Respect to Brian for changing your mind. As Upton Sinclair said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
Meanwhile the Biden regime is trying to force more electric vehicle adoption, even after demand has stalled. What is the best way to stop the continuing tyranny of unelected commissars pushing ESG social credit scores?
unfortunately you are preaching to the choir as I suspect the bulk of Public subs figured all of this out years ago. some minor problems in your otherwise excellent article -- "It’s true that increasing emissions of greenhouse gases like CO2 likely increase the risk of climate-related floods, droughts, heat waves, hurricanes, and fires" -- no it is not true. and, the "someone" who blew up the pipeline...you can find him at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave in DC...sometimes. most of the time he's at his beach house. goes by "brandon".
To be a member of our globalist Brahmin Left "I'm wealthy and credentialed so bow down to my wisdom and authority" ruling class in good standing there are a few requirements, one of which is: thou shalt never doubt the climate change Net Zero narrative. Here once again we are in the realm of theological dogma and very far from fact-based empiricism (or responsible political stewardship).
All the smart people know, along with their infallible children whose hearts have a passionate yearning for Justice, that the WORLD IS ON FIRE!! and we must pull the plug on modern civilization if we all don't want to die. Only evil capitalists disagree (they say while clinging to their devices and other luxury goods.)
There are 2 other truths here: the desire to have a sacred cause, to join a moral crusade and be an enlightened benefactor of humanity who helps "save the planet" (LOL), precedes the actual cause or issue, and since the 1960s moral revolution, "the environment" is a popular way for our secular nobility to launder their soiled souls in public;
also, no matter how ugly things get, the people who are inflicting their doomed fantasies on us will NEVER experience any of the consequences or take any responsibility. They all will have generators and/or second homes or planes to take them elsewhere, and all the politicians responsible will have long since escaped on golden parachutes.
In the modern West, wealth and status and moral superiority are privatized, while chaos and misery are socialized.
Lately I’ve watched some interesting YouTube videos by engineering types that installed solar on their homes and tracked all their expenses and power generation. I was struck by two things, the overall cost (well over $100k) and the total tax “incentives” - in the range of $40k-50k, and that’s not including the net metering etc. It’s hard to imagine the government handing over that order of magnitude of money to an individual for any other consumer choice. It’s also a massive wealth transfer to a largely upper middle class group, usually of a particular political persuasion. At the same time my own state (which has huge solar incentives) is trying to steal a chunk of a modest inheritance from my mother’s premature death. My opinion on this goes without saying. I’m not against renewables but I’m against financing my neighbor’s home improvement choices while meth zombies wander the streets.
This is an excellent cogent and coherent essay by someone who knows the numbers and has lived the consequences of his own advocacy. This process of coming to knowledge can also be said to be a "red-pilling".
I don't think the casual statement on hurricanes is supported by data/research that conclude that. The obvious fact is Netzero is a terrible idea, subsides are a scam, and nobody talks about carbon capture.
"I was wrong. It took twenty years of working in the energy industry promoting these technologies to realize they don’t solve climate problems." Wow. That is not an easy statement to make when you've put your soul into the renewables industry. I am impressed and congratulate you for your intellectual honesty. I suggest you have one more hurdle to jump: realize that the only "climate problem" human beings have is how to protect ourselves from an inherently hostile climate, that CO2 is not a "pollutant" and therefore not a threat to humans, and that we need more, not less, clean carbon-based energy to thrive.
The list of what we need is right on. I’m grateful to those dedicated to making it happen. But none of it can happen with Biden or any progressive in the White House. Bottom line.
I’ve always had natural skepticism about clean energy but believed in the positive intent. Now I wonder if the intent is to make people dependent, not make the world cleaner. If they limit our energy, they limit our mobility and other things, Then they have the power, literally and authoritatively
“It’s true that increasing emissions of greenhouse gases like CO2 likely increase the risk of climate-related floods, droughts, heat waves, hurricanes, and fires—events that could negatively affect people’s lives.”
I stopped reading after that statement. There is excellent satellite data showing that the earth has been significantly greening over the last 20 years. I have seen no reliable data showing an increase in hurricanes,floods and fires. I’m glad he figured out that gas and nuclear isn’t so bad but he has a lot more to learn.
Lots of good points but the author is still wrong about green house gases causing climate change. It’s been debunked numerous times but it still hasn’t been accepted by enough people who have a voice, like this author. Too bad.
I couldn't have found this piece more incredibly useful and perfectly timed. As Germany slides into economic ruin, somehow no one but the U.K. gets it, and is moving to get more NG electricity plants online.
This is required reading for all - not just the "energy illiterate." Share this far and wide!
Thank you for this thoughtful piece. (I hope you don't lose all your friends.)
The threshold issue rests on what the great Thomas Sowell realized: There are no government solutions, only tradeoffs. So are we to immiserate millions of Western people and destroy more people in primitive countries on the off chance we will make life better for some other unknown people a thousand years from now? I vote no. And until the VIPs stop swanning across continents in their emission-spewing private jets, I will stand by that.
“It’s true that increasing emissions of greenhouse gases like CO2 likely increase the risk of climate-related floods, droughts, heat waves, hurricanes, and fires”.
The genuflecting at the altar of climatism is the entire reason we are in this position in the first place. Absolute stupidity can simply be refuted.
Roger Pielkie Jr has several posts outlining the actual IPCC WG1 data that shows no climate emergency, most climate indicators show no variation outside natural variability and the few that do are only assumed to have a human cause.
If there are 15 indicators and 12 show no signal why must we assume the other three are our fault?
If it’s AGW shouldn’t all show a signal?
If it’s 1 in 5 isn’t it more likely to be other natural factors?
Isn’t that simply logical thought?
I like that Brian has clued in, just take it a little further.
Respect to Brian for changing your mind. As Upton Sinclair said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
Meanwhile the Biden regime is trying to force more electric vehicle adoption, even after demand has stalled. What is the best way to stop the continuing tyranny of unelected commissars pushing ESG social credit scores?
unfortunately you are preaching to the choir as I suspect the bulk of Public subs figured all of this out years ago. some minor problems in your otherwise excellent article -- "It’s true that increasing emissions of greenhouse gases like CO2 likely increase the risk of climate-related floods, droughts, heat waves, hurricanes, and fires" -- no it is not true. and, the "someone" who blew up the pipeline...you can find him at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave in DC...sometimes. most of the time he's at his beach house. goes by "brandon".
To be a member of our globalist Brahmin Left "I'm wealthy and credentialed so bow down to my wisdom and authority" ruling class in good standing there are a few requirements, one of which is: thou shalt never doubt the climate change Net Zero narrative. Here once again we are in the realm of theological dogma and very far from fact-based empiricism (or responsible political stewardship).
All the smart people know, along with their infallible children whose hearts have a passionate yearning for Justice, that the WORLD IS ON FIRE!! and we must pull the plug on modern civilization if we all don't want to die. Only evil capitalists disagree (they say while clinging to their devices and other luxury goods.)
There are 2 other truths here: the desire to have a sacred cause, to join a moral crusade and be an enlightened benefactor of humanity who helps "save the planet" (LOL), precedes the actual cause or issue, and since the 1960s moral revolution, "the environment" is a popular way for our secular nobility to launder their soiled souls in public;
also, no matter how ugly things get, the people who are inflicting their doomed fantasies on us will NEVER experience any of the consequences or take any responsibility. They all will have generators and/or second homes or planes to take them elsewhere, and all the politicians responsible will have long since escaped on golden parachutes.
In the modern West, wealth and status and moral superiority are privatized, while chaos and misery are socialized.
It’s obvious that the John Kerry’s , Al Gore’s and AOCs don’t care about the planet or the poor. They despise the poor.
Hence the AOC dress “ Tax the Rich “ not
“ Feed the Poor”
They want P.O.W.E.R. And climate change is their vehicle
Lately I’ve watched some interesting YouTube videos by engineering types that installed solar on their homes and tracked all their expenses and power generation. I was struck by two things, the overall cost (well over $100k) and the total tax “incentives” - in the range of $40k-50k, and that’s not including the net metering etc. It’s hard to imagine the government handing over that order of magnitude of money to an individual for any other consumer choice. It’s also a massive wealth transfer to a largely upper middle class group, usually of a particular political persuasion. At the same time my own state (which has huge solar incentives) is trying to steal a chunk of a modest inheritance from my mother’s premature death. My opinion on this goes without saying. I’m not against renewables but I’m against financing my neighbor’s home improvement choices while meth zombies wander the streets.
This is an excellent cogent and coherent essay by someone who knows the numbers and has lived the consequences of his own advocacy. This process of coming to knowledge can also be said to be a "red-pilling".
I don't think the casual statement on hurricanes is supported by data/research that conclude that. The obvious fact is Netzero is a terrible idea, subsides are a scam, and nobody talks about carbon capture.
"I was wrong. It took twenty years of working in the energy industry promoting these technologies to realize they don’t solve climate problems." Wow. That is not an easy statement to make when you've put your soul into the renewables industry. I am impressed and congratulate you for your intellectual honesty. I suggest you have one more hurdle to jump: realize that the only "climate problem" human beings have is how to protect ourselves from an inherently hostile climate, that CO2 is not a "pollutant" and therefore not a threat to humans, and that we need more, not less, clean carbon-based energy to thrive.
The list of what we need is right on. I’m grateful to those dedicated to making it happen. But none of it can happen with Biden or any progressive in the White House. Bottom line.
Spread the word, thus could not be more important for humanity.
I’ve always had natural skepticism about clean energy but believed in the positive intent. Now I wonder if the intent is to make people dependent, not make the world cleaner. If they limit our energy, they limit our mobility and other things, Then they have the power, literally and authoritatively
“It’s true that increasing emissions of greenhouse gases like CO2 likely increase the risk of climate-related floods, droughts, heat waves, hurricanes, and fires—events that could negatively affect people’s lives.”
I stopped reading after that statement. There is excellent satellite data showing that the earth has been significantly greening over the last 20 years. I have seen no reliable data showing an increase in hurricanes,floods and fires. I’m glad he figured out that gas and nuclear isn’t so bad but he has a lot more to learn.
Lots of good points but the author is still wrong about green house gases causing climate change. It’s been debunked numerous times but it still hasn’t been accepted by enough people who have a voice, like this author. Too bad.
I couldn't have found this piece more incredibly useful and perfectly timed. As Germany slides into economic ruin, somehow no one but the U.K. gets it, and is moving to get more NG electricity plants online.
This is required reading for all - not just the "energy illiterate." Share this far and wide!
Thank you for this thoughtful piece. (I hope you don't lose all your friends.)
The threshold issue rests on what the great Thomas Sowell realized: There are no government solutions, only tradeoffs. So are we to immiserate millions of Western people and destroy more people in primitive countries on the off chance we will make life better for some other unknown people a thousand years from now? I vote no. And until the VIPs stop swanning across continents in their emission-spewing private jets, I will stand by that.
“It’s true that increasing emissions of greenhouse gases like CO2 likely increase the risk of climate-related floods, droughts, heat waves, hurricanes, and fires”.
The genuflecting at the altar of climatism is the entire reason we are in this position in the first place. Absolute stupidity can simply be refuted.
Roger Pielkie Jr has several posts outlining the actual IPCC WG1 data that shows no climate emergency, most climate indicators show no variation outside natural variability and the few that do are only assumed to have a human cause.
If there are 15 indicators and 12 show no signal why must we assume the other three are our fault?
If it’s AGW shouldn’t all show a signal?
If it’s 1 in 5 isn’t it more likely to be other natural factors?
Isn’t that simply logical thought?
I like that Brian has clued in, just take it a little further.
There is no climate emergency.
Repeat.