TEAM ENERGY: 10 Steps to Unlock American Energy, Fuel Economic Recovery, & Strengthen National Security.

/in , , , , , , /by

We recently received a text message from Team Energy—Energy Citizens on their efforts to make American energy independent again. The text message stated, “Did you see that recently we unveiled a 10 in 2022 Plan to restore US energy leadership & fuel economic recovery? It’s no secret that energy and fuel prices are rising & with this plan policymakers can help unlock American energy, fuel economic recovery, & strengthen national security. Read the plan & sign your name: text.energycitizens.org/10in22.”

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE TEAM ENERGY—ENERGY CITIZENS 10 STEP PLAN TO RESTORE U.S. ENERGY LEADERSHIP

According to the Team Energy—Energy Citizens website:

We live in very uncertain times. Inflation is at historic levels. The cost of fuel is soaring.

Global and domestic supply chains are in disarray. Vladimir Putin’s brutal war in Ukraine has brought suffering and instability to Europe not seen since World War II.

Each of these challenges has a direct tie to energy, and each can be improved with assertive American energy leadership. Unfortunately, the federal government is not doing everything it can to unleash American energy potential. In some cases, policymakers in Washington are standing firmly in the way of strengthening our domestic energy sector.

That’s why we are calling on Congress and the administration to enact 10 simple – but significant – policy reforms that will boost American energy potential, ease inflation and supply chain woes, and bolster our allies in Europe that are most impacted by the war in Ukraine.

Washington policymakers must support policies that encourage energy investment, create new access, improve our supply chains, and keep unnecessary regulation from restricting energy growth. 10 in 2022 will take major steps to achieve these vital goals.

The world is calling out for energy leadership. America can and should step up fast.

ABOUT TEAM ENERGY

Our Mission

We are passionate and determined to see our nation develop balanced energy policies that strengthen our communities, support our families and make our nation more secure. We encourage discussion about our nation’s energy issues.

Energy Citizens is a movement focused on keeping America #1 in energy production and putting America’s national security first. We are a diverse community of Americans who strongly believe that, in order to have a better future, we need affordable, reliable, and safe energy.

©Team Energy—Energy Citizens. All rights reserved.

REPORT: Biden Poised To Declare Climate Emergency To Ram Through Green Agenda

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

President Joe Biden could declare a climate emergency as soon as this week, according to The Washington Post, in a bid to implement elements of his environmental agenda as climate legislation has stalled in Congress.

Leading Biden administration officials are debating ways to advance the president’s agenda, and the president is prepared to announce a number of new initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, reported the Post, citing three people familiar with the matter. The internal discussions come after Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia told party leaders last week that he opposes the plans to advance this month’s significant economic package that includes billions of dollars toward slashing carbon emissions and promoting green energy.

White House Economic Adviser Jared Bernstein told reporters at a press briefing Monday that Biden would work “aggressively to attack climate change.”

“Realistically there is a lot he can do and there is a lot he will do,” Bernstein stated.

“Unilaterally declaring a climate emergency will not reduce emissions by one molecule,” American Exploration & Production Council CEO, Anne Bradbury said on Twitter Tuesday. “In fact, many of the policies that could follow from declaring a climate emergency would increase emissions while driving up costs for American families.”

Democratic lawmakers are also calling on Biden to use his powers to enact further climate policies amid failed legislative action and the Supreme Court’s recent decision to limit the regulatory abilities of the Environmental Protection Agency.

On Monday, Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon said it was time for Biden to take massive, unilateral executive actions on climate change, even if the Supreme Court rules them unconstitutional.

“There is probably nothing more important for our nation and our world than for the United States to drive a bold, energetic transition in its energy economy from fossil fuels to renewable energy,” Merkley told reporters on Monday, according to the Post.

“This also unchains the president from waiting for Congress to act,” Merkley said, referencing the recent legislative impasse.

Meanwhile, Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, said that lawmakers should continue to pursue legislation in a statement on Monday.

“While I strongly support additional executive action by President Biden, we know a flood of Republican lawsuits will follow,” Wyden said, according to the Post.

“Legislation continues to be the best option here,” he added.

AUTHOR

JACK MCEVOY

Contributor.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLE: Joe Manchin Drives A Stake Through Democrats’ Economic Package

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The Author Who Warned Us Against Blindly Trusting ‘The Science’

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Thomas Kuhn’s 1962 work “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” revealed why we should not confuse scientists with science.

“Attacks on me are, quite frankly, attacks on science,” said Anthony Fauci to widespread ridicule or approval, depending upon which side you are on. If you doubt his judgment personally, you must not believe in “the science.” Fauci went on to claim that all of the “things he’s talked about” were “fundamentally based on science.”

Let’s put the weasel words aside and recognize that what he wants you to believe – that all his official policy recommendations (“all the things I’ve talked about”) were firmly proven effective through application of the scientific method – is demonstrably false. The most rigorous, most scientific studies show precisely the opposite.

Fauci was a proponent of what has become to be known as “lockdowns,” the widespread closure of businesses and/or stay-at-home orders for the general population. Dozens of studies show this had no demonstrable effect on the spread of Covid-19. As one after another came out, Fauci went on talking about lockdowns as if this evidence did not exist.

Now, there are studies being conducted every day on this or that aspect of Covid-19 and I’m sure Fauci and his supporters can produce links to some that support lockdowns. While there are no absolutes, here is a general observation: the most scientific studies – the randomized controlled trial studies with large sample sizes measuring results in the real world – tend to point towards the inefficacy of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). NPIs include (anti)social distancing, masks, and lockdowns.

Less scientific studies – those with small sample sizes or based on laboratory experiments rather than experience in the real world – tend to point towards efficacy. Remember the experiment on mannequins wearing masks? You get the picture.

Let’s not forget that early in 2020 Fauci said a study based on a single case of asymptomatic spread of Covid-19 “lays the question to rest.” And guess what? It turned out the patient documented in the case had never been asked if she had symptoms. When it turned out she was symptomatic at the time of transmission, the study was unpublished. Subsequent studies failed to prove asymptomatic spread was significant. A December 2020 study looking at secondary attack rates within the same household – published right on the NIH (Fauci’s agency) website – says it’s miniscule if it exists at all.

Yet, Fauci goes on talking as if this study doesn’t exist. He has no choice. Without asymptomatic spread, there is no justification for lockdowns or mandating masks for asymptomatic people.

On a rare occasion where the largely useless national media confronted Fauci with a question about how Texas could be doing so well four weeks after abandoning all Covid restrictions, he had no answer. “Maybe they’re doing more outside,” he mused. Then, he went on recommending the same policies as if the question had never been posed.

Fauci wasn’t alone. When White House coronavirus advisor Anthony Slavitt was asked why locked down and masked California and restriction-free Florida were having similar results in terms of Covid spread, he began his answer with perhaps the only honest words that have escaped a public health official’s mouth: “There is so much of this virus that we think we understand, that we think we can predict, that is just a little bit beyond our explanation.” But then, in literally the same breath, he said we do know masking and social distancing work.

Now, you don’t have to be a trained journalist for the obvious follow-up question to occur to you: “No, Mr. Slavitt, the question I just posed to you suggests we don’t know masking and social distancing work because we are seeing equivalent results in states that are and are not following those policies.”

Of course, that follow-up was not put to Slavitt. And you really have to ask yourself why.

The failure of scientists to be scientific is not a new phenomenon. Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) dealt directly with the tendency of scientists to reject evidence that contradicts the prevailing theory or “paradigm.”

“Part of the answer, as obvious as it is important,” wrote Kuhn, a Harvard educated philosopher of science, “can be discovered by noting first what scientists never do when confronted by even severe and prolonged anomalies. Though they may begin to lose faith and then to consider alternatives, they do not renounce the paradigm that has led them into crisis.”

Kuhn’s overall thesis challenged the prevailing understanding at the time that science proceeds in a linear fashion, with new discoveries incrementally adding to the accumulated knowledge that preceded them. Instead, argued Kuhn, science throughout history has featured a series of revolutions, where paradigms like the geocentric theory of the solar system or Newtonian physics collapsed under the weight of “anomalies” (evidence which contradicted the theory) and made way for new paradigms like the heliocentric theory of the solar system and Einsteinian physics.

There is much nuance in Kuhn’s argument which his critics have tended to ignore, but one takeaway that we’re seeing proved in real time is that these scientific revolutions are only revolutionary because of the tendency for scientists to cling to a theory regardless of evidence that refutes it. Kuhn argues that scientists will not abandon a disproven theory until a new theory is presented that they are convinced explains the evidence better than the old.

What makes the New Normal so strange is that a scientific revolution occurred with no anomalies. It was firmly established by a century of scientific research that suggested nonpharmaceutical interventions weren’t effective in combating respiratory viruses. Indeed, Fauci himself initially repeated the established scientific consensus that lockdowns and mask mandates were not effective policy responses. He even discouraged people from voluntarily wearing masks.

Then, he and the rest of the government scientists did a complete about face. There was no new evidence that motivated this. They simply abandoned the prevailing scientific consensus based on a desire to do something – even though the scientific evidence before, during, and after the outbreak of Covid-19 said what they wanted to do wouldn’t work. As a result, there is now a New Normal paradigm based on…nothing.

It should be noted that there were plenty of non-government scientists protesting vehemently right from the beginning. The authors of the Great Barrington Declaration were already loudly protesting lockdowns as early as April 2020. Others contested asymptomatic spread, the mortality rate initially reported (they were right), and the efficacy of masks.

Here is the problem. This New Normal paradigm can’t collapse in the face of anomalies, no matter how numerous they are, because the anomalies are now simply ignored. Anyone who calls attention to them, no matter how credentialed or qualified, is systematically discredited.

In such an environment, unsubstantiated assertions like “Covid-19 spreads asymptomatically” and “lockdowns and mask mandates work” continue to form the basis of policy. The same goes for vaccine mandates.

It’s not that evidence against New Normal science can no longer be found. Much of it is available right on the websites of the government agencies denying it. It is simply a matter of saying “no” when governments and media demand you refuse to believe your lying eyes and obey.

Obedience has a price. We will be feeling the economic effects of lockdowns for many years. An entire generation of children will suffer psychological damage from being forced to wear masks during their most formative years. The damage to society as a whole from lockdowns, mask mandates, and (anti)social distancing policies may be immeasurable.

Neither can you simply go along to get along until things “get back to normal.” If and when the COVID Crisis finally ends, there is a Climate Crisis already teed up to begin as surely as night follows day. It will feature the same breathless media propaganda and ignoring of contrary evidence as did the COVID Crisis. The cost this time will be a significantly and permanently lower standard of living for you and your children.

That’s the price of obedience. Are you willing to pay it?

This article was reprinted with permission from tommullen.net.

AUTHOR

Tom Mullen

Tom Mullen hosts the Tom Mullen Talks Freedom podcast and is the author of Where Do Conservatives and Liberals Come From? And What Ever Happened to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness? and A Return to Common  Sense: Reawakening Liberty in the Inhabitants of America. His podcast episodes and writing can be found at www.tommullentalksfreedom.com.

RELATED ARTICLE: Biden Poised To Declare Climate Emergency To Ram Through Green Agenda: REPORT

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Peak climate insanity’ — Manchin Rejects $2 Trillion Pork Barrel Climate Spending Bill

/in , , , , , , , /by

Morano: “I liken it to they compare the climate crisis to having cancer and the green energy transition, the Green New Deal is their version of chemotherapy. Yeah, you’re gonna be sick, you’re gonna be vomiting, you’re gonna be laid up, but just when you get to the other side of that, you’re gonna be cancer free or in this case, climate crisis-free. So in their minds, this is the necessary bitter medicine that we have to go through — that the Netherlands is going through. What Sri Lanka is going through. What Germany and England are going through, as they’re facing blackouts and energy shortages and economic devastation and inflation.”

Morano on Fox & Friends:

‘We’ve reached peak climate insanity’ as Sen. Manchin kills Biden’s bill – ‘Completely unhinged’ activists claim a pork barrel fed spending bill will alter Earth’s geologic history!

Broadcast July 16, 2022 – Fox News Channel

Morano: “The New York Times quoted a University of California professor who said she was ‘sobbing’ at this news.  (Dr. Leah C. Stokes on Twitter: “Manchin says he won’t support the climate bill. I’m holding my children and sobbing.”

Morano: Sen. Chuck Schumer is ‘shell-shocked’. The House Budget Committee Chairman said ‘we’re all going to die’. We have a climate activist Bill McKibben actually saying that Joe Manchin’s name is going to be a geologic era in the Earth —  that Manchin is altering the geologic history of the earth. They are completely unhinged because one politician is not going to support a pork barrel spending bill, which they somehow think is going to save the planet. Just another pork barrel spending bill in Washington somehow has this power. We’ve reached peak climate insanity.”

[ … ] 

Green energy transition so worth it?!

Morano: “I liken it to they compare the climate crisis to having cancer and the green energy transition, the Green New Deal is their version of chemotherapy. Yeah, you’re gonna be sick, you’re gonna be vomiting, you’re gonna be laid up, but just when you get to the other side of that, you’re gonna be cancer free or in this case, climate crisis-free. So in their minds, this is the necessary bitter medicine that we have to go through — that the Netherlands is going through. What Sri Lanka is going through. What Germany and England are going through, as they’re facing blackouts and energy shortages and economic devastation and inflation.”

By: Marc Morano – Climate Depot – July 17, 2022 8:07 AM

Climate activists are ‘completely unhinged’ after Manchin decision: Climate publisher – Fox News Channel – Broadcast July 16, 2022

Climatedepot.com publisher Marc Morano praises Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., for rejecting a climate spending bill and slams climate activists for pushing ‘necessary bitter medicine’ solutions to the climate.

Rough Transcript:

Will Cain: Climate spending bill potentially doing any major green legislation before the midterms…So does (W.VA) Sen. Manchin make a good case here with reaction is Marc Morano, publisher of ClimateDepot.com. Marc, great to see you this morning. You know, I think it’s unavoidable. It’s interesting what happens overseas what is happening across the world. You know, we’re seeing precursors of it right here back home when not that’s food shortages in Sri Lanka, climate change proposals in the Netherlands. And here’s Joe Manchin, seemingly standing in the way at least in part of some of this stuff, making it back to the United States.

Marc Morano: Yes, I’ve already said Europe is much further ahead with the insanity of their energy policy than the United States. So if you want to know what’s going to happen in the US, look to Europe, and we’re seeing devastating energy news in Europe. And what Joe Manchin did — what he did was phenomenal. It reveals that just insanity of the current climate energy movement, Green New Deal movement if you will, he pulled out of this deal that they were trying to push on him with all sorts of bribes on the climate bill that President Biden is pushing the build back better $2 trillion.

And the New York Times quoted a University of California professor who said she was ‘sobbing’ at this news. (Dr. Leah C. Stokes on Twitter: “Manchin says he won’t support the climate bill. I’m holding my children and sobbing.”

Sen. Chuck Schumer is ‘shell-shocked’. The House Budget Committee Chairman said ‘we’re all going to die’. We have a climate activist Bill McKibben actually saying that Joe Manchin’s name is going to be a geologic era in the Earth —  that Manchin is altering the geologic history of the earth.

They are completely unhinged because one politician is not going to support a pork barrel spending bill, which they somehow think is going to save the planet. Just another pork barrel spending bill in Washington somehow has this power.

We’ve reached peak climate insanity.

Kudos to Joe Manchin for withstanding the pressure he’s under. He’s had activists and events surrounding him in the street chanting, ‘We want to live’ surrounding him not even letting him walk this video footage. They have targeted him, the climate activists, the Green New Deal activists, and he has stood strong and not given into their demands.

Will Cain: So Marc, how do you explain the insanity? Do you think that the likes of Chuck Schumer and others look across the world and see what’s going on with hyperinflation and food shortages and think it’s disconnected from climate policies or do they think that you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet that it’s worth, you know, it’s worth a little human suffering to save the habitat?

Marc Morano: You’re spot on Will. That’s exactly what they think. When you hear everyone from Transporation Sec. Pete Buttigieg to Treasury Sec. Janet Yellen. They believe this is going to be a painful transition, but it’s necessary.

I liken it to they compare the climate crisis to having cancer and the green energy transition, the Green New Deal is their version of chemotherapy. Yeah, you’re gonna be sick, you’re gonna be vomiting, you’re gonna be laid up, but just when you get to the other side of that, you’re gonna be cancer free or in this case, climate crisis-free.

So in their minds, this is the necessary bitter medicine that we have to go through — that the Netherlands is going through what Sri Lanka is going through what Germany and England are going through, as they’re facing blackouts and energy shortages and economic devastation and inflation.

It’s all worth it because we’re going to solve the climate crisis, which is nuts because even John Kerry, the U.S. climate envoy said if the US and Europe zeroed out our emissions the Earth wouldn’t even notice in terms of CO2 emissions because China, India, the developing world’s economies are ramping up so fast that global CO2 emissions are going up. So if we were trying to save the planet, just hamstringing our economy and punishing our people has no impact on global emissions.

Will Cain: You know what I would love to see Marc, and we’ll leave it here. But I would love to see their description of the planet post — in your analogy, chemotherapy. What is their description because we have that they have told us piecemeal, it’s fewer humans on this earth? So it’s less population. I’m sure it’s not going to apply to them and their families. You know, it’s less impact on the earth. So whatever that means shorter lifespans, fewer people, less human flourishing. I’d like to know Bill McKibben, his description of a healthy planet because I think we wouldn’t all agree with the picture of health.

Marc Morano great to talk to you this morning.

Marc Morano: Thank you Will.

“We’re all going to die”: Dems irate at Manchin for tanking climate change part of new BBB bill – “We’re all going to die,” House Budget Committee Chairman John Yarmuth, D-Ky., told reporters when asked about the consequences of Congress failing to act… “Unfortunately, we have one Democrat who thinks he knows better than every other Democrat,” he said…

New York Times GUEST ESSAY: What Joe Manchin Cost Us – By Leah C. Stokes – Dr. Stokes is an associate professor of political science at the University of California, Santa Barbara. – Excerpt: “Like other young people, Mr. Manchin’s grandchildren will grow up knowing that his legacy is climate destruction.  …  Hold your children close tonight. Leave some water out for the birds. And make a plan to call your elected leaders to demand climate action, to rip out your fossil fuel furnace or to buy an e-bike. The climate crisis is getting worse, and Congress is one vote short of saving us.”

Rolling Stone: ‘Joe Manchin Just Cooked the Planet’ by not supporting Biden’s massive federal spending bill — ‘Condemned virtually every living creature on Earth to a hellish future of suffering, hardship, & death’

JEFF GOODELL of Rolling Stone: “West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin just cooked the planet. I don’t mean that in a metaphorical sense. I mean that literally. Unless Manchin changes his negotiating position dramatically in the near future, he will be remembered as the man who, when the moment of decision came, chose to condemn virtually every living creature on Earth to a hellish future of suffering, hardship, and death.”

New York Times: John Podesta, former senior advisor to President Obama: “It seems odd that Manchin would choose as his legacy to be the one man who single-hadedly doomed humanity.”  …

“Privately, Senate Democratic staff members seethed and sobbed on Thursday night, after more than a year of working and weekends to scale back, water down, trim and tailor the climate legislation to Mr. Manchin’s exact specification, only to have it rejected from the finish line.”

Politico Editor On Manchin’s No To Biden’s BBB: ‘Objectively devastating for the planet. The last best chance at climate change legislation is gone’

The Sunrise Movement, a youth movement to stop climate change, said in a post on Twitter that “Joe Manchin and the fossil fuel industry don’t care if we make it out of this climate crisis dead or alive. This is #PeopleVsFossilFuels.”

Michael Mann: “Joe Manchin just launched a hand grenade at [UN climate summit in] Glasgow,” Michael Mann, a distinguished professor of atmospheric science at Pennsylvania State University, tweeted. “W/out a clean energy standard in the reconciliation package, Biden admin cannot meet pledge of 50% reduction in U.S. carbon emissions by 2030. And international climate negotiations begin to collapse.”

‘Build Bank Bankrupt’: Watch: Morano’s 30 min speech in Glasgow at climate skeptic forum – ‘How many times do we have to save the planet?’

Marc Morano joined the Ezra Levant Show to discuss Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin single-handedly throwing a wrench in Joe Biden’s legislative agenda, halting his climate and tax plans.
U.S. cannot fulfill climate change pledges if Manchin won’t vote for clean energy, experts say

Economic chaos is GOOD for climate?! NYT praises inflation as way ‘to drive welcome change for the planet’ – ‘Adjust what we eat to save both our pocketbooks & our planet’

Climate Depot’s Marc Morano: “The New York Times seems bent on updating Gordon Gekko’s phrase from the 1987 film Wall Street: Chaos, for lack of a better word, is GOOD. Climate activists in academia, the Biden admin. and the media seem to think the more humans suffer, the more the planet will benefit. This is more evidence that economic calamity, debt, inflation, supply chain issues, and skyrocketing meat and energy costs are not the unintended consequences of the climate agenda, but the INTENDED consequences. Chaos conditions the public to accept more centralized control of their lives. Vladimir Lenin reportedly once said, ‘worse is better’ or ‘the worse, the better’ to cheer on chaos and the destruction of the existing order to impose his ideology.”

Also see: Climate Depot News Round-Up: 

Watch: Morano on Tucker Carlson on energy & food chaos: ‘This is a war against modern civilization’ – World Economic Forum & UN seek ‘controlling humans’

Media Matters calls Morano a ‘notorious climate denier’ & ‘a proponent of the Great Reset conspiracy theory’

Climatologist Dr. Pat Michaels RIP
https://www.climatedepot.com/2022/07/17/watch-morano-on-fox-friends-weve-reached-peak-climate-insanity-as-sen-manchin-kills-bidens-climate-agenda-completely-unhinged-activists-claim-a-pork-barrel-fed-spendin/

©Marc Morano. All rights reserved.

AWED MEDIA BALANCED NEWSLETTER: We cover COVID to Climate, as well as Energy to Elections.

/in , , , , , , /by

Welcome! We cover COVID to Climate, as well as Energy to Elections.

Here is the link for this issue, so please share it on social media.

Particularly note the *** asterisked *** items below…

— This Newsletter’s Articles, by Topic —

Ukraine:

Germany Labels Journalist ‘Criminal’ And Seizes Her Bank Accounts For Reporting From Ukraine

Putin Offers Full Citizenship To All Ukrainians

Ukraine — What You Can Do:

*** Pray for the safety of the Ukrainian people

*** A well-rated source to make a Ukraine donation

COVID-19 — Repeated Important Information:

My webpage (C19Science.info) with dozens of Science-based COVID-19 reports

*** World Council of Health: Early COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines

*** COVID-19: What You Need To Know (Physicians for Informed Consent)

*** If you have received a COVID-19 injection, here’s how to Detox

*** Place Your US Order for Free At-Home COVID-19 Tests

COVID-19 — Injections:

*** Are the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Safe?

*** Pfizer Asks Court to Dismiss Whistleblower Lawsuit Because Government Was Aware of Fraud

*** New Study finds Natural Immunity to Covid-19 does not wane by even 1% but the Vaccinated are developing Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome

*** It’s Time to Stop the Shots

*** Five Reasons Why NOT to get the new NOVAX Vaccine

The “safe and effective” narrative is falling apart

Fauci admits that COVID-19 vaccines do not protect ‘overly well’ against infection

Study: Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Goes into Liver Cells and is Converted to DNA

Austrian Ministry of Health to Fine Doctors Nearly $15,000 for Unreported COVID-19 Vaccine Injuries

U.S. Public Health Agencies Aren’t ‘Following the Science,’ Officials Say

COVID-19 — Injection Mandates:

*** Judge Sides With Parent, Strikes Down Los Angeles School Vaccine Mandate

*** Canada’s Health Minister: “You Will Never Be Fully Vaxxed”

So You Are Still Thinking About Taking the Vaccine to Please Your Employer?

COVID-19 — Data:

The Feds Pile Up Vaccine ‘Adverse Event’ Reports as They Decry Scaremongering Elsewhere

Excess mortality update

Cumulative All-Cause Excess Mortality – United States

COVID-19 — Masks:

*** How Face Masks Make You Sick Instead Of Protecting You

COVID-19 — Misc:

*** After month-long COVID bout, Fauci claims quad vaxxed status prevented ‘severe’ disease. No mention of why he also took Paxlovid, or its effect.

*** Tucker Carlson: Biden Ignores Report from his own Agencies

*** Reviews of three powerful COVID-19 books (Kennedy, Atlas and Navarro)

*** Health experts are quitting the NIH and CDC in droves because they’re embarrassed by the lack of Science

Court strikes down NYS’ forced quarantine regulation as unconstitutional

COVID Fearporn

A Mostly Peaceful Depopulation

Families Unite to Call Out Questionable Hospital Protocols that Led to Deaths

Endemic Covid Will Kill Us All Reasonably Quickly

Renewables (General):

*** Paved with good Intentions

*** Energy Crises In Germany and Texas Are Exposing The Folly of Renewable Energy

*** Mining Industry Warns Energy Transition Isn’t Sustainable

*** Germany went all in on green energy. Now its economy is on brink of collapse

Wind and Solar Cannot Solve High Power Prices, and Inflation

Wind, Solar And Pipelines All Fail Germany

Wind Energy:

*** Texas Wind Power Failing When State Needs It Most

*** Texas wind power is failing amid a scorching US heat wave

*** New York must balance climate mandates with declining reserve margins to ensure reliability: ISO

*** Kansas State Senator’s Testimony about industrial wind energy

Opponents question science, motivations of putting wind turbines in Lake Erie

Offshore Wind Turbine Threat to Whales is Next Big Argument

GE Shelves Wind Turbine Blade Plant as Renewable Energy Has Been a Tough Go

Solar Energy:

*** Unprecedented IEA report: There’s a huge problem for the clean energy shift and it comes from China

*** LA Times report warns about ‘environmental danger’ in solar transition

It’s Not Working

Nuclear Energy:

*** Nuclear Power Gets New Push in U.S., Winning Converts

*** Environmentalists Stunned by EU’s Parliament’s Decision That Nuclear and Gas Power are Now ‘Green Energy’

*** No power technology can do the job of nuclear energy today Duke Energy CEO

Soaring demand for electricity and coal shows why we need nuclear energy

Greenpeace co-founder, ex-director calls nuclear safest energy

Nuclear Power Could Heat Your Home

Fossil Fuel Energy:

*** Mike Rowe’s superior response regarding climate catastrophe

*** Natural gas now rivals oil as the fuel that shapes geopolitics

The unravelling of Germany’s green agenda

Europe at risk of civil unrest unless it returns to fossil fuels

France restarts coal plant mothballed in February

A role for Coal? Low-cost, negative emissions Blue Hydrogen from “MAWGS” Coal/Biomass co-gasification

Canada Sends Gas Pipeline Repair To Germany

Biden reportedly sold nearly 1M barrels of US oil RESERVES to Chinese oil company with ties to Hunter

Electric Vehicles (EVs):

*** Electric Vehicles Are a Tool of Tyranny

*** Studies Show The Electric Vehicles Democrats Insist You Buy Are Worse For The Environment And Lower Quality

*** EVs are Not the Future

The EV transition in the eyes of the Beholden Part 1

EVs Are Now Targeted for Overloading the Electric Grids During an Energy Crisis

Misc Energy:

*** China, Russia, Biggest Winners in Biden’s War on Energy — While Greenhouse Gases Rise

*** Study: Europe’s Green Experiment is a Costly Climate Policy Failure

*** The Global Search for Energy Security

*** Federalism Is The Key To Demonstrating The Disaster Of Green Central Planning

*** GOP Gambit Could Help U.S. Energy Producers Build Back Better

Deep Geothermal — can it make coal, gas, nuclear redundant?

The End of Private Car Ownership

World Energy Mix Data

Wholesale prices shoot up near-record 11.3% in June on surge in energy costs

Manmade Global Warming — Some Deceptions:

*** The theory of anthropogenic climate change has no reliable scientific basis

*** Climate Change: a religion built on blind faith

*** The Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis and the Causality Principle

*** Short video: Putting the Heat on Climate Dogmatism

*** NASA admits climate change occurs because of changes in Earth’s solar orbit, not because of SUVs and fossil fuels

*** Nature doesn’t give us a clean environment

*** Study: Surface Solar Radiation Dataset Appears to Expose a Major Manipulation of Global Temperature Records

The Nonexistent Nitrogen “Crisis” In The Netherlands

Manmade Global Warming — Misc:

*** Manchin says he won’t support climate, tax provisions in proposed Democratic bill

*** Is a Carbon Tax the Only Way to Stop the Climate Activists?

*** EPA now stuck between a rock and a hard place on CO2

*** LinkedIn Bans Scientist for Presenting Inconvenient Truths About CO2

State judge blocks Pennsylvania RGGI plan

Russia Gives Climate Obsessed Europe the Heisman!

Report: Counting Carbon Molecules

All-time Cold Records Fall in Australia; Solar Activity Controls the Climate

Spokesperson Explains How Climate Change Goals Will Reduce Farm Production

The Global Warming Golden Goose

Huge number of new signatories of World Climate Declaration (CLINTEL)

US Election:

Election-Integrity.info (10 major election reports by our team of experts, plus much more!)

*** US Election Integrity Poll: 50% Think Cheating Likely in Midterms

*** ERIC Investigation, Part 3

*** Good Government Groups Ask State Officials To Stop Biden’s Federal Takeover Of Elections

*** Data Supporting the Reported Results of the 2020 Election Does NOT Reconcile with Data in Voting Machine Files

*** Google Spam Filter Cost Republicans $2± Billion In Lost Donors

*** 21 confirmed illegalities, irregularities from 2020 election

The Game Plan for Stealing Elections?

The Push for Permanent Vote by Mail

Court Requires DOJ to Turn Over Documents

US Election — State Issues:

*** Citizen’s Guide to Building and Election Integrity Infrastructure

*** Become a Poll Watcher in your State

*** Wisconsin Court says unattended absentee ballot drop boxes are illegal

*** Judge upholds limits on mass mailings of Georgia absentee ballot forms

*** PA Victory: Anti-Corruption Election Legislation Banning “Zuckerbucks” Scheme Passes on Bi-Partisan Basis, Signed into Law

DOJ sues Arizona over proof of citizenship voter law

Democrats Tried to Sabotage North Carolina Election with Aggressive Methods

Sample US Arrests for Election Fraud

US Politics and Socialism:

*** Left Wing Elites — Our New Antoinettes

*** California Throws 70,000 Truckers in Work Legal Limbo, Risking Supply Chains

*** The Big Lie of Woke Capitalism

*** The Deep State Is Sadistic

How the Federal Government Buys Our Cell Phone Location Data

Democrats Want to Tax Working Americans into Recession

US Politics and the J6 Committee:

*** The J6 Show Trial Is Lying About Election ‘Fraud’

*** Dr. Simone Gold Sentenced to Two Months in Prison

Freedom Has Departed the Western World

Where Jan. 6 prosecutions stand, 18 months later

Other US Politics and Related:

*** We Outnumber Them: “If We Don’t Submit, They Have No Chance”

*** We’ll Be Back, But Will Trump?

*** Immigration and World Poverty Explained

*** Judge blocks Biden admin’s transgender school bathroom rule, athletes

The private email Obama sent his former physician after he questioned Biden’s cognitive health

The Rise and Fall of Boris Johnson

Ruling in West Virginia v. EPA Scores Win for Representative Government

Collapse of Sri Lanka Is a Failure of Leftism

Globalism:

*** Successfully Facing an International Mob of Globalists

*** HSBC banker quits and declares ‘cancel culture destroys wealth and progress’

A Popular Uprising Against the Elites Has Gone Global

Vatican Goes Full Technocracy With ‘Council For Inclusive Capitalism’

Religion Related:

*** Don’t downplay violent attacks on Catholic churches

The Most ‘Post-Christian’ Populated Cities in the US

Celebrities speak on faith: How religion affects Hollywood careers

Education Related:

*** Our kids’ schools told us to ‘cease and desist’ but we’re fighting back

*** The Origins and Impact of Racially Divisive Curricula

How the Best of Intentions Created Today’s Academic Disasters

Science and Misc Matters:

*** ‘Disturbing’: weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples

*** The #1 Reason for Clutter (It’s Not What You Think!)

*** Pat Michaels, RIP

China crushes mass protest by bank depositors demanding their life savings back

In NC the GOP has the numbers, but the Dem Gov runs the state

Please use social media, etc. to pass on this Newsletter to other open-minded citizens…If at any time you’d like to be added to (or taken off) 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 recent past Newsletter issues see 2020 Archives & 2021 Archives & 2022 Archives. To accommodate numerous requests received about prior articles over the twelve plus years of the Newsletter, we’ve put together   since the beginning of the Newsletter — where you can search by year. For a detailed background about the Newsletter, 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.

Copyright © 2022; Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions (see WiseEnergy.org).

Climate-Related Deaths Are at Historic Lows, Data Show

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Since the 1920s, atmospheric CO2 concentrations increased from about 305 parts per million to more to more than 400 ppm.

The latest talking point of progressive politicians, pundits, and activists is that America cannot afford not to spend trillions of dollars to “solve the climate crisis” because global warming is an existential threat. As Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) put it, “You cannot go too far on the issue of climate change. The future of the planet is at stake, OK?”

That is sham wisdom even if climate change were the terror Sen. Sanders imagines it to be. The resources available to public and private decision makers are finite. Resources allocated to “climate action” are no longer available to make mortgage payments, pay college tuitions, grow food, fund medical innovation, or build battleships. Prudent policymakers therefore not only consider the costs of policy proposals but also compare the different benefit-cost ratios of competing expenditures. As it happens, the benefit-cost ratios of carbon suppression policies are abysmal.

For example, just the direct expense of the electric sector portion of the Green New Deal would, conservatively estimated, cost $490.5 billion per year, or $3,845 per year per household, according to American Enterprise Institute economist Benjamin Zycher. Yet even complete elimination of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions would avert only 0.083°C to 0.173°C of global warming 70 years from now—a policy impact too small to discernibly affect weather patterns, crop yields, polar bear populations, or any other environmental condition people care about.

The climate “benefit” over the next 10 years would be even more minuscule. Yet during that period, Zycher estimates, the annual economic cost of the GND electric sector program would be about $9 trillion. It is unwise to spend so much to achieve so little.

The doomsday interpretation of climate change is a political doctrine, not a scientific finding, as Danish economist Bjorn Lomborg shows in a recent series of tweets and University of Alabama in Huntsville atmospheric scientist John Christy explains in a new paper titled “Falsifying Climate Alarm.”

In the aforementioned tweets, Lomborg rebuts an op-ed by Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz, who advocates spending trillions of dollars annually to combat climate change, which he calls “our World War III.” As evidence, Stiglitz claims that in recent years weather-related damages cost the U.S. economy 2 percent of GDP—a figure for which he gives no reference.

Lomborg deftly sets the record straight. Aon Benfield reinsurers estimate that during 2000-2017, weather-related damages cost the United States about $88 billion annually, or 0.48 percent of GDP per year, not 2 percent. More importantly, extreme weather is a natural feature of the Earth’s climate system. The vast majority of those damages would have occurred with or without climate change. “Does Stiglitz believe there is no bad weather without climate change?” Lomborg asks.

Click here for United States Economic and Insured Losses chart.

In the United States, hurricanes are the biggest cause of weather-related damages. Hurricanes have become more costly over the past 120 years but not because of any long-term change in the weather. Once historic losses are adjusted for increases in population, wealth, and the consumer price index, U.S. hurricane-related damages show no trend since 1900.

Click here for Continental US Landfalling Normalized Total Economic Damage (1900-2017) chart.

The past three decades are generally agreed to be the warmest in the instrumental record. Yet during that period, damages due to all forms of extreme weather as a share of global GDP declined. In other words, despite there being many more people and lots more stuff in harm’s way, the relative economic impact of extreme weather is decreasing. It is difficult to reconcile that trend with claims that ours is an “unsustainable” civilization.

Click here for Global Weather Losses as Percent to Total GDP 1990-2018 chart.

Lomborg provides an even more telling rebuttal point in a previous Tweet. Since the 1920s, atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations increased from about 305 parts per million to more than 400 ppm, and global average temperatures increased by about 1°C. Yet globally, the individual risk of dying from weather-related disasters declined by 99 percent.

Click here for Deaths from Climate and non-Climate Catastrophes 1920-2017 chart. 

Stiglitz claims we cannot afford not to spend trillions to mitigate climate change because “our lives and our civilization as we know it is at stake, just as they were in World War II.” Lomborg notes that in the peer-reviewed literature, unchecked climate change is estimated to cost 2-4 percent of global GDP in 2100. That “is not the end of the world,” especially considering that, despite climate change, global per capita incomes in 2100 are expected to be 5-10 times larger than today.

Ironically, in the “socio-economic pathways” (SSPs) literature, the richest SSP is the one that relies most on free markets and fossil fuels.

Click here for Socio-Economic Pathways Chart.

Source: Keywan Rhiahi et al. 2017. “This world [SSP5] places increasing faith in competitive markets, innovation and participatory societies to produce rapid technological progress and development of human capital as the path to sustainable development. . . . At the same time, the push for economic and social development is coupled with the exploitation of abundant fossil fuel resources and the adoption of resource and energy intensive lifestyles around the world.”

John Christy’s new paper, published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation, summarizes two of his recent peer-reviewed studies. In 2017, Christy and fellow atmospheric scientist Richard McKnider examined 37.5 years of satellite data in the global troposphere (bulk atmosphere). Christy and McNider factored out the warming effects of El Ninõ and the cooling effects volcanic aerosol emissions. The underlying greenhouse warming trend—the dark line (e) in the figure below—is 0.095°C per decade, or about one-fourth the rate forecast by former NASA scientist James Hansen, whose congressional testimony launched the global warming movement in 1988.

Click here for The Updating the Estimate chart.

Christy and McNider estimate that when atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations double, global warming will reach 1.1°C—a quantity called “transient climate response.” Christy comments:

This is not a very alarming number. If we perform the same calculation on the climate models, you get a figure of 2.31°C, which is significantly different. The models’ response to carbon dioxide is twice what we see in the real world. So the evidence indicates the consensus range for climate sensitivity is incorrect.

In 2018, Christy and economist Ross McKitrick set out to test the accuracy of climate models. They examined model projections in the atmosphere between 30,000 and 40,000 feet, in the tropics from 20°N to 20°S. The atmosphere warms fastest in that portion of the atmosphere in almost all models used by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), such as the Canadian Climate Centre model, shown below.

Click here for the Hotspot in Canada Model chart.

In 102 model runs, the average warming in the “hot spot” portion of the tropical atmosphere is 0.44°C per decade, or 2°C during 1979-2017. “However, the real-world warming is much lower; around one-third of the model average,” Christy reports.

Click here for Tropical mid-Tropospheric Temperatures, Models vs. Observations chart.

Christy sums up the test results:

You can also easily see the difference in warming rates: the models are warming too fast. The exception is the Russian model, which has much lower sensitivity to carbon dioxide, and therefore gives projections for the end of the century that are far from alarming. The rest of them are already falsified, and their predictions for 2100 can’t be trusted. If an engineer built an airplane and said it could fly 600 miles and the thing ran out of fuel at 200 and crashed, he wouldn’t say ‘Hey, I was only off by a factor of three’. We don’t do that in engineering and real science. A factor of three is huge in the energy balance system. Yet that’s what we see in the climate models.

Statements like the following are increasingly common in popular media, academic journals, and political discourse: “The evidence that anthropogenic climate change is an existential threat to our way of life is incontrovertible.” Not so—not even close.

This CEI article was republished with permission.

AUTHOR

Marlo Lewis Jr.

Marlo Lewis, Jr. is a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Lewis writes on global warming, energy policy, and public policy issues. Marlo has been published in The Washington Times, Investors Business Daily, TechCentralStation, National Review, and Interpretation: A Journal of Political Philosophy. He has appeared on various television and radio programs, and his ideas have been featured in radio commentary by Rush Limbaugh and G. Gordon Liddy.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Marx and the Banning of Elements in the Periodic Table

/in , , , , , , , /by

Examining the problem, reaction, solution/thesis, counter thesis, solution, or the dialectic scam of the left.

There certainly seems to be more than one understanding of this phrase. Here is our shot at it. Of course, there are scholars of Hegel/Marx who read this site, and we welcome any corrections or other interpretations of this well known phrase.

Picking Global Warming as an example, we have a completely invented problem which of course can be manipulated in any way needed to end up at the point you want to land on. Primarily, the destruction of the West with its notions of free market economy and individual rights. Since the problem is fake, and created and enforced by “consensus” (See video below) all the reactions from people calling it out as fake must be dealt with using the dialectic attack of hate speech. This was fabricated by a second generation Frankfurt School acolyte, a certain Habermas, in the form of “Discourse Theory”.

For the past many decades, various leftist controlled governments and leftist think tanks, have attempted to use the element of Carbon as a means to control industry and humanity in a highly selective manner. Like slavery as an issue, we must only examine the ‘problem’ of CO2 production in Western and free market nations, more accurately perhaps, in cultures with the concept of individual rights as being sacrosanct. We must not look at slavery in Africa or Islam ever but must focus on the past actions in The USA pretty much exclusively in terms of passing moral judgment. And we must not look at really dirty industrial activity, let alone CO2 production in China or India but must pretend that CO2 produced by any and all means connected to humans in the West as an existential threat to the entire planet.

There should be no need to try and disprove the idea that CO2 is a problem on this site. I do have a dedicated page to the science of it here on Vlad but I don’t maintain it very well as to engage in a debate based on a lie is to lose that debate since only one side seeks to know the truth and the power of the lie is much greater in the short run. At least where the goal is destruction.

One fact though, is that where CO2 is produced, more life happens. Plants grow etc. Plants, and life, are made of carbon. Even on the side of highways, plants tend to thrive from a truly poisonous form of carbon, CO1 or Carbon monoxide. CO2 is actually pumped into greenhouses to help plants hit their optimal growth rate.

But let’s pretend that CO2 production was a problem. Then why are those who wrap themselves in a false flag of environmentalism, so opposed to nuclear power? Its the obvious solution to those who claim that carbon dioxide is an existential threat to the planet. Whatever the issues with nuclear power, it cannot be as bad as that.

And then there is this:

Geothermal

A very worthy deeper dive:

So we have a solution now for food production that is safe, energy efficient and absorbs far more carbon than it produces.

Global Warming is a consensus based thing though. Meaning communists agreed on creating it and presenting it as an existential problem in order to get to the solution they want, which is communism. No real world approach to solving even the non-problem of “global-warming” will be entertained and any attempt to expose it as the fraud it is will be met with charges akin to hate speech. “Climate-denier” for example, makes moral equivalence with a Holocaust denier to one who would deny the ‘existential threat of global warming’. A fairly palpable use of the Hate-Speech tactic.

More recently, in order to destroy farming in the Netherlands and replace these farms with what will almost certainly be beehive brutalist housing for illegal mostly Muslim and African migrants forced on the local population since before 2015, a new element and compound had to be demonized as an existential threat. Nitrogen, which makes up damn near 80% of the total atmosphere, and ammonia.

I won’t even bother to deal with the issue of nitrogen. To think that the tiny amount of nitrogen released on a few dutch farms justify the actions against farmers we see in the Netherlands is even worthy of rebuttal on that basis, means a lack of understanding of the tactic at play. Much like when one knows that nearly all human beings are born either a man or a woman (with the exception of extremely few genetic mutations which end with those individuals as they tend to be sterile) and to pretend these are fungible is, well risible.

So let’s look at the new threat of ammonia.

How could we somehow solve the issue of ammonia in a way that would satisfy those who claim its a problem while maybe at the same time, solving other problems many are concerned about:

The bottom line is:

The problems we are bombarded with, from Covid to vaccine hesitancy. From global warming to cow flatulence. From Nitrogen to ammonia, are all fake problems which, even by engaging about it, causes us to lose. These are not problems at all, and some, to the extent they might be, are selectively enforced against the Western nations and peoples with zero effort to deal with these non-problems in places like China, North Korea, India and other places where the raw production of these gasses and so on are orders of magnitude higher than in the West.

We need to understand that so much of what we engage with on a day to day basis is we, the intellectual descendants of Socrates, being constantly basted with pseudo-reality and false cosmologies in order to destroy Western civilization where it actually lives.

In our own minds.

Eeyore for VladTepesBlog.

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The End of Private Car Ownership

/in , , , , , , , , /by

You will drive nothing and you will be happy.

The term “pedestrian” has a derogatory meaning because peasants walked while nobles were “equestrians” and rode horses. The industrial revolution eliminated this class difference, as it did so many others, by making car ownership available to the masses until eventually Herbert Hoover was able to boast that “Republican prosperity has reduced and increased earning capacity” to “put the proverbial ‘chicken in every pot’ and a car in every backyard to boot.”

Democrats have spent two generations trying to get those cars out of every backyard.

Biden is trying to bring back Obama’s mileage standards that were estimated to raise car prices by 20%.The goal is to “nudge 40% of U.S. drivers into electric vehicles by decade’s end.”

Will 40% of Americans be able to afford electric cars that cost an average of $54,000 by 2030?

Not likely. Nor are they meant to. Biden’s radical ‘green’ government, which includes Tracy Stone-Manning, the former spokeswoman for an ecoterrorist group as the head of the Bureau of Land Management, isn’t looking to nudge drivers into another type of cars, but out of cars.

Gas prices are a way to price Americans out of car ownership under the guise of pushing EVs.

Biden’s Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm responded to American concerns about high gas prices by urging them to buy electric cars. Granholm, who had promoted a green energy tycoon who spent years in prison for fraud, who had served on the board of directors of an electric battery company, and made millions divesting stock in an electric vehicle manufacturer, is a fan.

“Most electric vehicles are now cheaper to own than gas-powered cars from the day you drive them off the lot,” Granholm tweeted.

That isn’t actually true, but actual cars have become more expensive to own, largely because of efforts by the Biden administration, and by various states, including California. That hasn’t however made electric cars any more affordable for ordinary Americans.

The average price of an electric car shot up to $54,000 in May. Car prices in general have risen in the Biden economy, but electric cars are naturally expensive. The raw material costs for an average electric car are up to over $8,000. That’s compared to $3,600 for an actual car.

When your raw material costs are that high, electric cars will be inherently unaffordable.

The Obama administration pumped billions in taxpayer money into battery and electric car manufacturing, the majority of which failed, on the theory that enough government subsidies would lower battery costs. Not only was much of that money lost, but currently electric battery costs hover around the $160 kilowatt-hour mark. Green boosters cheer that’s far down from over $1,000 per kWh a decade ago, but that still adds up to the reality that an electric car capable of traveling for even short distances needs a battery that alone costs thousands.

The Nissan Leaf, which approaches $30,000 once the reality of MSRP in the current sales market is taken into account, is one of the cheapest electric cars around, and has a range of only 149 miles. Replacing its battery can set back car owners $6,500 to $7,500. And that’s even when you can manage to find one or someone willing to replace it. In less than 3 years, Leafs lose 20 miles of range. By the fifth year, they have lost 30 miles. And it’s all downhill from there.

The Nissan Leaf was initially a hit, but car manufacturers quickly realized that anyone willing to overpay that much for substandard performance had money to burn. The electric car market is now thoroughly dominated by luxury vehicles subsidized by taxpayers. And the Leaf went from 90% market share to less than 10%. The EV market is now a taxpayer-funded status symbol.

The dirty truth about the “clean” car market is that it consists of traditional car companies and Tesla frantically trying to unload a limited share of luxury electric cars on wealthy customers to cash in on the emissions credits mandated by states like California. Tesla makes more money reselling these regulatory credits to actual car companies than it does selling cars. Taxpayers and working class car-owners pick up the bill for the entire luxury electric vehicle market.

A market that they are shut out from by design.

The “green” vision is not a world in which everyone has their own electric car. It’s one of collective transport, of buses, light rail, and car-pooling through shared rides and roving self-driving cars. The only vehicle the average consumer is supposed to own is a bicycle.

While the Biden administration is still pretending that it’s out to “encourage” electric car ownership by making actual cars too expensive for much of the country to afford, others are saying the quiet part out loud.

“Car-lovers will doubtless mourn the passing of machines that, in the 20th century, became icons of personal freedom. But this freedom is illusory,” an Economist article predicted.

“There will be fewer cars on the road—perhaps just 30% of the cars we have today,” the head of Google’s self-driving car project predicted.

“The days of the single occupancy car are numbered,” Brook Porter at G2 Venture Partners, a green energy investment firm, thundered in an article titled, The End of Cars in Cities.

Dan Ammann, the former president of GM, claimed that “the human-driven, gasoline-powered, single-passenger car” is the “fundamental problem” in a post titled, “We Need to Move Beyond the Car”. He has since gone to work for Exxon-Mobil.

Predictions are cheap, but car bans are expensive and all too real. The European Union voted to back a ban on the sale of non-electric cars by 2035. California is also pushing for a similar 2035 ban on the sale of new actual cars in the state. Officials noted that the ban would push more than half of mechanics out of work and leave much of the state unable to afford cars.

Canada has its own 2035 car ban. Last year, Governor Newsom and Governor Cuomo, along with 10 other governors, urged Biden to impose a 2035 car ban on all Americans.

Electric cars aren’t actually “cleaner”. The mining processes that produce “green” technologies are as dirty, if not dirtier, and trade dependence on oil for dependence on rare earth metals, and dependence on the Middle East for dependence on Communist China. The one thing that they decisively accomplish is to make it impossible for ordinary Americans to own cars.

And that is what environmentalists really want. But not just them.

The vision of a nation in which private car ownership is a luxury good, in which cars have been priced out of the reach of most people through environmental measures that concentrated on gas-powered vehicles, and then added more taxes and fines for the waste” and “inefficiency” of an individual owning a vehicle is not very far away.

The technocratic sales pitch is that ride-sharing and self-driving cars will make car ownership unnecessary. Why own a big clunky machine when you can own nothing and be happy?

The reality is that car ownership offers mobility and independence. That is exactly what the leftist radicals making social policy want to eliminate. Gas prices are not Putin’s price hike, they’re the green dream. And that dream isn’t to put you in a Nissan Leaf. It’s the Pol Pot dream of dismantling civilization and rolling back the industrial revolution.

Once the dark age norms of their dark enlightenment are restored, peasants will go back to being pedestrians and only the progressive philosopher kings will ride.

AUTHOR

DANIEL GREENFIELD

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Another Ford EV Recall: Here’s the Dangerous Defect This Time

FABRICATING REALITY: Climate Change, Atmospheric Transgenderism and Mental Masturbation

Studies Show The Electric Vehicles Democrats Insist You Buy Are Worse For The Environment And Lower Quality

FACT: All Electric Vehicles (EVs) Are Powered by Coal, Uranium, Natural Gas or Diesel-Powered Energy

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Court Blocks Pennsylvania’s Carbon Pricing Scheme

/in , , , , , , , /by

“Don’t let activists who believe that putting Pennsylvanians out of work will help ‘save the planet.’ It’s time to confront the wannabe planet savers here in this room and this state and tell them not only NO, but HELL NO.”

That’s what CFACT’s Marc Morano declared before the Pennsylvania House of Representatives when Governor Tom Wolf tried to push The Keystone State into “The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative” (aka RGGI) scheme without authorization by law.

A state court agreed and blocked Wolf’s power grab as an attempt to establish an “unlawful tax.” The court said plaintiffs “raised a substantial legal question” since taxing is a power that is supposed to be wielded by the Pennsylvania General Assembly rather than the Executive.

As reported by the AP, “The Power Pa Jobs Alliance, a coalition of industry and labor groups, said that power plant operators would have started paying what it called the ‘carbon tax’ on Friday had the court not issued its injunction. It contends the carbon policy will impose higher electricity costs on consumers. The group called Friday’s ruling a ‘significant win for working families.’”

Winning court decisions are important and cause for celebration. But we must remind ourselves that oftentimes they’re only isolated “battles” and don’t necessarily determine the larger outcome.

Take, for example, how the Biden Administration is brazenly moving forward on its climate agenda despite the fact the Supreme Court handed them a stinging defeat on regulating carbon dioxide emissions in West Virginia v. EPA.

No sooner did the court wallop them, than Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg rolled out plans to regulate CO2 emissions from motor vehicles and boost his power over the states in ways Congress never intended.

As CFACT senior policy analyst Bonner Cohen reported at CFACT.org:

“One week after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency could not regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants because the agency lacks congressional authorization to do so, the Biden Department of Transportation (DOT) proposed a rule targeting CO2 emissions from highway vehicles, for which DOT also has no legal authority.”

“In a rare moment of regulatory candor, the administration acknowledges in the docket supporting DOT’s proposed rule that DOT’s scheme will ultimately encourage Americans to switch from gasoline-powered cars to EVs.”

For those on the Left, court decisions are a useful tool if they propel their agenda forward — but if they suffer a setback then they proceed on as though it’s just business as usual. They need to lose again and again to force compliance.

Let’s hope the courts continue to teach Governor Wolf, Secretary Buttigieg and their armies of bureaucrats a sorely needed lesson in constitutional checks and balances.

RELATED VIDEO: COVID lockdowns morphing into climate lockdowns

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden’s Transportation Department targets CO2 emissions of cars on highways to push EVs

No excuse for Texas energy debacle

Electric vehicles a tool ripe for abuse

Government benefits more from fuel sales than oil companies!

EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Studies Show The Electric Vehicles Democrats Insist You Buy Are Worse For The Environment And Lower Quality

/in , , , , , , , /by

It was never about the climate. It was always about destroying our way of life, our standing in the world and transferring our wealth to left-wing elites with nonsensical, failed ‘businesses’.

Studies Show The Electric Vehicles Democrats Insist You Buy Are Worse For The Environment And Lower Quality

By: Helen Raleigh, The Federalist, July 11, 2022:

Two recent studies have shown that electric vehicles have more quality issues than gas-powered ones and are not better for the environment.

Many people believe electric vehicles are higher quality than gas-powered vehicles and are emissions-free, which makes them much better for the environment. But two recent studies have shown that electric cars have more quality issues than gas-powered ones and are not better for the environment.

J.D. Power has produced the annual U.S. Initial Quality Study for 36 years, which measures the quality of new vehicles based on feedback from owners. The most recent study, which included Tesla in its industry calculation for the first time, found that battery-electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid vehicles have more quality issues than gas-powered ones.

According to J.D. Power, owners of electric or hybrid vehicles cite more problems than do owners of gas-powered vehicles. The latter vehicles average 175 problems per 100 vehicles (PP100), hybrids average 239 PP100, and battery-powered cars — excluding Tesla models — average 240 PP100. Tesla models average 226 PP100. Given the average cost of an electric car is roughly $60,000, about $20,000 more than the cost of a gas-powered car, it seems owners of EVs didn’t get the value they deserve.

Some blamed the supply-chain disruptions caused by pandemic-related lockdowns as the main reason for EVs’ quality issues. EV makers have sought alternative (sometimes less optimal) solutions to manufacture new vehicles. But the same supply-chain disruption affected makers of gas-powered vehicles. Yet the three highest-ranking brands, measured by overall initial quality, are all makers of gas-powered vehicles: Buick (139 PP100), Dodge (143 PP100), and Chevrolet (147 PP100).

Some pointed to the design as a main contributing factor to EVs’ quality issues. According to David Amodeo, global director of automotive at J.D. Power, automakers view EVs as “the vehicle that will transform us into the era of the smart cars,” so they have loaded up EVs with technologies such as touch screens, Bluetooth, and voice recognition. EV makers also prefer to use manufacturer-designed apps to “control certain functions of the car, from locking and unlocking the doors remotely to monitoring battery charge.” Increasing technical complexity also increases the likelihood of problems. Not surprisingly, EV owners reported more infotainment and connectivity issues in their vehicles than owners of gas-powered vehicles. Amodeo acknowledged that “there’s a lot of room for improvement” for EVs.

Electric Vehicles Are Worse for the Environment

Besides quality issues, a new study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that electric vehicles are worse for the environment than gas-powered ones. By quantifying the externalities (both greenhouse gases and local air pollution) generated by driving these vehicles, the government subsidies on the purchase of EVs, and taxes on electric and/or gasoline miles, researchers found that “electric vehicles generate a negative environmental benefit of about -0.5 cents per mile relative to comparable gasoline vehicles (-1.5 cents per mile for vehicles driven outside metropolitan areas).”

Keep reading.…..

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: FACT: All Electric Vehicles (EVs) Are Powered by Coal, Uranium, Natural Gas or Diesel-Powered Energy

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

FABRICATING REALITY: Climate Change, Atmospheric Transgenderism and Mental Masturbation

/in , , , , , , , , /by

“I’ve called it ‘atmospheric transgenderism.’ If men can get pregnant, then CO2 is a pollutant, you see. If you’re fabricating reality, then anything goes.” — , July 7, 2022 in Natural News

“I liken it to they compare the climate crisis to having cancer and the green energy transition, the Green New Deal is their version of chemotherapy. Yeah, you’re gonna be sick, you’re gonna be vomiting, you’re gonna be laid up, but just when you get to the other side of that, you’re gonna be cancer free or in this case, climate crisis-free. So in their minds, this is the necessary bitter medicine that we have to go through — that the Netherlands is going through. What Sri Lanka is going through. What Germany and England are going through, as they’re facing blackouts and energy shortages and economic devastation and inflation.” — Marc Morano, Climate Depot

Mental Masturbation: The act of engaging in useless yet intellectually stimulating conversation, usually as an excuse to avoid taking constructive action in your life.

We have spent a lot of energy, no pun intended, in defending energy, specifically that energy produced by fossil fuels. We have carried this torch to keep not only Americans but mankind in general able to reap the benefits of cheap and reliable energy.

If you Google the words ‘Atmospheric Transgenderism’ one of the links goes to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Policy on Gender Identity Protections statement which reads,

This Order establishes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Policy on Gender Identity Protections, which advances NOAA’s goal to provide a workplace that is free from discrimination and fully inclusive of all employees. These protections include all forms of gender identity and gender expression. NOAA strives to ensure equal opportunity and protection from all forms of harassment for all employees, contractors, fellows, interns, grantees, and applicants for employment. This Order is not intended to replace or impede any applicable discrimination complaint processes and does not alter the filing deadlines for invoking those processes.

NOAA is made up primarily of climate scientists yet they want to protect gender identity?

Gender identity is scientifically determined by ones genomes. One is either born XX (male) or XY (female). This is scientifically indisputable.

QUESTION: If NOAA’s scientists can’t follow the science on gender then are they also ignoring the science on the climate too?

Below is a video titled “IPCC Climate Change 2022 Impacts Report: Insights from NOAA Authors” that explains NOAA’s “scientific” position on climate change. This video features interviews with NOAA scientists Libby Jewett and Kirstin Holsman — contributors to the IPCC Climate Change 2022 Impacts Report. They served on an international team of authors who assessed scientific literature to prepare the new IPCC report’s chapter on North America.

According to the NOAA video byline, “Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns, mainly caused by human activities, especially the burning of fossil fuels.”

Their premise is fossil fuels create CO2, which is a pollutant and therefore impacts every aspect of life and that mankind, by changing its behaviors, can in fact control the climate.

That’s the definition of “atmospheric transgenderism.”

The Science of Anything Goes

NOAA is the perfect example of scientific mental masturbation.

NOAA’s mental masturbation RE: manmade global warming goes something like this: man uses fossil fuels ⇒ which emit the pollutant CO2 ⇒ therefore fossil fuels must be eliminated in order to save the planet.

We have written here, here, here, here and here that CO2 is not a pollutant but rather is essential to keeping the planet green and mankind healthy.

In the below December 15, 2011 video Professor Ian Clark, Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Ottawa and director, G.G. Hatch Isotope Laboratories, one of Canada’s leading analytical facilities, is testifying before a Canadian Senate hearing on climate change.

Professor Clark presents three important findings on what impacts the earth’s climate:

  1. Earths warming and cooling periods over millions of years has been due to activity on the sun.
  2. H2O (water vapor) is driving green house gas models, not CO2. It is H2O that keeps earth at a livable temperature for mankind.
  3. CO2 has little to do with global warming. CO2 actually helps keep the planet green.

Watch this entire video to understand how data and science are used to define green house gases and their effect over time on our climate.

Scientists Can’t Control the Climate or Change a Person’s Gender

No one can change their gender! What they can do is mutilate themselves psychologically, spiritually and physically. It’s the greatest and most destructive myth of our generation.

The same goes for the climate and weather. Mankind cannot control neither the weather nor the climate because:

  1. The climate changes.
  2. These changes in the climate follow natural cycles (e.g. Summer, Fall, Winter, Spring)
  3. These natural climate changes are immutable and cannot be changed in any way, shape or form.

Recently there have been four major developments impacting those who believe, like NOAA, that CO2 and fossil fuels are harmful.

  1. In a landmark ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt a massive blow to the Climate Change Agenda by saying the CO2 cannot be regulated by the EPA. On July 1st, 2022 Zero Hedge’s Tyler Durden wrote, “In a majority opinion authored by chief justice John Roberts, the justices ruled that in the latest example of Democratic overreach, the Environmental Protection Agency was not specifically authorized by Congress to reduce carbon emissions when it was set up in 1970. The ruling leaves the Biden administration dependent on passing legislation if it wants to implement sweeping regulations to curb emissions. The opinion from the court’s conservative majority said that “a decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body”. The justices added they doubted Congress intended to delegate the question of “how much coal-based generation there should be over the coming decades, to any administrative agency”.
  2. On July 9th, 2022 the European Union voted to declare fossil fuel to be ‘green’ energy. “EU Parliament backs green label for nuclear and natural gas, defying climate Left,” reports the Washington Examiner. The decision will, “ease construction of infrastructure for those power sources over the objections of some environmentalists and members of the bloc…Suddenly, European nations are panicking to try to rebuild their energy infrastructure. But since they’ve officially blocked most funding for non-green energy projects, the only way to get funds to rebuild fossil fuel infrastructure is to declare fossil fuels to be ‘green.’”
  3. Natural gas prices soars by 700%. Bloomberg reported on June 29th, 2022, “[N]atural gas is the hottest commodity in the world right now. It’s a key driver of global inflation, posting price jumps that are extreme even by the standards of today’s turbulent markets — some 700% in Europe since the start of last year, pushing the continent to the brink of recession. It’s at the heart of a dawning era of confrontation between the great powers, one so intense that in capitals across the West, plans to fight climate change are getting relegated to the back-burner. In short, natural gas now rivals oil as the fuel that shapes geopolitics. And there isn’t enough of it to go around.”
  4. In an article titled “This Country Tried To Go Green, Now They Are In Total Collapse!” PRETCHI wrote, “Germany is now facing economic disaster following massive investments in green energy. The Wall Street Journal reported that in an effort to get ready for a potential recession, Germany stated on July 5 its intention to amend 1970s legislation to send taxpayer funding to energy companies. According to Reuters, the breakdown occurred shortly after Germany disclosed its intention to spend $220 billion to convert all of its energy needs to renewable sources, the fund for Germany’s energy plan was an industrial transformation between now and 2026, including climate protection, hydrogen technology and expansion of the electric vehicle charging network. “200 billion euros in funding for the transformation of the economy, society and the state,” German finance minister Christian Lindner said.

The atmospheric transgenderism of climate change and mind masturbation have run head first, no pun intended, into global economic and political realities.

The climate on climate change is changing rapidly.

People are looking at their pocketbooks and realizing that they’ve been duped by scientists and their governments on the climate, fossil fuels and CO2 things.

People are now seeing the myth of Atmospheric Transgenderism and they’re not happy.

As Bill Clinton said, “It’s the economy, stupid.” Citizens in the U.S. and globally are now waking up to this climate Mental Masturbation exercise. They’re seeing it for what it really is about—control and nothing more!

They’re saying enough is enough. And so do we!

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Studies Show The Electric Vehicles Democrats Insist You Buy Are Worse For The Environment And Lower Quality

Canada’s Peoples Party: ‘Climate change alarmism is based on flawed models that have consistently failed at correctly predicting the future.’

Don’t Let Climate Change Alarmism Ruin Your Future

Two Videos on the Global Warming/Climate Change Hoaxes

VIDEO: Big Government Is Not the Answer to Climate Change

SUPPLY CHAIN CRISIS: 70,000 Self-Employed Truckers in California Forced Off The Road Under New Democrat State Law

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The Democrats war on the hard working American ratcheted up another unimaginable notch. But this time, it not only outs the small businessman out of business, throw in massive shortages (food, supplies etc.), supply chain issues etc. It’s a catastrophe

Sadly, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a review on whether California Assembly Bill 5 (AB-5) violates the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 as it applies to self-employed truck drivers.

70,000 Self-Employed Truckers in California Face Shutdown Under New State Law

Industry says it’s ‘pouring gasoline’ on supply chain crisis

By Allan Stein, The Epoch Times, July 8, 2022:

Tens of thousands of independent California truck owner-operators could be out of business soon under a new statewide worker classification law designating them as employees.

On June 30, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a review on whether California Assembly Bill 5 (AB-5) violates the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 as it applies to self-employed truck drivers.

“Gasoline has been poured on the fire that is our ongoing supply chain crisis,” the California Trucking Association (CTA) wrote in a June 30 response to the high court’s decision regarding the association’s legal challenge to the bill.

“In addition to the direct impact on California’s 70,000 owner-operators—who have seven days to cease long-standing independent businesses—the impact of taking tens of thousands of truck drivers off the road will have devastating repercussions on an already fragile supply chain, increasing costs and worsening runaway inflation,” the association added.

“We are disappointed the court does not recognize the irrevocable damage eliminating independent truckers will have on interstate commerce and communities across the state.

“The legislature and [Gavin] Newsom administration must immediately take action to avoid worsening the supply chain crisis and inflation.”

The California State Assembly adopted AB-5 in September 2019, sparking CTA’s legal challenge and the Supreme Court’s latest decision.

The bill’s primary sponsor was Lorena Gonzalez (D), a union leader and former Assembly member.

Under AB-5, a self-employed commercial truck owner must satisfy a three-part test to be considered an independent contractor, with exceptions for construction trucking services.

The bill adds that existing law “creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits arising under wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission.”

Existing law defines employees for purposes that include “any individual who, under the usual common law rules applicable in determining the employer-employee relationship, has the status of an employee.”
Self-Employed Truckers Entitled to Benefits

The bill would entitle those self-employed truck drivers and owners to the same benefits and workers’ compensation as regular employees.

According to Globecom Freight Systems, a leading provider of transportation services, owner-operators make up 9 percent (350,000) of the commercial truckers on the road today. Their average salary is about $50,000.

A recent study by the American Trucking Association found that the nationwide shortage of 80,000 truck drivers could double by 2030. In light of the shortage, many trucking companies now offer lucrative sign-on bonuses and salaries to attract more drivers.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration recently launched an apprenticeship driver program for those aged 18–to–20 that would allow them to cross state lines to help further alleviate the shortage.

Tony Bradley, president and CEO of the Arizona Trucking Association, criticized AB-5 as a “horribly misguided piece of legislation” by California labor unions that will have a “drastic impact across all trucking.”

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden Economics: Natural Gas Soars 700%

/in , , , , , , , , /by

“Best economy in history.” — White House

Natural Gas Soars 700%, Becoming Driving Force in the New Cold War

(Bloomberg) — One morning in early June, a fire broke out at an obscure facility in Texas that takes natural gas from US shale basins, chills it into a liquid and ships it overseas. It was extinguished in 40 minutes or so. No one was injured.

It sounds like a story for the local press, at most — except that more than three weeks later, financial and political shockwaves are still reverberating across Europe, Asia and beyond.

That’s because natural gas is the hottest commodity in the world right now. It’s a key driver of global inflation, posting price jumps that are extreme even by the standards of today’s turbulent markets — some 700% in Europe since the start of last year, pushing the continent to the brink of recession. It’s at the heart of a dawning era of confrontation between the great powers, one so intense that in capitals across the West, plans to fight climate change are getting relegated to the back-burner.

In short, natural gas now rivals oil as the fuel that shapes geopolitics. And there isn’t enough of it to go around.

It’s the war in Ukraine that catalyzed the gas crisis to a new level, by taking out a crucial chunk of supply. Russia is cutting back on pipeline deliveries to Europe — which says it wants to stop buying from Moscow anyway, if not quite yet. The scramble to fill that gap is turning into a worldwide stampede, as countries race to secure scarce cargoes of liquefied natural gas ahead of the northern-hemisphere winter.

The New Oil?

Germany says gas shortfalls could trigger a Lehman Brothers-like collapse, as Europe’s economic powerhouse faces the unprecedented prospect of businesses and consumers running out of power. The main Nord Stream pipeline that carries Russian gas to Germany is due to shut down on July 11 for ten days of maintenance, and there’s growing fear that Moscow may not reopen it. Group of Seven leaders are seeking ways to curb Russia’s gas earnings, which help finance the invasion of Ukraine — and backing new LNG investments. And poorer countries

that built energy systems around cheap gas are now struggling to afford it.

“This is the 1970s for natural gas,” says Kevin Book, managing director at ClearView Energy Partners LLC, a Washington-based research firm. “The world is now thinking about gas as it once thought about oil, and the essential role that gas plays in modern economies and the need for secure and diverse supply have become very visible.”

Natural gas used to be a sleepy commodity that changed hands in fragmented regional markets. Now, even though globalization appears to be in retreat across much of the world economy, the gas trade is headed in the opposite direction. It’s globalizing fast — but maybe not fast enough.

Keep reading……

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: EU Declares Fossil Fuel To Be ‘Green’ Energy As ‘Climate Change’ Narrative Self-Destructs

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

EU Declares Fossil Fuel To Be ‘Green’ Energy As ‘Climate Change’ Narrative Self-Destructs

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

When reality meets propaganda, it’s brutal.

Trump was right. Right about “green energy’ farce, right about the climate accord, right about the Paris Agreement …. he was right about everything.

“EU Parliament backs green label for nuclear and natural gas, defying climate Left,” reports the Washington Examiner. The decision will, “ease construction of infrastructure for those power sources over the objections of some environmentalists and members of the bloc.”

This decision is the first sign that European leaders may be pulling back from the green energy suicide cult that now typifies socialist, progressive “libtard” governments that are more interested in virtue signaling than allowing their own domestic economies to function. The fraudulent, junk science narrative of “climate change” has caused western nations (including the USA) to dismantle much of their fossil fuel infrastructure over the last 20 years. With Russia’s energy exports suddenly cut off due to economic sanctions, Western Europe is finding itself mired in an unprecedented energy crisis with potentially catastrophic consequences.

Suddenly, European nations are panicking to try to rebuild their energy infrastructure. But since they’ve officially blocked most funding for non-green energy projects, the only way to get funds to rebuild fossil fuel infrastructure is to declare fossil fuels to be “green.”

And that’s exactly what the EU parliament just did with natural gas, delivering a devastating blow to the climate change narrative, which was always based on so much quackery and bunk that I’ve called it “atmospheric transgenderism.” If men can get pregnant, then CO2 is a pollutant, you see. If you’re fabricating reality, then anything goes.

It turns out that even “progressive” national leaders of European nations are being dragged back to reality, kicking and screaming, reluctantly admitting that fossil energy is the only thing that can power modern economies at the moment, at least until hot fusion or cold fusion are commercialized…… (more here)

EU parliament backs labelling gas and nuclear investments as green

By Kate Abnett, Reuters, July 6, 2022

Lawmakers back ‘green’ EU investment label for the fuels

Likely to become law unless super-majority of states veto

Gas, nuclear rules have split EU countries and lawmakers

Luxembourg, Austria to challenge law in court

BRUSSELS, July 6 (Reuters) – The European Parliament on Wednesday backed EU rules labelling investments in gas and nuclear power plants as climate-friendly, throwing out an attempt to block the law that has exposed deep rifts between countries over how to fight climate change.

The vote paves the way for the European Union proposal to pass into law, unless 20 of the bloc’s 27 member states decide to oppose the move, which is seen as very unlikely.

The new rules will add gas and nuclear power plants to the EU “taxonomy” rulebook from 2023, enabling investors to label and market investments in them as green.

Out of 639 lawmakers present, 328 opposed a motion that sought to block the EU gas and nuclear proposals.

The European Commission welcomed the result. It proposed the rules in February after more than a year of delay and intense lobbying from governments and industries.

“The Complementary Delegated Act is a pragmatic proposal to ensure that private investments in gas and nuclear, needed for our energy transition, meet strict criteria,” EU financial services chief Mairead McGuinness said.

The rules have split EU countries, lawmakers and investors. Brussels redrafted the rules multiple times, flip-flopping over whether to grant gas plants a green tag. Its final proposal fuelled fierce debate about how to hit climate goals amid a crisis over dwindling Russian gas supplies.

Gas is a fossil fuel that produces planet-warming emissions – but far less than coal, and some EU states see it as a temporary alternative to replace the dirtier fuel.

Nuclear energy is free from CO2 emissions but produces radioactive waste. Supporters such as France say nuclear is vital to meet emissions-cutting goals, while opponents cite concerns about waste disposal.

Read more

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Dutch Farms Seized To Make Way For Migrants

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre: ‘Our Economy is Stronger Now Than Ever Before!’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report us republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

UPDATE: Holland’s Eco-War Against Farmers

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face— forever.” ― George Orwell, 1984

Since Monday the Fourth of July, there has been an uprising of Dutch farmers. Though the farmers break laws, their protests should be considered peaceful and within the spirit of democracy.

Their case is justified. The Dutch Government says it wants to protect Nature and the farmers pollute heath with too much Nitrogen from their cattle. However, Nitrogen is beneficial for Nature and changes barren heath into beautiful green forest. Do you know that 78% of the air you breathe consists of Nitrogen?

Dutch farmers belong to Holland, just as cowboys belong to the USA. Holland was made a great nation by farmers, preachers and merchants.

As I wrote you before, the real reason that the Dutch Government wants to expel farmers from their farmlands is, that they need the land to build homes for mass immigration from Africa and the Middle East. Holland will become a city state, full of ugly modern architecture, meant for foreigners.

The in a July 7th, 2022 Free West Media article titled “No longer a conspiracy theory: Dutch farmers must make way for asylum seekers” reports:

Flevo member of parliament Niek Beenen (JA21) has shared a document on Twitter from the province of Flevoland in the Netherlands about the purchase of “nitrogen space” in the Noordoostpolder.

“The province of Flevoland has bought nitrogen space in the Noordoostpolder. With the nitrogen space that has been freed up, the province can help a number of PAS claimants in the Noordoostpolder. This opportunity has arisen because the government has bought an agricultural business in the Noordoostpolder. The government wants to set up a registration centre for asylum seekers at the location of the farm,” reads the document.

“In this country, farming families who produce food are being exchanged for asylum seekers,” tweeted Beenen. [Emphasis added]

Read more

Dutch police and even part of the Military have responded aggressively to the farmers’ protests. There has even been an occasion in which a police officer shot at a 16 year old boy, who was unarmed and drove away from the protest without being a threat to anyone.

This happened in Heerenveen and there is video of the incident on Twitter.

Prime Minister Mark Rutte, a fake conservative, doesn’t seem to be impressed by the protests. He has offered that a friend of his mediate between the Government and the farmers. But Rutte has said that the plan to expel farmers will not be negotiable, so negotiations are meaningless. The mediator is also a driving force behind the climate hysteria in Holland.

I see a bleak future for Dutch farmers. But also for Dutch fishermen. They are also under attack by the Government. They have to diminish their fleet, so that wind turbines can be erected in the North Sea.

And what we also see happening, is that slowly but steadily a police state is developing in Holland. The Dutch Constitution is merely an obstacle that can be overcome by declaring “emergency” situations.

Yes, Holland is in deep trouble. Only immediate elections could offer a way out. But then again, would the people vote wisely? They are so misinformed by state run media and by media supporting the state.

©Matthys van Raalten. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Dutch Farms Seized To Make Way For Migrants

RELATED VIDEO: Italian farmers start rebellion of their own