tin-tacks taken back from the Green Blob, but cheer it on. The Abbott government apparently wants to use the money to protect rainforests, instead of given to green-bureaucrats. Enjoy the apoplexy among greens and environmentalists. Excuse me, I think your priorities are showing!

ABC news

“The Federal Government has slashed funding to a key United Nations environment agency by more than 80 per cent, stunning environmental groups ahead of a global climate change summit in Peru.

The ABC has learned the Government cut $4 million from the UN Environment Program (UNEP), which provides advice on environmental policies and climate change negotiations.”

Instead of giving $1.2m a year, we are giving $200,000. True to form, the green-blobby is “stunned” and immediately responds with a higher ambit claim. There is a scale for everything, and too much is never enough:

“Environmental groups are stunned, especially because according to UNEP’s Voluntary Indicative Scale of Assessments, Australia should have contributed around $2.2 million next year.”

The money is going to the environment, and environmental groups hate that:

“Environment Minister Greg Hunt said the Government had to “make choices in a difficult budget environment”.”

“‘I would imagine that most Australians would see putting $12 million into coral reef protection within our region and combating illegal logging of the great rainforests of the Asia-Pacific as a pretty good investment compared with $4 million for bureaucratic support within the UN system,’ Mr Hunt said.”

The appropriate response when the government takes money from bureaucrats and uses it to protect reefs and rainforest is to call it “anti-environment”, “anti-nature”, “anti-science”, and “denier”.

Read the rest for the laugh-worthy reaction from the head of the Australian Green Party.

Meanwhile, here in America, President Obama has signed an agreement with China that uses the climate-change fraud to satisfy his radical Green supporters and force energy price hikes here. Sigh.

This leads to the inevitable question: “Abbott 2016?”


The Gruberization of environmental policies

November 29, 2014

Shoot, we know they think we’re children who needed to be lied to in order to pass the healthcare legislation they (and no one else) wanted, so we shouldn’t be surprised that the same is true with environmentalism, too.

Watts Up With That?

Gruber Gruber

Accumulation of fraudulent EPA regulations impacts energy, economy, jobs, families and health

Guest essay by Paul Driessen

Call it the Gruberization of America’s energy and environmental policies.

Former White House medical consultant Jonathan Gruber pocketed millions of taxpayer dollars before infamously explaining how ObamaCare was enacted. “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage,” he said. “It was really, really critical to getting the bill passed.” At least one key provision was a “very clever basic exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the American voter.”

The Barack Obama/Gina McCarthy Environmental Protection Agency is likewise exploiting its lack of transparency and most Americans’ lack of scientific understanding. EPA bureaucrats and their hired scientists, pressure groups and PR flacks are getting rich and powerful by implementing costly, punitive, dictatorial regulations “for our own good,” and pretending to be honest and publicly spirited.

EPA’s latest regulatory onslaught is its “Clean…

View original post 1,262 more words


Climate Change: scratch a Green, find a Red

September 24, 2014
Watermelons

Watermelons

The anonymous photo-blogger Zombie does an invaluable service by visiting the People’s Climate March in Oakland to record for posterity the ideological core of the modern environmentalist movement: bare-naked statism in the form of totalitarian communism:

Communists along with a few environmental groups staged a “People’s Climate Rally” in Oakland, California on Sunday, September 21, in conjunction with the larger “People’s Climate March” in New York City on the same day.

Wait — did I say communists? Isn’t that a bit of an exaggeration?

Well…no.

At the New York event, many people noticed that gee, there sure are a lot of communists at this march. But in Oakland — always on the cutting edge — the entire “climate change” movement at last fully, irrevocably and overtly embraced communism as its stated goal. Any concerns about “optics” or operating in “stealth mode” were abandoned.

The “climate change” “crisis” is now nothing but the latest justification for “total revolution” and getting rid of capitalism forever.

Zombie Climate March Oakland

(Photo credit: Zombie)

Be sure to read the whole thing. Remember, it’s not about polar bears and rising seas, it’s about control.

RELATED: For more about the Socialist origins and nature of the global-warming scare, read Christopher Booker’s “The Real Global Warming Disaster” and James Delingpole’s “Watermelons.”