Pirate's Cove

Funny how so much of what climate scam cultists want is to knock the human race back hundreds and hundreds of years economically

Our addiction to growth is harming the climate
We must wean ourselves off unsustainable economic growth if we are to cut greenhouse gas emissions and avoid catastrophic climate change, say some economists. But what are the alternatives to growth?

Electing Leftists usually limits economic growth.

On the way home from work in your electric car, you stop off at the local discount store and pick up some beef for dinner. The meat was shipped in from Brazil to Germany. The land where the cow grazed was once rainforest. The nickel used in the car made its way from a polluting mine in the Philippines to a European assembly line.

Extracting, producing and shipping both products involved vast amounts of energy, resources, and greenhouse gas emissions. Taken in isolation, that’s not a big deal, you might think. But the scale of consumption — particularly in industrialized countries — and the the relentless pursuit of goods and services, is putting a huge strain on the planet’s ecosystems and atmosphere, say scientists.

In 2017, Earth Overshoot Day — the date when humanity spent Earth’s resource budget to live sustainably for the year — fell on August 2. In 1987, it landed on December 9. Today, we need 1.7 planets to meet our consumption demands — and that number could rise to two planets by 2030.

Unless we get that growth under control, not only will we be facing an “ecosystem collapse” due to the loss of species and conversion of land for industry and agriculture, we won’t be able to stop global warming, according to some economists.

You get the idea: these people hate people living a modern economic life. What to do?

In the US and Europe, the idea of “degrowth” — a movement around downsizing production and consumption, and moving the economy away from infinite expansion in a just and equitable way — is gaining traction.

That’s partly because of the growing gap between rich and poor. Part of the problem is that we measure society’s economic progress and well-being using Gross Domestic Product (GDP), say some economists.

Strange: I’m getting the idea that this whole ‘climate change’ movement is intertwined with all the other Statist/Progressive ideas. But, hey, if these climate scammers really believe this stuff, they should practice what they preach. Oh, wait…

On an individual level, “degrowthers” might choose not to fly or drive a car but they say environmental problems are not individual problems. Solutions must be political and community-based.

In other words, forcing everyone else to comply per government force.

Read: We Must Limit Our Economic Growth To Stop ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Writing for the UK Guardian, which gave up all notions of journalism in their march for Progressive policies, non-climate scientist John Abraham (he’s a mechanical engineer) is all about believing that not believing in anthropogenic climate change is un-American (via Watts Up With That?)

An Inconvenient Sequel – the science, history, and politics of climate change

Al Gore’s new movie ‘An Inconvenient Sequel’ is, in some ways, similar to his groundbreakingInconvenient Truth project, but different in other ways. Those key differences are why I recommend you watch it.

This movie successfully accomplishes a number of interweaving tasks. First, it gives some of the science of climate change. Gore gets his science right. I remember his first movie, which I thought was more steeped in science and data than this one, so based on my recollection this new picture is somewhat abbreviated. That’s a good thing because the science is settled on climate change. That is, the science is settled that humans are causing current climatic changes and the science is settled that we are observing these changes throughout the natural world.

Readers of this column who venture into the comments below will likely find people claiming, “science is never settled.” But the people making those comments are not scientists. They don’t work in this field every day, they don’t see the data, and they don’t know what they’re talking about.

Interestingly, neither is Al Gore. Nor Barack Obama. A goodly chunk of those involved in the UN IPCC, and the present COP23.

The election in the US was a climate disaster and it is turning out to be worse than we could have feared. The US President and Congress are doing everything they can to ensure more rapid and devastating climate change. They are doing everything they can to ensure more California wildfires, more Marias, more Harveys, and more Irmas. They are doing everything they can to bring us more California droughts and wildfires and Texas floods. They are doing everything they can to cut funding from climate science so we won’t know how bad it is. They are doing everything they can to make the USA a pariah nation. In fact, on the day I write this, the US has become the only country to reject the Paris Climate Accord. That is a stunning fact. What kind of country does this?

What they are doing is so un-American; so un-conservative.

It’s always interesting getting inside the mind of a Warmist: in this case, we learn that they believe that massively increasing the size and power of the federal government, instituting massive control over citizens, private entities, the economy, the energy sector, while artificially increasing the cost of living through taxes and fees is totally their idea of “America” and ‘Conservative.” If you’re against that, you’re un-American and un-conservative. Good grief.

Read: It’s Un-American To Pull Out Of Paris Climate Agreement Or Something »