Climate Depot’s Morano response to Daily Kos: “Let’s end this energy dysphoria now. Let’s have fossil fuel energy ‘identify’ as solar and wind. Then everyone will be happy and we can stop being energy-phobic. We will have energy that powers our modern economy, and we can call it solar and wind. Problem solved.”
Climate Depot’s Marc Morano on rice: “The big picture is this: This isn’t necessarily about shutting down rice production. This is about the climate agenda coming from the United Nations and the World Economic Forum, academia, and the corporate world, identifying every facet of modern society as being a climate ‘problem’ that needs managing and thus a takeover. So whether we’re talking about transportation, whether it’s airlines, whether it’s gas-powered cars, whether it’s eating meat, whether it’s high-yield agriculture, it’s all allegedly creating a ‘climate emergency’ and thus global elites want to take over and ‘manage’ them. They are looking for a managerial revolution. They want to put themselves in charge of saving the planet and thus put themselves in charge of all aspects of modern society.”
Morano on China envy: “What happened in March 2020, why this is the most important date for this entire change of our lifetime, was the once-free West emulated one-party Chinese rule Communist Party rule.”
Now it is firmly ensconced among the climate change cult that eating meat is killing the planet and you must ‘eat ze bugs’, the same people have a new target, rice.
VIDEO: Rice is to blame for around 10 percent of global emissions of methane, a gas that over two decades, traps about 80 times as much heat as carbon dioxide. Scientists say that if the world wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, rice cannot be ignored. pic.twitter.com/46GgkaGPgK
The Food and Agriculture Organization notes that “Rice is one of the most important staple foods in the world. Over 50 percent of the world population depends on rice for about 80 percent of its food requirements. About 95 percent of the global output of rice is produced and consumed in developing countries.”
What is this really about?
This is sinister. Removing rice or wheat from production would trigger global famine. We need to start recognizing voices pushing this agenda so we push back on this nonsense. @wef#2030agenda
Banning rice would kill tens of millions of innocent people. I'm starting to think it's never been about saving the planet . . . https://t.co/Sz1bcbQM49
— Johnny Rotten's American Cousin (@EERCANE) April 16, 2023
A combination of publish-or-perish pressure on scientists, desire for click-bait headlines on the part of the media, and a poorly-informed public may explain the hysteria.
Say the phrase “climate change” to a certain class of generally well-educated and well-placed people, and you will hear how it is the most significant existential threat to humanity, how we should all go around despairing that we as a world community are not doing enough to avert the climate apocalypse that is coming, and that we face either the alternative of doom for humanity or a radical change in political, social, and economic arrangements to avert it. If you think I’m kidding, take a look at publications like the New York Times or The New Yorker or indeed, most mainstream media.
I’ve written here on climate change occasionally, but by and large I have taken an agnostic position on it. A wise teacher I know tells his students that worrying a lot about something you can’t personally do anything about is a waste of time, and that’s why I haven’t expended a lot of mental energy on the topic. But I did come across a reference not too long ago to a book by Steven E. Koonin entitled Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why It Matters. Having read the book, I’m now convinced that my attitude toward climate change is the right one, and I now have one of the best-placed persons in the world to back me up.
I can’t imagine a better-qualified person to write this book. Koonin’s professional career began at Caltech, where he was a professor of theoretical physics, then vice president and provost for several years. He left academia to become chief scientist for the international energy company BP, and then went into government and was President Obama’s Undersecretary for Science in the US Department of Energy. He now holds positions at New York University. So he is a product of academia, industry, and government, and has seen all three from the inside as a leader and participant.
Perhaps it is his early training as a physicist that makes him cut through the sound bites, breathless stories about polar bears, and even the periodic Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports, and go straight to the peer-reviewed, observation-based data and ask the question, “How sure are we that this alleged climate catastrophe is going to happen?” The answer suitable for a 1000-word column is, “Not sure enough to turn the world upside down.” Koonin has never met a piece of hype he couldn’t see through to get to the raw data that it was allegedly based on.
The first part of the book examines the accuracy, consistency, and meanings of the climate data on which the IPCC and other climate-change reports are based. Take rising sea levels, for example, which have inspired pictures of the Statue of Liberty wading in the Atlantic up to her waist. One overarching point he makes in this section is that climate is something that can’t be determined without taking long-term averages, ideally over periods of 20 to 30 years or more, while weather is what’s going on outside your window right now. For one thing, global sea level has varied as much as 100 meters (that’s about 330 feet) over the last half million years, falling as ice ages take up water and rising as they end. We’re currently right at the end of the last melting period, as it turns out. A plot of the last 24,000 years shows a rise of about 120 meters followed by a nearly flat period over the last 5,000 years—in other words, during the historic era. The bottom line here is that it’s much too early to tell if the rise in carbon-dioxide levels due to fossil-fuel use is going to make much of a difference in the average sea level. The true climatological answer won’t be known in any of our lifetimes.
And it’s basically the same or worse for any of the other climate tragedies that have become boogeymen to scare children with over the last twenty years or so. The worst aspect of the distortions and false terrors concerns violent weather: hurricanes, tornadoes, and so on. By two different measures, the frequency of tornadoes in the U. S. is probably going down, not up, although with modern Doppler radars it is easier to detect them than it used to be. And the annual fluctuations in something called the “power dissipation index” in the North Atlantic, which is correlated with hurricanes, are bigger than any so-called upward trend.
After showing how the actual data reveal that the IPCC, governments, and journalists have hyped climate change with cherry-picking, tendentious interpretations, and sometimes outright lies, he examines why this whole mess has come about. He concludes it is a combination of publish-or-perish pressure on scientists, desire for click-bait headlines on the part of the media, and a public that is poorly informed on even basic procedures of science. The “if it bleeds, it leads” mentality of yellow journalism has only gotten worse via the Internet and its penchant for 280-character summaries of topics that deserve a book like this one.
Although Koonin doesn’t mention the following factor, I think a contributing aspect to the climate-change hype is the gradual secularization of Western culture. Modern science arose from the Christian conviction that the universe was designed by an intelligent Being and was therefore capable of being figured out, because it follows logical rules. If most people no longer hold that view, it is an open question as to how long they will insist on looking at the data themselves, as Koonin does, versus being swept up in a public-relations fantasy that is based on greed for power and wealth rather than disinterested respect for knowledge.
I don’t think it’s a coincidence that many of the so-called “climate change deniers” (which does not include Koonin) have a Christian background. Yes, there are Christian ignoramuses too, but just because an idiot takes a certain view of a thing doesn’t mean the view itself is wrong.
Before you listen to another word on climate change, read Koonin’s book. You’ll never think about it the same way again.
Karl D. Stephan received the B. S. in Engineering from the California Institute of Technology in 1976. Following a year of graduate study at Cornell, he received the Master of Engineering degree in 1977… More by Karl D. Stephan.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexitieshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexities2023-04-17 06:11:192023-04-17 06:12:07The only climate change book you need to read
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded $177 million to environmental groups, including some who publicly supported the Biden administration’s signature climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act, the agency announced Thursday.
The funding will be spread across 17 groups, which will each receive a minimum of $10 million to serve as Environmental Justice Thriving Communities Technical Assistance Centers (EJ TCTACs), to help “underserved and overburdened communities” access government funding to support environmental justice initiatives, the EPA reported in a press release. Groups named by the EPA include the National Wildlife Federation (NWF), WE ACT for Environmental Justice and the Deep South Center for Environmental Justice (DSCFEJ), which each supported the president’s signature climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act.
“These EJ TCTACs are in direct response to feedback from communities and environmental justice leaders who have long called for technical assistance and capacity building support!” the EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights said in a tweetthread Thursday. “The EJ TCTAC program is partnered with [the Department of Energy] and is part of the Federal Interagency Thriving Communities Network to deliver on the Biden Administration’s Justice40 Initiative to ensure that 40% of the benefits of certain federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities.”
The funding represents a significant boost to groups like the NWF and DSCFEJ, two environmental groups tapped by the EPA. In 2021, the NWF generated roughly $118 million in revenue, while the DSCFEJ generated just $3.54 million in 2020, according to publicly available documentation.
— EPA Office of EJ and External Civil Rights (@EPAEnvJustice) April 13, 2023
“We know that so many communities across the nation have the solutions to the environmental challenges they face,” said EPA Administrator Michael Regan in the press release. “Unfortunately, many have lacked access or faced barriers when it comes to the crucial federal resources needed to deliver these solutions. Today we’re taking another step to break down these barriers.”
Including Thursday’s announcement, the EPA has announced a combined $827 million in funding for environmental justice initiatives in 2023, according to the agency’s press release.
RTI, NWF, DSCFEJ and WE ACT did not immediately respond to a Daily Caller News Foundation request for comment.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2023-04-15 08:40:022023-04-18 07:15:16The Biden Admin Hands Out Millions To Green Groups That Supported His Climate Bill
The Biden Democrat regime doesn’t give a damn about the environment. Hell, they blew up the Nord Stream in what is the greatest man made environmental disaster in history.
Now he’s blowing up American strength – the American economy.
The Biden regime (John Kerry) wants to mandate the purchase of electric vehicles. Only 19% of Americans intend to purchase an electric vehicle because of the high costs, lack of infrastructure, long charging times, etc. If this proposal goes through it will gift much of our auto industry to China, since that is where the materials required to manufacture electric vehicles come from. How can anyone in the rust belt support the Biden Administration in 2024? This dangerous proposal must be stopped.
Several top Republican lawmakers and energy industry groups blasted the Biden administration Wednesday after it announced aggressive regulations cracking down on gas-powered car emissions.
Critics of the sweeping emissions standards, unveiled Wednesday morning by the White House and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), argued the announcement revealed President Biden is seeking to effectively ban traditional gas cars in favor of electric vehicles (EV). The White House said the rules would “accelerate the clean vehicle transition” and reduce pollution by nearly 10 billion tons by 2055.
Rep @RyanZinke: Biden’s war on gas-powered cars makes us “vulnerable to China on the supply chain,” empowering the Chinese Communist Partypic.twitter.com/EGQx0hznQn
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2023-04-14 05:46:382023-04-16 14:42:37Biden Torched for Cracking Down on Gas Cars, Mandating Buying Electric Vehicles: ‘Biden’s Newest Power Grab’
Marc Morano, the force behind CFACT’s award-winning Climate Depot news and information service, is hitting the speaking circuit hard. Marc recently appeared in Calgary, Canada, Orlando, Houston, Pittsburgh, and Harrisburg.
WATCH: Marc Morano speaking tour exposes the “Great Reset” and climate agendas.
Morano Excerpt:
“They’re collapsing high-yield agriculture in the Netherlands and other places. They’re making food scarce. The Harvard public school of Health: The root causes of the climate also increase the risk of pandemics. So if you don’t support the Green New Deal, you’re a grandma killer! And that’s coming from Harvard University. This is Harvard as well. The Harvard Environment Law Review — this paper just came out this week. Climate homicide deaths for prosecuting big oil for climate deaths. Two years ago, a doctor issues the first clinically diagnosed patient with climate change — a lady suffering from heat stroke. So you can be charged with homicide; A doctor can diagnose you with climate change; and you can now have climate as a cause of death on your death certificate. I’m not making any of this up. This is in our academic mainstream now. Of course, the last hundred years of climate change has at a 99% drop in climate-related deaths.
Now be afraid, because the Biden Administration is pushing the U.S into a pandemic treaty where it won’t matter who your Governor is, who your mayor is, this will be coming International Global instant lockdowns.”
Marc has issued some stark warnings, for instance that, “the Great Reset essentially is restricting energy, food, transportation, free speech, property ownership, and collapsing our financial system, and the Biden Administration is pushing the U.S into a pandemic treaty where it won’t matter who your Governor is, who your mayor is, there would be international global instant lockdowns.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Committee For A Constructive Tomorrowhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngCommittee For A Constructive Tomorrow2023-04-13 15:08:402023-04-13 15:11:09VIDEO: Great Reset & Covid Climate Connection Explained in Just 20 Minutes
Morano excerpt: “This is mandating car shortages for Americans…with the design of forcing more people into public transit. You will go nowhere and be happy. … Once we don’t have the freedom of movement in America that we have grown accustomed to, they will be able to put all sorts of other mandates on you as well. They are making gas-powered cars statutorily extinct…creating radical chaos and car shortages.” …
Bypassing Democracy: “This is why they loved COVID lockdowns, and this is a way of recreating it through a regulatory process. By the way, no one’s voting on 15-minute cities. No one’s voting on gas car bans. No one’s voting on banning meat eating. No one’s voting on killing high-yield agriculture. But yet, somehow, it’s all happening through corporate government collusion, all bypassing democracy.”
Biden’s EPA Chief Micheal Regan:“Together, today’s actions will accelerate our ongoing transition to a clean vehicles future, tackle the climate crisis head on…”
Morano: “It is easier to transition your gender than it is your energy, particularly on the energy timescales they’re talking about. So if you think it’s impossible for a man to have a baby, well, then it’s equally impossible to have solar and wind power our entire economy. That’s the kind of delusion we’re living in right now.”
Marc Morano: “We did not get to vote on whether we wanted to ban gas-powered cars — it’s just happening to us…They’re banning gas-powered cars. That’s the goal here. Gavin Newsom started in California – then many states had trigger laws to follow suit. This is now a corporate government collusion because you have the World Bank telling automakers we’re not going to finance the creation of gas-powered cars, you have corporate banks announcing they’re not going to give out car loans for gas-powered cars. And if you’re lucky enough to still have a gas-powered car in a decade, you now have cities across the country in Colorado, and California, banning the creation of new gas stations — to do what? To create gas shortages.”
Morano: “This is the most insane part. China is now becoming the world’s number one automaker came out of nowhere, by the way, why because of the EV mandates because of the EV subsidies, and because of the banning on gas-powered cars throughout Europe, and the United States. We’re empowering China by doing this, and we’re doing nothing for the planet… You can’t even write a Hollywood script this dystopian, but this is what’s being imposed upon us as we speak.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Marc Moranohttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMarc Morano2023-04-13 14:40:592023-04-13 14:56:27Biden’s EPA ‘intentionally creating car shortages’ to force Americans into public transit
A federal court granted a preliminary injunction Wednesday against the Biden administration’s “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule that extends the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulatory authority.
The new rule, which defines what “navigable waters” are subject to government regulation under the Clean Water Act, allowed the EPA to claim regulatory authority over lands containing small streams and wetlands. District of North Dakota Judge Daniel Hovland granted 24 states who sued the EPA over the rule in February a preliminary injunction on Wednesday, finding they have “persuasively shown that the new 2023 Rule poses a threat to their sovereign rights and amounts to irreparable harm.”
“The States involved in this litigation will expend unrecoverable resources complying with a rule unlikely to withstand judicial scrutiny,” the court found.
BREAKING: The Court has granted our motion for preliminary injunction halting President Biden's unconstitutional WOTUS rule. His interpretation of WOTUS is nothing more than a land grab usurping the rights of Missouri farmers to control their property.
— Attorney General Andrew Bailey (@AGAndrewBailey) April 12, 2023
Hovland also stated that the rule appears to “directly” affect landowners who are now “potentially subject to federal jurisdiction and permitting requirements,” forcing them to “undertake expensive assessments or forgo their activities.” He noted the “dire need” for clarification on what constitutes a navigable water, holding out hope that the Supreme Court’s pending decision in Sackett v. EPA will settle the issue.
A huge win for Indiana! The District Court for North Dakota granted us a preliminary injunction for our multi-state lawsuit challenging the new WOTUS rule. Now, the overreaching rule can't be implemented or enforced in our state. Read the decision here: https://t.co/9B90EvuqaU
“Until then, every state will continue to swim in waters of uncertainty, ambiguity, and chaos,” Hovland wrote.
Last week, President Biden vetoed a bipartisan bill designed to overturn the new rule. Republicans have criticized the rule for the burden it places on farmers and landowners.
“The agencies are reviewing the decision and their options,” an EPA spokesman told the DCNF. “The agencies continue to believe the rule, which is informed by the text of the relevant provisions of the Clean Water Act and the statute as a whole, as well as the scientific record, relevant Supreme Court case law, input from public comment, and the agencies’ experience and technical expertise after more than 45 years of implementing the longstanding pre-2015 regulations defining waters of the United States, is the best interpretation of the Clean Water Act.”
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2023-04-12 14:29:092023-04-13 05:58:25Federal Court Blocks Biden’s Far-Reaching ‘Waters Of The United States’ Regulation
“Damn the whales, full speed ahead” seems to be the offshore wind policy of Biden’s NOAA. They now propose to approve yet another site survey, just 10 miles off Atlantic City. These surveys are the top suspect for the recent wave of dead whales, centered on New Jersey.
The site is a big one because the offshore wind project is huge. Phase 1 is a whopping 1,500 MW, which means over 100 monster turbine towers. The survey area is around 1,500,000 acres or an incredible 2,300 square miles.
Ironically the project is called Atlantic Shores, which is where all the dead whales are washing up. In fact this is basically a renewal of a prior permit. NOAA acts as though nothing has changed, ignoring the horrible New Jersey whale deaths.
NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is taking public comments on this preposterous proposal, details below.
The proposal’s cursory environmental impact assessment is ridiculously simple minded. NMFS itself predicts that a great many (supposedly protected by them) marine mammals will be subjected to unsafe levels of survey noise. See https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/s3/2023-03/AtlanticShoresHRG_2023_Proposed_IHA_OPR1.pdf
NOAA predicts the number of adverse impacts by species, but here are the staggering numbers by category:
42 Whales
2,534 Dolphins
142 Porpoises
1,472 Seals
Total = 4,190 adversely impacted marine mammals
Here is NOAA’s basic argument:
“….only Level B harassment is proposed for authorization, which NMFS expects would be of a lower severity, predominately in the form of avoidance of the sound sources that may cause a temporary abandonment of the location during active source use that may result in a temporary interruption of foraging activities for some species. NMFS does not expect that the proposed activity will have long-term or permanent impacts as the acoustic source would be mobile and would leave the area within a specific amount of time for which the animals could return to the area.”
In short these thousands of large animals will get the hell out of the way and come home when the survey is over, in a year or so. Apparently NMFS thinks this massive forced relocation is harmless. Despite having hundreds of scientists on staff they cannot think of how it might be harmful.
Here are two obviously harmful possibilities, among many.
First, the site is deliberately in a relatively low ship traffic area, surrounded by high traffic zones. This is one of the busiest ship traffic areas in the world. Being forced to relocate into higher traffic areas is virtually certain to increase the incidence of fatal ship strikes.
Second, moving this many animals into territory already occupied by similar animals should greatly increase the population densities for each species. But the food supply remains the same, which could lead to food scarcity.
The treatment of the severely endangered North Atlantic Right Whale is especially egregious. NOAA says this:
“…the size of the survey area (5,868 km2) in comparison with the entire migratory habitat for the North Atlantic right whale (BIA of 269,448 km2) is small, representing 2.11 percent of the entire migratory corridor.”
Right Whales migrate through the area twice a year, going between offshore Georgia and New England so the “corridor” is indeed large, but this is irrelevant. What is crucial is that the survey area is about 35 miles wide East to West and almost all of the migrating whales presently pass through this space. Thus the survey has the potential effect of blocking the migration, or at least seriously disrupting it, taking nearly 100% of the needed space not 2.11%.
Despite all of the above predicted and potential impacts, NOAA maintains that this proposed authorization is exempt from the environmental impact assessment requirements of NEPA. They specifically claim there is “no anticipated serious injury or mortality”.
They should anticipate a little harder. NEPA requires assessment if injury is reasonably likely. Injury and death certainly are reasonably likely here, to thousands of supposedly protected marine mammals, including the severely endangered Right Whales.
More deeply, the Atlantic Shores Wind Project has yet to be approved and may never be. Hugely disruptive site surveys should not be authorized until the Project is approved.
Here is the basic comment statement: “Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. Written comments should be submitted via email to ITP.Potlock@noaa.gov “
I suggest as an email subject line: “Comment on proposed Atlantic Shores IHA”. Simple objection is sufficient but specific arguments are always useful. Anyone can comment.
In the offshore wind stampede Biden’s National Marine Fisheries Service has lost sight of its mission to protect marine mammals.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Committee For A Constructive Tomorrowhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngCommittee For A Constructive Tomorrow2023-04-11 16:42:192023-04-11 16:43:21Ignoring dead whales, NOAA proposes another site survey off New Jersey
The head of one of America’s largest financial institutions, Chase Bank, says the electric vehicle ideology being pursued by the Joe Biden administration could be dangerous.
In fact, according to Jamie Dimon, such moves could imperil national security.
In a report from Just the News, it explained how Dimon’s comments came in the company’s 2022 annual report.
The top Democrat Party donor says he has concerns about Biden’s agenda.
“China … and its economic muscle to dominate batteries, rare earths, semiconductors or EVs, could eventually imperil national security by disrupting our access to these products and materials,” Dimon explained in the company’s 2022 report.
“We cannot cede these important resources and capabilities to another country.”
The Biden administration and others have admitted the U.S. needs to move to a position of being less dependent on China’s battery and semiconductor industries.
But analysts point out independence on such issues remains “far away.”
NOTE: James Dimon is an American billionaire businessman who has been the chairman and chief executive officer of JPMorgan Chase since 2005. Dimon was previously on the board of directors of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2023-04-11 09:11:482023-04-11 09:15:03CEO of JPMorgan Chase & Co.: Biden’s EV Addiction Could Hurt National Security
Please use social media, etc. to pass on this Newsletter to other open-minded citizens…If you’d like to be added to (or unsubscribe from) the distribution of our popular, free, worldwide Media Balance Newsletter, simply send me an email saying that.
Note 1: We recommend reading the Newsletter on your computer, not your phone, as some documents (e.g., PDFs) are much easier to read on a large computer screen… We’ve tried to use common fonts, etc. to minimize display issues.
Note 2: For past Newsletter issues see the archives from: 2020 & 2021 & 2022 & 2023. To accommodate numerous requests received about prior articles over all thirteen plus years of the Newsletter, we’ve put this together — where you can search ALL prior issues, by year. For a background about how the Newsletter is put together, etc., please read this.
Note 3: See this extensive list of reasonable books on climate change. As a parallel effort, we have also put together a list of some good books related to industrial wind energy. Both topics are also extensively covered on my website: WiseEnergy.org.
Note 4: I am not an attorney or a physician, so no material appearing in any of the Newsletters (or any of my websites) should be construed as giving legal or medical advice. My recommendation has always been: consult a competent, licensed attorney when you are involved with legal issues, and consult a competent physician regarding medical matters.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00John Droz, Jr.http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJohn Droz, Jr.2023-04-10 06:48:302023-04-10 06:48:30AWED MEDIA BALANCED NEWS: We cover COVID to Climate, as well as Energy to Elections.
President Joe Biden vetoed a bipartisan bill Thursday that would limit his administration’s broad interpretation of the “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule that grants the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) significant new authority.
The president rejected the bill, arguing that his administration’s new rule provides “clear rules of the road” to protect both economic efforts and water quality under the Clean Water Act, according to the veto. The rule dramatically expands the traditional limits of WOTUS — which allow the EPA to regulate navigable waters — to include all territorial seas, interstate waters, adjacent wetlands, traditional waters’ tributaries and some artificial reservoirs.
“The resolution would leave Americans without a clear definition of ‘Waters of the United States,’” Biden said in the veto. “The increased uncertainty caused by H.J. Res. 27 would threaten economic growth, including for agriculture, local economies, and downstream communities.”
Opponents of the rule currently lack the votes required to overcome the president’s veto.
Following a presidential veto, “Americans will need to hope the Supreme Court makes it clear that these EPA bureaucrats are way outside the authority that Congress actually provided in the Clean Water Act,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a March statement following the resolution’s passage by the Senate. He decried the Biden administration’s interpretation of the rule as a “radical power grab that would give federal bureaucrats sweeping control over nearly every piece of land that touches a pothole, ditch, or puddle.”
President Biden has once again turned his back on Iowa farmers and rural America.
His veto of @HouseGOP’s bipartisan resolution to overturn his overreaching WOTUS rule will saddle our producers with red tape, increase grocery bills for our families & threaten our food security.
Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, one of four Democratic senators who supported the bill, also issued a statement in March, encouraging the president to sign the bill.
“The Administration’s WOTUS rule is yet another example of dangerous federal overreach,” said Manchin in the statement. “The proposed changes would inject further regulatory confusion, place unnecessary burdens on small businesses, manufacturers, farmers and local communities, and cause serious economic damage. It is essential to ensure clean water for all West Virginians and Americans, but we can achieve this without regulating our hard-working people out of business.”
“The Biden administration’s WOTUS rule creates unnecessary confusion & burdensome red tape for [Montana] farmers, ranchers & landowners—that’s why the Senate voted to overturn it,” Republican Sen. Steve Daines said in a tweet immediately following the announcement. “[Joe Biden’s]veto today shows just how far he’s willing to go to impose big government regulations on [Montanans].”
A federal judge in late March stopped the Biden administration from implementing the rule in Texas and Idaho. At the time, the EPA told the Daily Caller News Foundation that it believes the expanded rule “is the best interpretation of the Clean Water Act,” and noted that it was still going into effect “in all other jurisdictions in the U.S.”
The EPA did not immediately respond to a DCNF request for comment.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2023-04-07 15:01:262023-04-10 06:58:48Biden Vetoes Bipartisan Attempt To Repeal EPA’s ‘Waters Of The United States’ Rule
The Bidens are so dirty, so corrupt, that it makes my skin crawl as an American. Our Constitutional Republic is broken owed largely to state-run media.
Hunter Biden joined the board of Ukrainian gas firm Burisma on April 18, 2014 – three days before Joe visited Ukraine as vice president and pushed for fracking
Former White House stenographer Mike McCormick told DailyMail.com that press were briefed on Biden’s strategies to boost Ukraine gas production
The call for greater energy production was politically significant – and lucrative for Burisma which generated revenues of at least $400million
Joe Biden pushed for Ukraine to frack gas during his 2014 vice presidential visit – just days after his son Hunter joined the board of a firm set to profit from it.
The first son joined the board of allegedly corrupt Ukrainian gas firm Burisma on April 18, 2014, the company announced in a press release at the time.
Three days later, Joe was aboard Air Force 2 for an official visit to the East European country.
One of his senior officials briefed reporters on the plane that the VP was pushing ‘medium- and long-term strategies to boost conventional gas production, and also to begin to take advantage of the unconventional gas reserves that are in Ukraine.’
Joe Biden made a visit to Ukraine as vice president on April 21, 2014, to push for greater energy production, just three days after his son Hunter joined the board of Ukrainian gas firm Burisma. He is pictured in Kyiv with former Ukrainian prime minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk in 2014
Joe Biden made a visit to Ukraine as vice president on April 21, 2014, to push for greater energy production, just three days after his son Hunter joined the board of Ukrainian gas firm Burisma. He is pictured in Kyiv with former Ukrainian prime minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk in 2014
Biden’s push for greater energy production proved to be a lucrative move for his son’s company Burisma, which generated revenues of at least $400M
Biden’s push for greater energy production proved to be a lucrative move for his son’s company Burisma, which generated revenues of at least $400M
The president’s current national security advisor, Jake Sullivan (pictured in Kyiv in November), was the senior official who briefed reporters on Biden’s trip at the time
The president’s current national security advisor, Jake Sullivan (pictured in Kyiv in November), was the senior official who briefed reporters on Biden’s trip at the time
The ‘unconventional’ reserves were a reference to fracking, a gas extraction method for which Burisma was one of the few firms in Ukraine to have a license at the time.
The official said Joe was also promising help for Ukrainian energy firms from US experts.
Biden’s push for greater energy production was politically significant – making Ukraine more economically independent from Russia. But the move also led to millions of dollars for the company his son was then working for.
According to Burisma’s website, it ramped up production from 100million cubic meters in 2010 to 1.3 billion cubic meters in 2018 – when it generated revenues of at least $400million, according to a Reuters estimate.
In 2019 Burisma held 35 licenses for hydrocarbon production in Ukraine’s main oil and gas basins.
According to energy industry publication KeyFactsEnergy.com it began using hydraulic fracturing, known as fracking, in 2016 and by May 2019 used the technology in 10% of its wells.
A Burisma executive explained how the company benefited from the help of US expertise in Ukraine, in a 2017 interview with Ukrainian trade publication Nefterynok.
White House stenographer Mike McCormick, was aboard Air Force 2 when Sullivan briefed reporters on Biden’s 2014 trip, he told DailyMail.com
White House stenographer Mike McCormick, was aboard Air Force 2 when Sullivan briefed reporters on Biden’s 2014 trip, he told DailyMail.com
Head of country operations Taras Burdeinyi said Burisma partnered with US firms Schlumberger and ProPetro Services for fracking in Ukraine, allowing it to grow the ‘largest modern rig fleet’ in the country, three years after Biden’s intervention.
Mike McCormick, a White House stenographer who was on board the April 2014 Air Force 2 flight, told DailyMail.com that the anonymous ‘senior official’ who gave the briefing was Jake Sullivan, who now serves as President Biden’s National Security Advisor.
‘Our job basically was to record everything that was said to the press, or public facing, and very quickly make transcripts that the White House could release,’ McCormick said.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2023-04-07 08:33:022023-04-07 08:38:13BOMBSHELL: Then VP Biden Visited Ukraine, Pushed for FRACKING Days After Hunter Joined Burisma Board
According to the globalists, climate change is the No. 1 threat to humanity, necessitating radical quality of life sacrifices and the total relinquishing of privacy and freedom
Climate change is also being used to explain away food shortages, justify the need to move people from the countrysides and suburbs into smart cities, and promote the replacement of beef with insects. The COVID-19 pandemic was even blamed on it
Globalists want health (which includes both medicine and food, under the new “food is medicine” agenda), climate action and energy control to be addressed not as three separate issues but as one
One of the globalists’ fraudulent solutions to the purported climate crisis is Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG) investing. A company’s ESG score is supposed to tell investors how socially conscious the company is, but recent scandals have revealed ESG is a scam
Carbon trade refers to the buying and selling of credits that allow a company to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide. By buying credits from nonpolluters, industry can continue to pollute. Basically, like ESG investing, the carbon trade is a globalist scam intended to lower the living standards of the poor and usher humanity into carbon slavery
According to the globalists, climate change is the No. 1 threat to humanity, necessitating radical quality of life sacrifices and the total relinquishing of privacy and freedom. Germany’s health minister Karl Lauterbach, for example, in December 2020 proclaimed that addressing climate change will require restrictions on personal freedom, similar to those implemented to “flatten the curve” of COVID.1
Similarly, British economics professor Mariana Mazzucato in September 2020 warned that “In the near future, the world may need to resort to lockdowns again — this time to tackle a climate emergency.”2 The World Economic Forum (WEF), the United Nations and the World Health Organization have also published articles stating their intent to “fight climate change” by shutting down society.3
Climate change is also being used to explain away food shortages, justify the need to move people from the countrysides and suburbs into smart cities, and promote the replacement of beef with insects. The COVID-19 pandemic was even blamed on it.
Health, Climate and Energy To Be Addressed as One Issue
Just about anything is now being justified on the basis that it helps address climate change. Indeed, dietary controls, energy control, carbon restrictions and climate change are increasingly tied together, whether it makes sense or not, and the reason for this can be found in a September 2022 WEF article4 co-written by the director of WHO’s Environment and Health Department. As noted in this article, titled “How to Fight the Next Threat to Our World: Air Pollution”:
“[W]orld leaders must put health at the core of climate action and social equity. The fight for clean air can accelerate the reduction of climate-warming emissions, the shift to cheaper and more reliable energy sources and justice for the marginalized and most vulnerable communities … We can confront these crises more effectively and fairly if we address them as one …”
In other words, health (which includes both medicine and food, as government has now launched a “food is medicine” agenda), climate action and energy control are to be addressed not as three separate issues but as one. The potential implications of this are enormous.
If the WHO ends up having sole power over global health, combining health, climate and energy issues into one will automatically give the WHO the de facto power to seize control over society in general.
They could issue climate lockdowns, for example, on the basis that lockdowns reduce pollution, hence improving public health. That the WHO will jump at the opportunity to implement climate lockdowns in particular can be seen in the WHO “Manifesto for a Healthy Recovery From COVID-19,” which states:5
“The ‘lockdown’ measures that have been necessary to control the spread of COVID-19 have slowed economic activity, and disrupted lives — but have also given some glimpses of a possible brighter future. In some places, pollution levels have dropped to such an extent that people have breathed clean air, or have seen blue skies and clear waters, or have been able to walk and cycle safely with their children — for the first times in their lives …
Opinion polls from around the world show that people want to protect the environment, and preserve the positives that have emerged from the crisis, as we recover …
Decisions made in the coming months can either “lock in” economic development patterns that will do permanent and escalating damage to the ecological systems that sustain all human health and livelihoods, or, if wisely taken, can promote a healthier, fairer, and greener world.”
This manifesto also lays out many other aspects of The Great Reset agenda, including smart cities, travel restrictions, new food systems, a complete transition to green energy and more. But again, the thing that will really facilitate all of these changes is to have a centralized powerbase, and that is the WHO.
We’re now told we have to sacrifice our standard of living because we have a responsibility to save the planet. However, ‘green solutions’ are a gigantic scam designed to disempower and control everyone but the ones at the very top of the power pyramid, while accomplishing little in terms of producing a cleaner environment, let alone having a distinct effect on climate. The WHO could also mandate individual carbon footprint tracking,6 as carbon emissions are claimed to be a primary contributor to climate change. A likely argument would be “We have to rein in our personal carbon footprint because pollution is deadly, and if you don’t, you’re responsible for the death of others.”
Sacrificing selfhood and the rights of individuals to “serve the greater good” is a hallmark call of authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, and they used this “care for others” argument during COVID to pressure people into compliance with everything from lockdowns and social distancing to wearing a mask and getting the jab.
The same narrative is also being used to prop up the “climate emergency.” We’re now told we have to sacrifice our standard of living because we have a responsibility both for others and for the earth itself.
However, while pollution is a reality that needs to be addressed, the solution the totalitarian cabal is offering is a gigantic scam designed to disempower and control everyone but the ones at the very top of the power pyramid, while accomplishing little in terms of producing a cleaner environment, let alone having a distinct effect on climate.
The ESG Scam
One of the globalists’ fraudulent solutions to the purported climate crisis is Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG) investing, first popularized in 2004.7 In more recent years, ESG funds have gained steam and now make up about 10% of all invested assets.8
A company’s ESG score is supposed to tell investors how socially conscious the company is, based on its behavior within the environmental, social and corporate sphere. For example, does the company have safeguards in place to protect the environment or policies to address climate change?
How “equitable” is its relationship with employees, suppliers, customers and the local community? And how does it stack up in terms of company leadership, executive pay, audits, internal controls and shareholder rights?
Has the company taken steps to eliminate conflicts of interest that encourage self-dealing by executives? Does it conduct independent audits and is there a traceable line of fiduciary duty? And so on.
ESG investing is supposed to encourage companies to act responsibly, but it’s actually having the opposite effect. Somehow or other, companies are greasing the right hands and getting great ESG ratings, only to later turn out to have the worst governance possible and/or a track record of environmental destruction.9
One of the latest in a long line of scandals is that of FTX, a cryptocurrency exchange that went belly up overnight while its CEO, Sam Bankman-Fried absconded with up to $2 billion of client funds.
John Ray, the appointed CEO of FTX’s bankruptcy stated: “Never in my career have I seen such a complete failure of corporate controls and such a complete absence of trustworthy financial information as occurred here.”
FTX’s ESG score really ought to have been nonexistent. Cryptocurrencies are extremely energy-intensive and wasteful (the “E” in the score), customer satisfaction (part of the “S” in the score) within the crypto space had been tanking for over a year, courtesy of the repeated evaporation of wealth.
As for the “G,” FTX had no board of directors, an “irregular ownership structure,” was rife with conflicts of interest and self-dealing, and had no financial controls whatsoever. Bankman-Fried didn’t even keep an accurate list of accounts. Yet at the time of FTX’s demise, it had a higher governance score than Exxon Mobil. As reported by Forbes:10
“Of the many dimensions of the FTX fiasco, the most shocking is the comprehensive failure of corporate governance, now becoming clear as the bankruptcy process unfolds. Sloppy and likely illegal management practices at FTX have raised doubts that extend beyond the company to call into question the whole crypto premise. They also cast doubt on the integrity of the ESG rating business …
ESG — broadly, let us call it ‘virtuous investing’ — is now a big business in the investment world. ESG ratings … purport to score capitalists (i.e., private-sector profit-driven corporations) against a melange of ‘goodness’ indicia of all sorts. Does the company’s business model help or hurt the Amazon forest?
Does the firm have enough ADA-rated bathrooms? Does it offer paternity-leave to its employees (regardless of gender)? Does it have board members who check all the right diversity boxes? …
ESG has captivated many, on both the ‘buy-side’ of the market … and on the ‘sell-side’ … But ESG is still a fluid concept, and much has been made recently of the inconsistencies and discrepancies in the ratings. For many, the core of ESG is G … Governance is the tip-of-the-spear when it comes to creating sustainable business models. It all starts from the top, which guides every other aspect all the way down …
According to a recent academic study of six prominent ESG rating agencies … ‘ESG ratings from different providers disagree substantially…’ Most of the divergence/confusion arises from differences in measurement methodology and execution. But there is also evidence of bias: ‘we detect that the rater’s overall view of a firm influences the measurement of specific categories’ …
The panoramic failure of FTX this month highlights a flawed governance framework, which today’s simplistic virtue metrics fail to reflect accurately — hence the absurd rankings cited for FTX vs Exxon and others.”
FTX isn’t alone in falling short of expectations though. According to a September 2021 report by climate change think tank InfluenceMap, more than half of the 723 funds marketed using ESG claims failed to meet the Paris Accord rules on carbon emissions and clean energy, and more than 70% of funds with broad ESG goals failed to meet global climate targets.11
Similarly, a May 2021 report12 by the Economist concluded some of the largest ESG funds in the world are “stuffed full of polluters and sin stocks.” A 2019 report by the Wall Street Journal13 also noted, “Eight of the 10 biggest U.S. sustainable funds are invested in oil-and-gas companies, which are regularly slammed by environmental activists.”
In short, the ESG investing scheme is yet another globalist scam that allows them to promote their own agenda outside of the democratic process.
Wind turbines, solar panels and electric-everything is touted as the answer to the purported climate crisis, yet most of these “green” solutions are far more environmentally destructive than oil and gas.14
Many also end up requiring more fuel rather than less. Importantly, there aren’t even enough minerals in the world to allow even a single country to go 100% electric. As just one example, to replace the 31.5 million vehicles in the U.K. with electric cars will require twice the global supply of cobalt!15 The math just doesn’t work.
So, are the globalists stupid? No. They’re fully aware they can’t replace all gas-powered cars with EVs, be it by 2030 or 2050. See, they know you won’t even be allowed to travel very far by the time the EV goals and mandates go into effect, so you won’t need a car in the first place.
Forcing states and countries to transition to EVs merely speeds up the end goal of preventing you from owning a car and driving anywhere. It also justifies the creation of “15-minute cities.”
As Vandana Shiva, Ph.D., cofounder of the Indian NGO Navdanya, has warned, we are being ushered into carbon slavery. As explained in Navdanya’s report, “Earth Democracy: Connecting Rights of Mother Earth to Human Rights and Well-Being of All”:16
“If ‘feeding the world’ through chemicals and dwarf varieties bred for chemicals was the false narrative created to impose the Green Revolution, the new false narrative is ‘sustainability’ and ‘saving the planet.’
In the new ‘net zero’ world, farmers will not be respected and rewarded as custodians of the land and caregivers … the providers of our food and health. They will not be paid a fair and just price for growing healthy food through ecological processes, which protect and regenerate the farming systems as a whole.
They will be paid for linear extraction of fragments of the ecological functions of the system, which can be tied to the new ‘net zero’ false climate solution based on a fake calculus, fake science allowing continued emissions while taking control over the land of indigenous people and small farmers.
‘Net Zero’ is a new strategy to get rid of small farmers … through the burden of fake carbon accounting. Carbon offsets and the new accounting trick of ‘net zero’ does not mean zero emissions. It means the rich polluters will continue to pollute and also grab the land and resources of those who have not polluted — indigenous people and small farmers — for carbon offsets.”
Bill Gates has alluded to this double-standard in responding to those who criticize him for the hypocrisy of being a serious polluter himself, with a 66,000 square-foot mansion, a private jet, 242,000 acres of farmland and investments in fossil fuel-dependent industries such as airlines, heavy machinery and cars.17
This pollution is acceptable, Gates said, because, “I am offsetting my carbon emissions by buying clean aviation fuel, and funding carbon capture and funding low-cost housing projects to use electricity instead of natural gas.”18
Focusing solely on carbon reductionism also misses the point that lands, forests and ecosystems are more than just the carbon stored in them, and putting carbon conditions on small farmers will only make environmental injustices worse. As noted by Navdanya’s report, “Conditionalities put on the nonpolluters by the polluters who want to continue to pollute is unjust and ecologically, morally and ethically bankrupt.”
The Carbon Trade Scam
Carbon trade refers to the buying and selling of credits that allow a company to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide, and by buying credits from nonpolluters, industry can continue to pollute. Basically, like ESG investing, it’s nothing but a globalist scam that lowers the living standards of the poor while having no negative impact on the wealthy.
Indeed, you can be assured that the carbon restrictions that will be placed on humanity will not apply to the globalists. They can simply buy enough carbon credits to maintain their lifestyle, while the lower-, middle- and even upper classes of “regular” folk will be forced to make major sacrifices to theirs. Ultimately, carbon slavery will apply not just to farmers but to all of us, as our personal carbon footprint will be part of our social credit score.
The first credit card with a carbon-emission spending limit was introduced in April 2019. As explained by the World Economic Forum,19 “Everything we put in our shopping basket comes at an environmental cost … Swedish fintech company Doconomy has launched a new credit card that monitors the carbon footprint of its customers — and cuts off their spending when they hit their carbon max.” Isn’t that nice? They’re helping you do your part to save the planet!
Or are they? “Helpful” tools like this will ultimately become tools for control. Eventually, your carbon footprint will dictate what you can eat and wear, where you can live and how far you can travel, and you won’t even need a special credit card. Meanwhile, there will be plenty of loopholes for the rich.
ESG, the carbon trade and personal carbon footprint tracking will all become barriers of entry — a way to keep the peons out of the rich boys’ club. Needless to say, rigged schemes like ESG and the carbon trade also make it difficult for startup companies to compete, which will facilitate consolidation of companies and industries into mega-monopolies.
Last but not least, the focus on carbon emissions has made the world turn a blind eye to other far more harmful kinds of pollution, such as dioxin — thought to be the most toxic molecule on Earth — which in March 2023 was allowed to contaminate huge areas of Ohio without government lifting a finger to address it.20
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MERCOLA Take Control of Your Healthhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMERCOLA Take Control of Your Health2023-04-07 06:35:112023-04-07 06:37:50VIDEO: This Is Why ‘Green Solutions’ Are a Gigantic Scam
CFACT helped lead an effort at Clemson University in South Carolina to determine the opinion of the student body on the issue of coal power in electricity generation. CFACT activists surveyed 985 students and found that a whopping 70% (69.95% to be exact) of students surveyed support the use of coal for electricity in South Carolina.
Specifically, CFACT asked students “Do you support the use of coal to power electricity in South Carolina?” 689 students said “yes,” 145 students said “no,” while 151 students said they were “unsure.”
Across the United States, reliable sources of electricity, such as coal, are being forced to close in the name of ill-advised “Net Zero” policy. Part of the thinking behind this is that many young people supposedly support such efforts. These survey results, however, clearly show that young college students at Clemson University don’t want to shut down any coal plants that would threaten grid reliability or affordability.
“Currently, coal power production in South Carolina contributes to cheap and reliable power for its citizens, and using government regulation to force it out will only destabilize our electrical infrastructure,” said Fish Belk, a junior that helped CFACT with the survey.
“There’s been rumors that the state might shut down coal plants here in South Carolina,” said CFACT National Field Coordinator Greg Neff, who helped lead the effort on the ground. “I hope these results make state bureaucrats realize that not even liberal-leaning college students agree with their bad idea.”
According to the South Carolina Energy Office, the Palmetto State gets 28% of its electricity from coal, while solar and wind only make up 0.1% of South Carolina’s energy. Forcibly closing over a quarter of the state’s energy sources and trying to make that up from sources that don’t exist yet will only spell disaster for South Carolina families, seniors, and businesses.
Over the years, great advancements have been made in emissions and pollution regarding coal plants, and now many coal plants are equipped with emissions controls and scrubbers that stop things like carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide from ever reaching the atmosphere, including those in South Carolina. Carbon capture is also being employed around the nation, defeating the Leftist argument that the switch must be made to solar and wind as soon as possible in the name of the environment or “climate change.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Committee For A Constructive Tomorrowhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngCommittee For A Constructive Tomorrow2023-04-06 14:42:342023-04-06 14:42:34SOUTH CAROLINA: Clemson Survey Shows 70% of Students Support Use of Coal for Electricity
