Archive for Eco-Fascist
I believe, dear reader, that I have mentioned David Suzuki at least eight times in the 28 months of this blog’s life.
I was originally going to have this item Monday, but my temporary WordPress problem delayed things.
To be clear dear reader, I believe David Suzuki is one of the biggest frauds and hypocrites in Canada. Dare to disagree with the mighty man and see how quickly he will blow up on you.
Ideology over science. Money in his pocket over truth, facts or science. That’s David Suzuki.
Ezra details some of the real truth about “Saint” Suzuki.
(updated shortly after first posting)
I turned to page four of Saturday’s Calgary Herald and an odd headline jumped out at me – “It’s official: Harper government withdraws from Kyoto climate agreement”
I thought, shouldn’t the headline say Canada withdraws? Why are they making it personal? Are Harper haters writing the headlines?
Then I read the first paragraph written by Mike De Souza of Postmedia News at the Vancouver Sun –
Canada will officially become the first country to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol climate change agreement Saturday, following years of criticism from the Harper government and lobbying from major industrial polluters.
….lobbying from major industrial polluters. ???
Gee Mike, do you have any actual proof for that? Kyoto was a pathetic joke of a treaty and Canada’s withdrawal is an excellent decision.
This is another example how the thugs on the left demand to allow only one side, their side, to have a voice on an issue. In their limited view, if you support Kyoto then you care about the planet. If you oppose Kyoto then you must support pollution, etc.
It was the Liberal government under Jean Chretien that signed onto Kyoto. Chretien did it to score some immediate brownie points and didn’t do a single thing to follow through on Kyoto because it would have bankrupted the country.
Key bits of information that De Souza chose to leave out of his story.
As Lorrie Goldstein reported back on January 15th of 2012.
Their infatuation with “green” energy for the past two decades — in which they’ve resembled children running through the house with scissors — speaks to this.
In the 1993 election that brought the Liberals to power, Jean Chretien, Paul Martin and Chaviva Hosek promised in their red book to reduce Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels to 20% below 1988 levels by 2005.
This completely unrealistic target, which Chretien lifted from a similar promise made by the Brian Mulroney Progressive Conservatives in 1988, would have bankrupted the country, had either party ever tried to implement it, which they didn’t.
But Chretien wouldn’t let this absurd idea go, signing on to the United Nations’ Kyoto accord in 1998.
He committed Canada to reducing our emissions to a less severe, but still utterly unattainable target of an average of 6% below 1990 levels from 2008 to 2012.
This after getting into a bidding war with then U.S. vice-president Al Gore over which country would make the more fantastical commitment to Kyoto, which Paul Wells describes in his 2006 book, Right Side Up: The Fall of Paul Martin and the Rise of Stephen Harper’s New Conservatism.
Under Chretien, the Liberals ratified Kyoto in 2002 — bringing it into force — despite the fact, as top Chretien adviser Eddie Goldenberg later acknowledged in a 2007 speech reported by The Canadian Press, the government knew it was in no position to deliver on its commitment. (Google, “Not ready for Kyoto, Chretien adviser says.”)
Here’s the link Goldstein mentioned.
Mike De Souza’s entire item reads as paid propaganda. It’s shoddy “journalism” from Postmedia. If Postmedia is concerned about controlling costs, then I suggest they stop subsidizing left wing propaganda and invest more into honest journalism.
The science does not support the theory of CAGW, Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming.
That’s why, in recent years the fanatics have shifted from Man-made global warming to the general purpose “climate change”.
More and more people are realizing Man-made global warming is all about ideology and has nothing to do with science.
How does that make Manmade global warming fanatics feel?
Angry, very angry indeed!
But seriously dear reader…a thread at Anthony Watts, Watts Up With That? provides a look into the increasing derangement of Man-made global warming propagandists.
Here is a little snippet from what the fanatics say among themselves in a “secret” forum.
And this isn’t about science or personal careers and reputations any more. This is a fight for survival. Our civilisations survival. .. We need our own anonymous (or not so anonymous) donors, our own think tanks…. Our Monckton’s … Our assassins.
Anyone got Bill Gates’ private number, Warren Buffett, Richard Branson? Our ‘side’ has got to get professional, ASAP. We don’t need to blog. We need to network. Every single blog, organisation, movement is like a platoon in an army. ..This has a lot of similarities to the Vietnam War….And the skeptics are the Viet Cong… Not fighting like ‘Gentlemen’ at all. And the mainstream guys like Gleick don’t know how to deal with this. Queensberry Rules rather than biting and gouging.
..So, either Mother Nature deigns to give the world a terrifying wake up call. Or people like us have to build the greatest guerilla force in human history. Now. Because time is up…Someone needs to convene a council of war of the major environmental movements, blogs, institutes etc. In a smoke filled room (OK, an incense filled room) we need a conspiracy to save humanity.
Once again dear reader, it needs to be said – if the “science is settled”, it should very easy for the fanatics pushing Man-made global warming to make the case.
They can’t make the case because the science does not support them.
Canada’s preeminent science phoney, David Suzuki is in the news again.
I first heard about Suzuki’s latest outburst of rage two weeks ago in a thread at Watts Up With That?
Peter Foster does an excellent job of smacking down Suzuki in Friday’s National Post.
In fact, “Silence and demonize” could be the Suzuki foundation’s motto. On its website, right beside Tell the Senate to stop silencing environmental groups sits a piece by Mr. Suzuki with the headline Climate change denial isn’t about science, or even skepticism. The same article was recently published in The Huffington Post under the headline Deny Deniers their Right to Deny!
There is no more objectionable term for legitimate skepticism than “denial,” which equates honest questioning with barmy claims that the Holocaust never took place. The Puffington article is, however, fascinating because it implicitly acknowledges that the Kyoto policy juggernaut has come off the rails, so Mr. Suzuki changes tack. What if the science isn’t settled (ridiculous idea though that still is), asks Mr. Suzuki. How can we keep relying on “finite” fossil fuels and thus robbing the future? We need big plans!
Such Malthusian hooey confirms that Mr. Suzuki is blind to history and utterly clueless about how markets work. Just look at the actual results of the government-mandated global green shift: collapsing wind and solar industries, threats of trade war over the EU’s plan to force emissions trading on foreign airlines; President Obama backpedalling furiously over Keystone XL in the face of soaring gasoline prices.
The Senate’s inquiry into foreign activist funding and charitable tax deduction is valid, but perhaps more intriguing is domestic support for Mr. Suzuki. The David Suzuki Foundation certainly receives major donations from the California-based Moore, Hewlett and Packard foundations, whose funding is highlighted by Vivian Krause, but Mr. Suzuki is also heftily supported by Canadian Establishmentarians such as the Bronfman family, Power Corp., Jim Pattison, and Gerry Schwartz.
Do these leaders and scions of capitalism grasp that they are supporting an anti-development fanatic who believes that anybody who doesn’t think like him on climate science is evil, mentally defective or a corporate shill?
Do they agree with his 2008 suggestion that apostate politicians should be put in jail? Do they go along with his admiration for totalitarian Cuba’s “sustainability?” Do they support child-scaring propaganda such as his recent Christmas campaign based on “saving” Santa’s North Pole workshop? Do they fail to register that he demonizes “corporate profits and interests?”
The Suzuki foundation’s robo-email concludes that “A democracy functions best when all points of view are considered rationally and carefully.” To be fair, Mr. Suzuki only wants to put those words in the mouths of others. He could never possibly say them himself. His pants would catch on fire.
The environmental movement has become thoroughly corrupt.
Lies and misinformation have become standard operating procedures.
Wednesday morning I first heard about David Suzuki’s latest sad attempt to exploit children.
David Suzuki fully fits into the definition of evil.
Anthony at Watts Up With That? has a thread on the topic.
One of the big problems endemic to the modern left is its penchant for malicious stupidity.
Naomi Klein is a classic example. Klein has written a manifesto for overhauling the world. A very sloppy manifesto.
Here is just one of the many whoppers from Klein’s sloppy manifesto-
The fact that the earth’s atmosphere cannot safely absorb the amount of carbon we are pumping into it is a symptom of a much larger crisis…
It’s rather well known that greenhouse growers pump more CO2 into the greenhouses to increase pant growth and yield.
The benefits of carbon dioxide supplementation on plant growth and production within the greenhouse environment have been well understood for many years.
Ambient CO2 level in outside air is about 340 ppm by volume.
All plants grow well at this level but as CO2 levels are raised by 1,000 ppm photosynthesis increases proportionately resulting in more sugars and carbohydrates available for plant growth.
Any actively growing crop in a tightly clad greenhouse with little or no ventilation can readily reduce the CO2 level during the day to as low as 200 ppm.
The decrease in photosynthesis when CO2 level drops from 340 ppm to 200 ppm is similar to the increase when the CO2 levels are raised from 340 to about 1,300 ppm
You have to get to 5000ppm to start having negative effects on humans.
Both James Delingpole and Jo Nova have taken Klein to the woodshed.
Here’s James Delingpole.
Er, Naomi. Here are some things you should know before you type out your next eco-fascistic horror rant.
1. That “97 per cent” figure: it’s kind of an urban myth.
2. The heat-trapping gas and fossil fuel theory: it’s at best moot, not least because the “feedbacks” – as you’d know if you’d bothered to do a scintilla of research – are still so ill-understood.
3. the “radically different energy path” bit: Says who? And on what evidence?
4. “a world of pain”. Right. And you’ll have done a cost benefit analysis here will you? You can show us that the freedom-destroying, economy-ruining totalitarianism you advocate will a) make the blindest bit of difference to global mean temperatures and b) cause less pain than a world where it’s ever so slightly warmer and where people are free to shop without jackbooted Canadian eco-activists stamping up and down shrieking: “Das ist Verboten!”?
And Jo Nova.
When Klein says people accept the science, she misses the detail that “the” science she refers too, is the permitted science advocated by government scientists, not the science discussed by independent scientists. Once again, it’s not about the evidence, it’s reduced to Government Scientist: Good; Independent Scientist: Bad.
Where’s the evidence that man-made emissions cause global warming? Only religious devotees think the answer starts and ends with “97% of our climate scientists say so”. That’s a logical fallacy, it’s only 75 scientists, and many of them will admit their models are flawed and the uncertainties are large. The consensus was fake from the start.
Klein thinks the answers to feeding the poor lies with “Big Government”, but rational thinkers know that more than anything, the fate of the poor depends on clear thinking, real evidence, and polite debate. None of which is on offer in this article.
Reading Klein is like visiting a parallel universe — her religious devotion to her ideology means nearly every sentence is the exact opposite of the truth. More’s the pity that The Nation has no editors who recognise innumerate drivel and an ideological rant based on a logical black hole.
Bad mannered bluster, blind assumptions, and religious rationalization have always been the tool of witchdoctors and con artists.
Naomi Klein: Nice writing, shame she can’t think.
The quote of the day comes from another thread at Judith Curry’s Climate Etc. blog.
The thread is “Sceptical about scepticism” and the commentator is Mike Keller.
At the risk of alienating everyone on this excellent forum, studying climate ad nausea and zealously deploying renewable energy are not particularly effective uses of time and money.
IMO, the actual problem is reasonably priced energy for the world’s population, not global warming. Further, renewable energy is not capable of making even a minor dent in global CO2 emissions and is in any case (from a practical engineering standpoint) a very poor solution to the alleged problem.
The emphasis should be on the efficient use and creation of energy. That leads to lower costs, thereby putting more money in consumer’s and industry’s pockets. That, in turn, causes increased economic activity, lifting living standards for all.
As a happy byproduct, the wise use of energy reduces CO2 much more effectively than high-priced, unneeded, less-than-helpful energy that more-or-less randomly self-dispatches itself into the electrical grid.
I suppose this sort of viewpoint would be classified by the IPCC crowd as skeptical and “denier”, but such an assessment is not really accurate.
IMO, CO2 is irrelevant with the “climate change industry” on the whole actually dangerous. Vast sums of money are being squandered, thereby severely complicating solving the real fatal problem: reasonably affordable supplies of energy for mankind.
On one hand, Al Gore wants us to believe there is a planetary crisis and that the future of civilization and humanity hangs in the balance.
On the other hand, Al Gore demands close to $145,000 for one speech at an University.
Lets be honest here dear reader, the manure/facts ratio of a speech by Al Gore will be heavily tilted towards manure.
That’s pretty good evidence that man-made global warming…aka, climate change is a fraud, a snake oil scam. But it does put lots of money into Al Gore’s pocket!
As I’ve said previously, Al Gore and David Suzuki are probably two of the biggest frauds on the planet right now.
By luck, I’ve just come across a fresh lecture from the mighty Suzuki.
Here are three excerpts from his lecture.
When I got involved with First Nations communities in remote areas, one of the first lessons I learned was about the importance of respect.
Without respect for each other, we don’t listen, and we fail to learn.
Instead, we try to engage in conversations set within the perspective of our values, beliefs, and ideas.
The importance of respect? Listening? Seriously?
Point out the flaws in Suzuki’s beliefs on Man-made Global Warming to take one example and the guy flips out.
There’s no shortage of first hand reports on what an a$$hole David Suzuki is.
Here’s the link to Suzuki’s recent smear against Dr. Willie Soon.
Here’s one reply to Suzuki’s smears against Dr. Soon.
David Suzuki has never met, debated or even spoken with my colleague, scientist Willie Soon. But as more people dismiss Mr. Suzuki’s scare stories about global-warming cataclysms, the more he has resorted to personal attacks against Mr. Soon and others who disagree with him.
Here’s what Jenn Carlson of Moncton learned last November about David Suzuki’s prowess at listening and respect.
I was hoping to ask him during the question period that normally follows these types of talks for advice on how to help me promote environmentalism to my group of largely apathetic students at Hampton High School, where I am the librarian.
Unfortunately, there was no question period. Directly following Dr. Suzuki’s speech, where he emphatically urged the audience to form strong interpersonal connections with their neighbours, family and local ecology, there was a book signing. I waited until the line was gone before I approached. I did not purchase any books, since I either have them at home, or have read them through our public library service. There was only one other man at the table, talking about a Prius, and he stopped and said he should go since I was waiting. Dr. Suzuki said it was alright since there was “no one there.”
I assumed since he was 75, perhaps his eyesight was poor and he did not see me. When the man left, I approached Dr. Suzuki.
He looked up and said, “book?” I said I didn’t have one but I wanted to ask him a question. He said, “I don’t have time for that,” and waved me away like a king dismissing a commoner.
There was absolutely no one else around the table except the security guards.
Then he shouted out, “Books! Books!” and continued waving me out of the way. There was no sign indicating no questions were allowed.
Only minutes before he had been espousing the value of slowing down and making time for each other and he didn’t even have the decency to say, “I’m sorry, I’m tired . . . or I’m not allowed to answer questions . . .”
Instead here I was, an educator and great promoter of his books, looking for help with the generation he claimed was most important, but because I was not spending money (other than the $45 I spent to hear him lecture), I was waved off.
I used to be proud to call Dr. Suzuki one of my heroes, and now I can see that he is a hypocrite.
Respect and listening….great ideas, David Suzuki needs to practice what he preaches.
The second excerpt-
I was impressed with my grandson’s response to his first birthday cake. He loved the novelty of the sweetness (his parents restrict his candy intake), but he only took three bites and was sated.
If only we were all able to control our appetites so well.
As a species, we have developed an insatiable hunger for stuff and the technological power and global economy to fulfill that consumptive demand.
I would be more impressed with this if David Suzuki restricted his own appetite to only owning one home. There’s nothing like lecturing people to make do with less while you keep giving yourself more.
And the third excerpt-
Now, the consequences – which I would never have dreamed possible when I was a boy – are apparent: The oceans that cover 71 per cent of Earth’s surface – the oceans that I was taught in high school were a “limitless source of protein” – are a mess, beset not only by overfishing, but dead zones bereft of oxygen, immense islands of plastic debris, and changing pH from carbon dioxide dissolving in the water.
I’m all in favour of paying more attention to the oceans. What’s been sucking up all the time, effort and money over the last twenty-five years?
How much time, money and effort has been spent over the last quarter centruty on the scam of man-made global warming instead of going towards genuine and more worthy efforts….say, the oceans?
The latest news of more experimental results supporting Henrik Svensmark and his theory on cloud creation is really bad news for scammers like David Suzuki and Al Gore.
The science is now all-but-settled on global warming, convincing new evidence demonstrates, but Al Gore, the IPCC and other global warming doomsayers won’t be celebrating. The new findings point to cosmic rays and the sun – not human activities – as the controller of climate on Earth.
Two interesting items from the Globe and Mail, one from Thursday and one from Friday.
An idea I heard about earlier in the summer was covered in Friday’s paper, reversing the flow of two Eastern pipelines to get Alberta crude moving further into Ontario, into Quebec and on to the Atlantic Coast at Portland, Maine.
Earlier this month, Enbridge filed for approval to partially reverse the flow of Line 9, a pipe that currently carries African and Middle Eastern crude from Montreal through southwestern Ontario to refineries around Sarnia, Ont.
The $16.9-million proposal, which could be built by next fall, would instead see western oil, which crosses the continent on other Enbridge pipes, reverse the flow on a roughly 200-kilometre section of pipe from Sarnia to Westover, an oil hub northwest of Hamilton.
From that hub, the crude could feed a United Refining Co. operation in Pennsylvania and the Imperial Oil Ltd. refinery at Nanticoke, Ont.
This could be expanded upon by reversing the flow of the one of the two pipelines on the Portland Montreal Pipe Line.
Doing so would also require flipping the direction of another pipe, the Portland Montreal Pipe Line, which currently transports crude from Maine to Quebec. Officials with Portland Montreal say they are in talks to do just that.
“We’re still very much interested in reversing the flow of one of our two pipelines to move Western Canadian crude to the eastern seaboard,” said company treasurer Dave Cyr. “We’re having discussions with Enbridge on their Line 9 and what it means to us.”
The $5.5-billion mega-pipe would bring up to 525,000 barrels per day of Canadian crude from Alberta’s oil sands to the West Coast for shipment to refineries in California and Asia.
The 1,172-kilometre line would be the first major non-U.S. export option for the Canadian energy industry,….