Ecofascists point to the emissions reductions during COVID shutdowns as a model for climate.
False climate predictions are, unfortunately, nothing new. “The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change,” declared climate expert Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in 2019 while pushing the Green New Deal. Former Vice President Al Gore’s 2006 “An Inconvenient Truth” told the public there was about a decade of life remaining unless significant climate change measures were implemented. In 1989, Noel Brown, then director of one of the offices of the UN Environment division, espoused the warning that “entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.” Contrast these statements to the 1975 siren by Kenneth Watt, the UC Berkeley professor who predicted the world was going to be “eleven degrees colder in the year 2000 … about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”
Now the public is being told that lockdowns may be necessary to save the world from climate change. This is, they say, an existential problem.
Late last summer and early fall, the whispers of “climate lockdowns” first appeared. In an opinion article for MarketWatch, Mariana Mazzucato, an author and a professor in innovative economics at the University of London, opined that a climate lockdown would employ measures such as limiting private-vehicle use, banning consumption of red meat, and imposing rationing to force fossil fuel companies out of business. Mazzucato concluded, “To avoid such a scenario, we must overhaul our economic structures and do capitalism differently.”
Now, the UK Guardian trumpets, “The annual rate of emissions cuts must increase roughly tenfold from that recorded in high-income countries before the pandemic.” Furthermore, “Lockdowns around the world led to an unprecedented fall in emissions,” but similar reductions “are needed every year of the next decade to have a good chance of holding temperature rises to within 1.5C or 2C of pre-industrial levels, as required by the Paris agreement.”
Ironically, just last month, Science Daily published data by the National Center for Atmospheric Research that wrecked the premise of these lockdowns. As published, “The counterintuitive finding highlights the influence of airborne particles, or aerosols, that block incoming sunlight. When emissions of aerosols dropped last spring, more of the Sun’s warmth reached the planet, especially in heavily industrialized nations, such as the United States and Russia, that normally pump high amounts of aerosols into the atmosphere.”
But don’t get distracted by the inconvenient truths of selective science. Control of money, power, and policy is at the root of this entire cult of thinking aimed at “high-income countries.” It seems that a vow of poverty and Third World status is required.
According to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the 2015 Paris Climate Accord goals are to limit the increase of the global average temperature to 1850 levels, when the U.S. population was around 23 million, Millard Fillmore was president, and there were no cars or personal vehicles outside of a good ole horse and wagon. True to his ideology, the newly appointed United States Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry is even claiming the Paris Agreement’s goals are inadequate in reducing carbon emissions and that a climate tax, as supported by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, is one of the most significant things that can be done to yield the greatest impact.
The late Dr. Walter Williams, renowned economist, author, and conservative, nailed it: “Communism and socialism have lost respectability, so it’s been repackaged as environmentalism.” The Center-Right needs to stop bickering internally and make a stand, or we’re headed back to before there was a Grand Old Party.
Start a conversation using these share links: