Environment

Sent by a subscriber

An amazing synopsis:

A friend shared this and if I knew the original writer, I would absolutely give them credit. Warning- it’s long, but pretty darn accurate. Thanks Jon Jon.

We could not have said this any better:

“If you can’t stand Trump, and cannot possibly fathom why anyone would ever vote for him, let me fill you in.

It’s not that we love Donald Trump so much. It’s that we can’t stand YOU!

And we will do whatever it takes — even if that means electing a rude, obnoxious, unpredictable, narcissist (your words not ours) to the office of President of the United States — because the thing we find more dangerous to this nation than Donald Trump is YOU.

How is that possible you might ask? Well, you have done everything in your power to destroy our country. From tearing down the police, to tearing down our history, to tearing down our borders.

From systematically destroying our schools and brainwashing our kids into believing socialism is the answer to anything (despite being an unmitigated failure everywhere), while demonizing religion and faith, and glorifying abortion, violence, and thug culture.

From calling us racists every time we expect everyone of any skin color to follow our laws equally to gaslighting us about 52 genders, polyamory, grown men in dresses sharing public locker rooms with little girls, and normalize the sexualization of young children, you simultaneously ridicule us for having the audacity to wish someone a “Merry Christmas” or hang a flag on the 4th of July, stand for the national anthem, or (horror of horrors) don a MAGA hat in public.

So much for your “tolerance.” Do you see why we think you are hypocrites?

We’re also not interested in the fact that you think you can unilaterally decide that 250 years of the right-to-bear-arms against a tyrannical or ineffective government should be abolished because you can’t get the violence in the cities you manage under control. That free-speech should be tossed out the window, and that those who disagree with your opinions are fair game for public harassment or doxing. That spoiled children with nose-rings and tats who still live off their parent’s dime should be allowed to destroy cities and peoples’ livelihoods without repercussions.

That chaos, and lawlessness, and disrespect for authority should be the norm. This is your agenda. And you wonder why we find you more dangerous than Donald Trump?

Your narrative is a constant drone of oppressor/oppressed race-baiting intended to divide the country in as many ways as you possibly can. You love to sell “victim-hood” to people of color every chance you get because it’s such an easy sell, compared to actually teaching people to stand on their own two feet and take personal responsibility for their own lives and their own communities and their own futures. But you won’t do that, you will never do that, because then you will lose control over people of color. They might actually start thinking for themselves, God forbid!

This is why we will vote for Donald Trump.

Not because he is the most charming character on the block.

Not because he is the most polite politician to have ever graced the oval office.

Not because he is the most palatable choice, or because we love his moral character or because the man never lies, but because we are sick to death of you and all of the destructive crap you are doing to this once beautiful and relatively safe country.

Your ineffective and completely dysfunctional liberal “leadership”(?) has literally destroyed our most beautiful cities, our public education system, and done it’s damndest to rip faith out of people’s lives.

However bad Donald Trump may be, and he is far from perfect, every day we look at you and feel that no matter what Donald Trump says or does there is no possible way he could be any worse for our country than you people are.

We are sick to death of your stupid, destructive, ignorant, and intolerant behavior and beliefs — parading as “wokeness.” We are beyond sick of your hypocrisy and B.S.

We are fed up with your disrespectful divisiveness and constant unrelenting harping and whining and complaining (while you live in the most privileged nation in the world), while making literally zero contributions of anything positive to our society.

Your entire focus is on ripping things down, never ever building anything up. Think about that as there is something fundamentally very wrong in the psychology of people who choose destruction as their primary modus operandi.

When Donald J Trump is reelected, don’t blame us, look in the mirror and blame yourselves. Because you are the ones that are responsible for the rise of Donald Trump. You are the ones who have created this “monster” that you so despise, by your very actions. By your refusal to respect your fellow Americans, and the things that are important to us.

You have made fun of the “fly-over states,” the people who “cling to their guns and religion,” the middle class factory workers and coal miners and underprivileged rural populations that you dismissively call “yahoos” and “deplorables.”

You have mocked our faith and our religion.

You have mocked our values and our patriotism.

You have trampled our flag and insulted our veterans and treated our first responders with contempt and hatred.

You have made environmentalism your religion, while trashing every city you have taken responsibility for.

You scream from the rooftops about “global warming” and a “green new deal” while allowing tens of thousands of homeless people to cover your streets in literal sh!t and garbage and needles and plastic waste without doing a single thing to help them or solve the environmental crisis your failed social policies are creating.

But we’re supposed to put YOU in charge of the environment while gutting our entire economy to institute this plan when you can’t even clean up a single city??

You complain — endlessly — yet have failed to solve a single social problem anywhere. In fact, all you have done is create more of them.

We’ve had enough. We are tired of quietly sitting by and being the “silent” majority. So don’t be surprised when the day comes when we finally respond. And trust me it’s coming, sooner than you might think. And also trust me when I say it won’t be pretty. Get ready.

When Donald Trump is reelected it will be because you and your “comrades” have chosen to trash the police, harass law-abiding citizens, and go on rampages destroying public property that we have all paid for and you have zero respect for.

When Donald Trump is reelected it will be because we are sick of your complete and utter nonsense and destruction. How does it feel to know that half of this country finds you FAR more despicable than Donald J. Trump, the man you consider to be the anti-Christ? Let that sink in.

We consider you to be more despicable, more dangerous, more stupid, and more narcissistic than Donald Trump. Maybe allow yourself a few seconds of self-reflection to let that sink in. This election isn’t about Donald Trump vs. Joe Biden. This is about Donald Trump vs YOU.

So if on the morning of November 4 (or more likely January 19, by the time the Supreme Court will weigh in on the mail-in ballot fiasco that we are headed towards), and Donald J. Trump is reelected?

The only people you have to blame is the left-wing media drones and yourselves. You did this. Yep you.”

Scientific American endorses Biden – first time in 175 years

Wow. Scientific American has endorsed Joe Biden. This is the first time the magazine has backed a presidential candidate in 175 years. We think it may live to regret its move. The magazine has merely exposed the deep partisan bias and confirmed again how much of scientific academia and media leans left. Why?

The editors closed with,

It’s time to move Trump out and elect Biden, who has a record of following the data and being guided by science.”

If we listened to Joe Biden’s ‘Moses and the 10 Commandments’ speech the other day, it was full of unsubstantiated hyperbole about the risks of higher incidences of floods, hurricanes and wildfires if Trump is reelected despite the fact that under the current administration, harmful GHG emissions have fallen by the largest absolute number ever in 2019 according to the IEA.

For a magazine that rests its laurels on “following the data” and “being guided by the science”, perhaps it missed the UNIPCC’s March 2018 report on weather extremes (with respect to anthropogenic induced global warming) which noted:

…There is low confidence in observed trends in small-scale phenomena such as tornadoes and hail because of data inhomogeneities and inadequacies in monitoring systems…in some regions droughts have become less frequent, less intense, or shorter, for example, in central North America and northwestern Australia. There is limited to medium evidence available to assess climate-driven observed changes in the magnitude and frequency of floods…low confidence for the attribution of any detectable changes in tropical cyclone activity to anthropogenic influences..low confidence in projections of changes in extreme winds.. low confidence in projections of changes in monsoons…low confidence in wave height projections…overall low confidence because of inconsistent projections of drought changes…low confidence in projected future changes in dust storms…low confidence in projections of an anthropogenic effect on phenomena such as shallow landslides.

Perhaps the editors missed the questionnaire posted by the UN Interacademy Council committee on its website which invited interested parties to respond to the scientific processes at the IPCC during the compilation of the gold standard climate bibles? These were some of the responses;

some of the lead authors…are clearly not qualified to be lead authors.” (p.16)

There are far too many politically correct appointments, so that developing country scientists are appointed who have insufficient scientific competence to do anything useful. This is reasonable if it is regarded as a learning experience, but in my chapter…we had half of the [lead authors] who were not competent.” (p. 138)

The whole process…[is] flawed by an excessive concern for geographical balance. All decisions are political before being scientific.” (p. 554)

half of the authors are there for simply representing different parts of the world.” (p. 296)

Lest anyone think that people from less affluent countries were being unjustly stereotyped,

The team members from the developing countries (including myself) were made to feel welcome and accepted as part of the team. In reality, we were out of our intellectual depth as meaningful contributors to the process.” (p.330)

The founders of Scientific American must be rolling over in their graves. If their scientific rigour is as sound as their endorsement then Trump has even more chances to secure reelection.

This should be seen as a rejection of Trump not an endorsement for Biden.

Joe Biden vs Moses – can you spot the difference?

Can you spot the difference? Here is Joe Biden’s version.

The irony is that America, despite not being a signatory of the Paris Climate Accord, has recorded the largest falls in GHG emissions of any nation on an absolute basis ever under Trump. The IEA reported,

The United States saw the largest decline in energy-related CO2 emissions in 2019 on a country basis – a fall of 140 Mt, or 2.9%, to 4.8 Gt.

So best pay no mind to Joe Biden’s teleprompter!

Statistical skidmarks at Sturgis

Thousands of bikers rode through the streets for the opening day of the 80th annual Sturgis Motorcycle rally Friday, Aug. 7, 2020, in Sturgis, S.D. (AP Photo/Stephen Groves)

There are lies, more lies and then there are statistics. When the COVID-19 autopsy is finally published we will know that had credible biopsies been conducted, such ineptitude would never have led to the disastrous outcomes and misinformation we have faced today. The media have been willing accomplices, taking a morbid fascination with daily reporting to help arrest falling ad revenues and relevance.

It is worth pondering the slew of dud predictions made to date by so many activist medical academic bodies across the globe. These forecasts have been the very opinions by which so many poor policies have been forged by local, state and national governments. Even worse, these healthcare hacks have faced absolutely no accountability for those wildly inaccurate advisories.

Australian senior medical experts told the government the country risked 5,000,000 infections and a best case scenario of 50,000 deaths. The actual figures are 26,465 and 781 respectively. Consequences? Zero.

It is hard not to think of the actions of these whackademics as akin to the climate science cult which has portended doom for the longest time. How timely that the Dr Tedros, of the completely discredited World Health Organization, said, “In particular, the Covid-19 pandemic has given new impetus to the need to accelerate efforts to respond to climate change.” To think if we had eradicated fossil fuels that the pandemic wouldn’t have been worse than a spot of hay fever?

Speaking of fossil fuels, it is a perfect segue into the carbon criminals who attended Sturgis, South Dakota (SD) last month.

A recent report published by the Institute of Labor Economics (ILE) – which to the best of our knowledge is not in the healthcare sector – suggests that the 10-day Sturgis motorcycle rally during August 2020 was a super-spreader event leading to 260,000 infections, or 19% of the nation’s total during that period.

Medical experts warned that SD would have 10,000 COVID-19 patients in hospitals because the state refused to lock down but it never exceeded 100 at the peak. SD has some of the lowest rates in absolute and relative terms. Governor Kristi Noem made a point to allow residents to exercise common sense and keep operating. What a surprise it is now the best performing state in the US. No wonder the media hates its narrative busting success.

The mainstream media wasted no time to heap scorn on 480,000 irresponsible two-wheeled outlaws who have now apparently burdened the taxpayer with another $12.2bn in unnecessary health costs. Even if that number was accurate, we shudder to think of the $ trillions in economic damages caused by largely Democrat-controlled states and cities which have forced their minions into lockdown. Never mind that the political elites – who exert control over them – have brazenly violated many of the rules they issue dire warnings over. We wrote about that here.

Then these doomsayers wonder why events like Sturgis happen? Could it be that people are growing tired of the hypocrisy and see right through the “rules for thee, but not for me” double standards.

Naturally journalists went into overdrive saying that SD had the highest spike in the rate of coronavirus cases in the nation after Sturgis. That was partly true. Note that is the “growth rate”, not the “absolute” number.

What many statisticians fail to account for is the law of incredibly low numbers to begin with in SD.

Note the relatively unchanged trajectory of deaths from COVID-19 (below), which the CDC admits is directly responsible for only 6% of the total. 94% are caused by co-morbidities.

Neighbouring Iowa and North Dakota were also pointed to as states which were affected by these renegades. Death rates have not moved much, if at all.

The divergent trends of coronavirus cases and deaths is an increasingly global phenomenon. Lockdown or no lockdown, better approaches to hygiene and more precautions taken by age groups more susceptible to the virus are no doubt a factor.

Yet governments are still ignoring hard evidence and blindly following inept medical advice in order to hold onto these new found powers so they can preach how virtuous they are to save a handful of lives but destroy 1,000s upon 1,000s of livelihoods. It is shameless and we hope voters punish them at the ballot box.

In closing, these two charts on SD more accurately reflect the media and medical activists. Infections marking the level of amplified hysteria and death rates depicting the lack of trust we should place in these institutions.

NY Times plunges new lows – if that was possible

What a disgrace. NY Times journalist Murray Carpenter and photographer Tristan Spinsky want to run a story which publicizes Fox presenter Tucker Carlson’s home address to get him off the air. Imagine if Tucker Carlson reported where NY Times editors and journalists lived? We would never hear the end of it.

No matter how abhorrent NYT might find Carlson’s politics to be, his family should be totally off-limits. We thought that Bari Weiss’ resignation letter was the peak of the disgraceful antics at the NYT.

This is criminal, sinister and a perfect example of how reprehensible the one reputable paper has become. Instead of crushing Carlson’s arguments with facts and logic, they want to cancel him. Tells us all we need to know.

Segregated in Seattle

This is truly sick. How much more of this racial segregation malarkey can Americans tolerate? What are we on about?

The City of Seattle’s Office of Civil Rights sent an email last month inviting “white City employees” to attend a training session on “Interrupting Internalized Racial Superiority and Whiteness.

Christopher Rufo wrote an article in the City Journal after he received the training pack under a freedom of information request. His piece can be found here.

Rufo notes, “trainers explain that white people have internalized a sense of racial superiority, which has made them unable to access their “humanity” and caused “harm and violence” to people of color.

Once the diversity trainers have established this basic conceptual framework, they encourage white employees to “practice self-talk that affirms [their] complicity in racism” and work on “undoing [their] own whiteness.” As part of this process, white employees must abandon their “white normative behavior” and learn to let go of their “comfort,” “physical safety,” “social status,” and “relationships with some other white people.”

This insanity is off the charts. We’re surprised rats in face cages aren’t part of the process.

It isn’t the first time this type of brainwashing has hit Seattle. Starbucks also indulged in this Marxist rubbish two years ago after a store called the police on two non paying customers who refused to leave that just happened to be people of colour.

We wrote,

Starbucks closed 8,000 stores on Tuesday and reached out to activists and bias training experts to put a curriculum together for its 175,000 workers to prevent “unconscious bias

…While training staff is never a bad thing, do the human resources/ PR department at Starbucks honestly think that explicitly educating white people about their racism (if it truly exists on any scale to warrant the conscious bias based indoctrination) will do anything other than alienate more customers? What a smear on the majority of clientele and staff who no doubt exercise decency when transacting their skim milk doubleshot latte.”

These diversity trainers are absolutely the last people qualified to dictate to others about society.

Note Seattle has been Democrat for the last 30 years. Mayor Jenny Durkan was the one who called CHAZ a “summer of loveuntil it threatened her $7m mansion.

Liberal artists cave to the cancel culture days after co-signing a letter condemning it

Image

Remember those brave maverick left-leaning artists who co-signed JK Rowling’s letter to decry the cancel culture we wrote about yesterday?

Several days later, several have withdrawn their support after surrendering to the threat of being cancelled themselves.

Author Jennifer Finney Boylan tweeted, “I did not know who else had signed that letter…I thought I was endorsing a well-meaning, if vague, message against internet shaming. I did know Chomsky, Steinem, and Atwood were in, and I thought, good company.

Historian Kerri Greenidge also tweeted, “I do not endorse this @Harpers letter. I am in contact with Harpers about a retraction.

So let us get this right. The very people who co-signed a letter highlighting the anxiety of cancel culture over the anxiety that they might be cancelled for being anxious about cancel culture due to guilt-by-association just proved the point way better than JK Rowling’s letter ever could.

So much for free speech. Cancel culture is alive and well.

Keeping up with the Obamas

Former Australian PM Kevin Rudd once said that climate change was “the great moral challenge of our generation.” He also wrote in an essay in 2019 that “neighbouring island states are facing the future disappearance of their countries altogether through coastal inundation.”

The Rudds have just bought a $17m beachfront house in Noosa.

They must have taken notes from the Obamas who bought a $15m waterfront property in Martha’s Vineyard.

Why is Mother Nature so generous to left-wing former heads of state?

Thanks SF for the flag.

Sydney Lord Mayor thinks we’re stupid

Lord Mayor Clover Moore proudly tweeted the City of Sydney went 100% renewable energy.

Shame 87.3% of the state’s electricity came from coal on the day of that announcement. Or is that how it works? Calculate the total energy consumed in Sydney and claim that any renewable energy across the state of NSW was hers?

Forbes deletes climate alarmism apology

forbes

Below is the article Forbes published then deleted. One imagines it must be hold a certain amount of truth.

Perhaps the climate alarmists – so annoyed at having their platform hijacked by COVID19 and systemic racism – used their collective idle resources to mobilize and gang up on Forbes with all manner of threats. Cancel Climate Culture?

Here is what was deleted

——–

On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.

I may seem like a strange person to be saying all of this. I have been a climate activist for 20 years and an environmentalist for 30.

But as an energy expert asked by Congress to provide objective expert testimony, and invited by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to serve as Expert Reviewer of its next Assessment Report, I feel an obligation to apologize for how badly we environmentalists have misled the public.

Here are some facts few people know:

Humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction”

The Amazon is not “the lungs of the world”

Climate change is not making natural disasters worse

Fires have declined 25% around the world since 2003

The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska

The build-up of wood fuel and more houses near forests, not climate change, explain why there are more, and more dangerous, fires in Australia and California

Carbon emissions are declining in most rich nations and have been declining in Britain, Germany, and France since the mid-1970s

Adapting to life below sea level made the Netherlands rich not poor

We produce 25% more food than we need and food surpluses will continue to rise as the world gets hotter

Habitat loss and the direct killing of wild animals are bigger threats to species than climate change

Wood fuel is far worse for people and wildlife than fossil fuels

Preventing future pandemics requires more not less “industrial” agriculture

I know that the above facts will sound like “climate denialism” to many people. But that just shows the power of climate alarmism.

In reality, the above facts come from the best-available scientific studies, including those conducted by or accepted by the IPCC, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and other leading scientific bodies.

Some people will, when they read this imagine that I’m some right-wing anti-environmentalist. I’m not. At 17, I lived in Nicaragua to show solidarity with the Sandinista socialist revolution. At 23 I raised money for Guatemalan women’s cooperatives. In my early 20s I lived in the semi-Amazon doing research with small farmers fighting land invasions. At 26 I helped expose poor conditions at Nike factories in Asia.

I became an environmentalist at 16 when I threw a fundraiser for Rainforest Action Network. At 27 I helped save the last unprotected ancient redwoods in California. In my 30s I advocated renewables and successfully helped persuade the Obama administration to invest $90 billion into them. Over the last few years I helped save enough nuclear plants from being replaced by fossil fuels to prevent a sharp increase in emissions

But until last year, I mostly avoided speaking out against the climate scare. Partly that’s because I was embarrassed. After all, I am as guilty of alarmism as any other environmentalist. For years, I referred to climate change as an “existential” threat to human civilization, and called it a “crisis.”

But mostly I was scared. I remained quiet about the climate disinformation campaign because I was afraid of losing friends and funding. The few times I summoned the courage to defend climate science from those who misrepresent it I suffered harsh consequences. And so I mostly stood by and did next to nothing as my fellow environmentalists terrified the public.

I even stood by as people in the White House and many in the news media tried to destroy the reputation and career of an outstanding scientist, good man, and friend of mine, Roger Pielke, Jr., a lifelong progressive Democrat and environmentalist who testified in favor of carbon regulations. Why did they do that? Because his research proves natural disasters aren’t getting worse.

But then, last year, things spiraled out of control.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said “The world is going to end in twelve years if we don’t address climate change.” Britain’s most high-profile environmental group claimed “Climate Change Kills Children.”

The world’s most influential green journalist, Bill McKibben, called climate change the “greatest challenge humans have ever faced” and said it would “wipe out civilizations.”

Mainstream journalists reported, repeatedly, that the Amazon was “the lungs of the world,” and that deforestation was like a nuclear bomb going off.

As a result, half of the people surveyed around the world last year said they thought climate change would make humanity extinct. And in January, one out of five British children told pollsters they were having nightmares about climate change.

Whether or not you have children you must see how wrong this is. I admit I may be sensitive because I have a teenage daughter. After we talked about the science she was reassured. But her friends are deeply misinformed and thus, understandably, frightened.

I thus decided I had to speak out. I knew that writing a few articles wouldn’t be enough. I needed a book to properly lay out all of the evidence.

And so my formal apology for our fear-mongering comes in the form of my new book, Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All.

It is based on two decades of research and three decades of environmental activism. At 400 pages, with 100 of them endnotes, Apocalypse Never covers climate change, deforestation, plastic waste, species extinction, industrialization, meat, nuclear energy, and renewables.

Some highlights from the book:

Factories and modern farming are the keys to human liberation and environmental progress

The most important thing for saving the environment is producing more food, particularly meat, on less land

The most important thing for reducing air pollution and carbon emissions is moving from wood to coal to petroleum to natural gas to uranium

100% renewables would require increasing the land used for energy from today’s 0.5% to 50%

We should want cities, farms, and power plants to have higher, not lower, power densities

Vegetarianism reduces one’s emissions by less than 4%

Greenpeace didn’t save the whales, switching from whale oil to petroleum and palm oil did

“Free-range” beef would require 20 times more land and produce 300% more emissions

Greenpeace dogmatism worsened forest fragmentation of the Amazon

The colonialist approach to gorilla conservation in the Congo produced a backlash that may have resulted in the killing of 250 elephants

Why were we all so misled?

In the final three chapters of Apocalypse Never I expose the financial, political, and ideological motivations. Environmental groups have accepted hundreds of millions of dollars from fossil fuel interests. Groups motivated by anti-humanist beliefs forced the World Bank to stop trying to end poverty and instead make poverty “sustainable.” And status anxiety, depression, and hostility to modern civilization are behind much of the alarmism

Once you realize just how badly misinformed we have been, often by people with plainly unsavory or unhealthy motivations, it is hard not to feel duped.

Will Apocalypse Never make any difference? There are certainly reasons to doubt it.

The news media have been making apocalyptic pronouncements about climate change since the late 1980s, and do not seem disposed to stop.

The ideology behind environmental alarmsim — Malthusianism — has been repeatedly debunked for 200 years and yet is more powerful than ever.

But there are also reasons to believe that environmental alarmism will, if not come to an end, have diminishing cultural power.

The coronavirus pandemic is an actual crisis that puts the climate “crisis” into perspective. Even if you think we have overreacted, Covid-19 has killed nearly 500,000 people and shattered economies around the globe.

Scientific institutions including WHO and IPCC have undermined their credibility through the repeated politicization of science. Their future existence and relevance depends on new leadership and serious reform.

Facts still matter, and social media is allowing for a wider range of new and independent voices to outcompete alarmist environmental journalists at legacy publications.

Nations are reverting openly to self-interest and away from Malthusianism and neoliberalism, which is good for nuclear and bad for renewables.

The evidence is overwhelming that our high-energy civilization is better for people and nature than the low-energy civilization that climate alarmists would return us to.

The invitations from IPCC and Congress are signs of a growing openness to new thinking about climate change and the environment. Another one has been to the response to my book from climate scientists, conservationists, and environmental scholars. “Apocalypse Never is an extremely important book,” writes Richard Rhodes, the Pulitzer-winning author of The Making of the Atomic Bomb. “This may be the most important book on the environment ever written,” says one of the fathers of modern climate science Tom Wigley.

“We environmentalists condemn those with antithetical views of being ignorant of science and susceptible to confirmation bias,” wrote the former head of The Nature Conservancy, Steve McCormick. “But too often we are guilty of the same. Shellenberger offers ‘tough love:’ a challenge to entrenched orthodoxies and rigid, self-defeating mindsets. Apocalypse Never serves up occasionally stinging, but always well-crafted, evidence-based points of view that will help develop the ‘mental muscle’ we need to envision and design not only a hopeful, but an attainable, future.”

That is all I hoped for in writing it. If you’ve made it this far, I hope you’ll agree that it’s perhaps not as strange as it seems that a lifelong environmentalist, progressive, and climate activist felt the need to speak out against the alarmism.

I further hope that you’ll accept my apology.