#climatescam

Identifying misinformation without facts

You have to hand it to government funded media networks. Just like Australia’s ABC, America’s NPR will peddle its belief system and tell you what is misinformation and what is not.

Here are some of the responses to an NPR poll listed under “incorrect statements”:

“Humans do not play a significant role in climate change

It scored a 69% false rating. Does NPR have facts to support that misinformation?

Have they read the amount of climb downs made by the UN IPCC with respect to have very low confidence that extreme climate events are in any way linked to global warming? Obviously not. The 2018 study compiled by the IPCC just reinforced the findings of the 2013 paper by an even greater degree.

Or the hilarious article in a climate alarmist newspaper that pointed to putting faith in the very investment bankers who they wanted burnt at the stake in 2008. As long as they sing the correct tune in their endeavors of crony capitalism.

Or perhaps the EU Parliament commitment to a climate emergency bill which voted on the following proposed amendment 95 (for), 563 (against), 9 (abstain) by MEPs:

Recalls that climate change is one of the many challenges facing humanity and that
all states and stakeholders worldwide must do their utmost to measure it
scientifically so that policy, and especially spending, is based on observable facts and not on apocalyptic fearmongering or unreliable models; emphasises that there is no scientific consensus on what percentage of climate change is anthropogenic and
what percentage is natural

Wouldn’t want pesky facts to get in the way of doubling commitments to the green climate fund. Openly vote to show evidence is irrelevant.

Of the 1,115 people polled to give a true/false answer on the statement “a group of Satan-worshipping elites who run a child sex ring are trying to control our politics and media” it returned a false rating of 47%.

Perhaps the 53% that returned a true/unsure vote merely thought elements of the statement were true. After all it wouldn’t be a stretch to suggest that elites are trying to control politics and media in a coronavirus lockdown world. Just look at the politicians breaking the very rules we must abide by. If we step out of our homes we risk instant infection from a disease with a 99.9% recovery rate.

With an ever complicit social and mainstream media peddling fear and checking their own facts by shutting down alternative viewpoints (aka free speech), what is so hard to fathom?

Presumably aliens on Venus burnt too much coal

Just when you thought the world’s biggest collection of elitist hypocrites (World Economic Forum) – who fly everywhere on private jets demanding soccer mums refrain from driving the kids to soccer practice in their 2nd hand SUVs – could get any more sycophantic, think again. Apparently climate change ruined Venus.

The WEF believes that Venus has a lot of lessons for earth.

We can learn a lot about climate change from Venus, our sister planet. Venus currently has a surface temperature of 450℃ (the temperature of an oven’s self-cleaning cycle) and an atmosphere dominated by carbon dioxide (96 per cent) with a density 90 times that of Earth’s….Less than one billion years ago, the climate dramatically changed due to a runaway greenhouse effect.

Those damned aliens should have stopped using baseload coal-fired power, moved from internal combustion engines and consumed coffee out of keep cups!

Perhaps we’ll know in a billion years whether the Paris Climate Accord was worth it. Given CO2 is only 0.04% of our atmosphere, it might take some time to get it to the 96% on Venus. It may shorten if we allow too much hot air to escape the conferences held by the WEF.

Surprised they didn’t mention COVID-19’s impact on the inhabitants of Venus.

Can someone point to which department will head climate change policy?

We are getting confused. It seems that a growing number of government agencies are pushing a climate change agenda, an extension of a remit that is well outside its scope of expertise.

Never mind. The US Federal Reserve is the latest group to announce it is throwing its hat in the ring on climate policy. Perhaps the board of governors felt left out that former Fed chair Janet Yellen was promising to stem the climate emergency via the Treasury. Best keep up.

Never mind that 35% of all M1 money supply has been printed in the last 10 months. It would be one thing if the Fed had a track record to boast about. Sadly, it has such poor predictive powers that getting the core business right maybe a more prudent strategy. God help us if inflation ever hits us. Read Jonathan Rochford’s piece on too much cash here.

The problem with central banks is that they continue to use the only tool they possess – a hammer – which would be great if every problem they encountered was actually a nail.

We aren’t alone. The Reserve Bank of Australia has also joined this climate alarmist bandwagon. Even worse the speech based its assertions on the prophecies of the IPCC and BOM, two of many organizations which have been caught red handed manipulating climate data.

Instead of coordinating monetary policy which has fed a housing bubble of almost 1980s Japan levels in terms of price:income with banks 50% more levered to mortgages on average than Japan’s financial institutions were at the point of collapse.

APRA and ASIC have also told us they plan to get stricter on climate change reporting by corporates even though their own data over the last decade shows the opposite. In order to get the results they want, they plan to legislate to enforce it. That should tell us much.

Forgive us for being cynical, but we all know that government agencies must submit their budgets each year. What better way to get a healthy shot in the arm than add a climate change agenda to it in order to squeeze $10s or $100s of millions in extra funding. Forget if the agency has absolutely zero relation to climate change like the DOJ. Just tick that box and then hire a bunch of activists to write puff pieces warning us of the grave dangers of a future crime wave if we don’t stop rising sea levels as opposed to defunding the police.

What an absolute farce. What tends to happen is that extra funding often finds its way to line the pockets of those who work within these agencies, especially at the senior levels. Note what happened to our own fire services in Australia who rarely spoke about climate change but got masses of funding which didn’t go to replenishing equipment but salary increases.

We guess the 2020 annual reports will be ALL about the impacts of climate change when it was hardly ever mentioned over the previous decade when it should have mattered.

Just watch department and agency around the world line up one after another at the climate change teat. That tells all we need to know. A bunch of amateurs doing what they do best – behaving as professional politicians.

It’s for our own good, you know! Shut up already.

Fukushima offshore wind farms to be dismantled

From The Japan Times:

The government said Thursday it will remove the two remaining wind power turbines it installed off Fukushima Prefecture citing lack of profit in the project, which cost ¥60 billion ($580 million).

The project was widely seen as a symbol of the reconstruction of the northeastern prefecture following the 2011 earthquake, tsunami and nuclear disasters.

The decision came despite Japan’s goal of raising its offshore wind power generation to up to 45 gigawatts in 2040 from a mere 20,000 kilowatts at present as part of efforts to fight climate change. Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga has pledged to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.

At a meeting in Fukushima, industry ministry officials briefed fishermen and other participants about the plan, with local people saying the government had wasted taxpayers’ money and should conduct a thorough study of why the project had failed.

In June, the government removed one of the three turbines installed 20 kilometers off the town of Naraha. It has decided to remove the remaining two in the fiscal year starting April.

The three turbines were constructed in stages from 2012 to support the local economy by creating a new industry based on renewable energy.

To commercialize wind power generation, the operational rate of a turbine must remain at 30% to 35% or more, according to the ministry.

But the rates of the turbines off Fukushima had been around 4% to 36%, according to trading house Marubeni Corp., which participated in the project.”

Germany also gave us a wonderful case study on how its renewables based energy system has backfired spectacularly. 

In 2007, Germany forecasted that 2020 residential electricity prices would be approximately 16 Eurocents with the shift to renewables away from nuclear. Today they trade at c.31 Eurocents. Der Spiegel, a normally left-leaning journal wrote in a two-part series. 

Part 1 – Germany Failure on the Road to a Renewable Future

“But the sweeping idea has become bogged down in the details of German reality. The so-called Energiewende, the shift away from nuclear in favour of renewables, the greatest political project undertaken here since Germany’s reunification, is facing failure. In the eight years since Fukushima, none of Germany’s leaders in Berlin have fully thrown themselves into the project, not least the chancellor. Lawmakers have introduced laws, decrees and guidelines, but there is nobody to coordinate the Energiewende, much less speed it up. And all of them are terrified of resistance from the voters, whenever a wind turbine needs to be erected or a new high-voltage transmission line needs to be laid out.”

Germany’s Federal Court of Auditors is even more forthright about the failures. The shift to renewables, the federal auditors say, has cost at least 160 billion euros in the last five years. Meanwhile, the expenditures “are in extreme disproportion to the results, Federal Court of Auditors President Kay Scheller said last fall, although his assessment went largely unheard in the political arena. Scheller is even concerned that voters could soon lose all faith in the government because of this massive failure.

But never let that get in the way of feeling good about saving the planet.

AOC channels The Last Emperor

Few things come closer to the recent comments made by Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) -who thinks that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (80) and Senator Chuck Schumer (70) need to step aside for the harder left faction of the party – than this clip from The Last Emperor.

While we agree with AOC that both are past their prime purely on their ridiculous policy positions, at the very least Pelosi has regularly kept AOC away from any bodies of influence given her even more radical views. Recall Pelosi referred to AOC’s Green New Deal as a “green dream.”

Still, the Trojan horse in Biden will make way for Harris at some stage and so will begin the cultural revolution within the Democrat Party.

We just thought AOC wanted to publicly blacklist Republicans. Now even her own elders are ripe for ridicule.

Swedish truant slaps the high priestess of woke

The beauty of being young is that any manner of words can come out of the mouth and be automatically assumed to be fact or truth. Anyone with teenagers knows this.

How sorry we feel for the high priestess of woke, NZ PM Jacinda Ardern, to be chastised by the infamous Swedish teenage truant for not doing enough on climate change. We should prepare ourselves in the future for Greta Thunberg as UN Secretary General because she is gifted in the ways of admonishing those that stray from the preordained orthodoxy.

Now that COVID19 is almost behind us and Joe Biden has officially been nominated president-elect by the electoral college we should expect to see the coronavirus restrictions/cases to disappear and climate change to regain its rightful place at the top of the liberal agenda.

We’ve always held the Paris Accord as an absolute joke. Self-declared developing nation, China, as the world’s biggest polluter by a minimum factor of two, is free to increase emissions out to 2030 while the rest of the developed world must self-flagellate. No matter what strides are made by nations on emissions abatement, it is never enough. Thank God we have all those elites who fly by private jet to global summits to tell mothers who drive their kids to soccer practice in second hand SUVs will burn in hell if they don’t quit their selfish behavior.

No doubt Greta will praise China’s net zero emissions commitment by 2060 as she’ll probably be one of the few that will be around to validate the promise.

Now that peons around the world have proved their obedience during lockdowns, ramming the global warming agenda should be a piece of cake. Maybe those who rationally want to see fair minded cost benefit analysis of going 100% renewable will risk being arrested by the apparatchiks and charged with hate crimes, as has previously been promote by the more radical climate alarmists.

Before they do that, we always have green pioneer Germany to guide us with the massive costs of decommissioning wind farms that have outlived subsidies. None of it factored into the modeling but you aren’t allowed to question this additional burden.

Rest assured global central banks have extended their expertise from monetary policy to saving the planet. We are in safe hands. Treasury Secretary-elect Janet Yellen has told us as much. After all, she claimed as Fed Chair that we’d never see another depression in our lifetime. Hmm.

Now that we are presented with negative sovereign yields for Portuguese, Italian or Greek debt despite the fact much of it will never be repaid, we know these geniuses have got Frankenstein under control. Just trust them, the media and ignore our thoughts. It’s above our pay grade and intelligence. So shhhhh. We’re in safe hands. School skipping teenagers know best.

The Red Face

Adam Anderson, CEO of Innovex, an oil & gas company, wanted to get his staff The North Face (TNF) down jackets with the company logo emblazoned on it for Christmas.

Unfortunately, the apparel maker rejected the request on the basis that fossil fuel companies, like Innovex, didn’t reflect TNF’s core values – the same standard it applies to porn and tobacco companies.

So Anderson returned fire in a 4 page letter here:

“The recreational activities they encourage are all ones that require hydrocarbons to make the products, to provide the means to get to whatever activity folks want to perform…It’s just so intertwined with everything that we do…

…The irony in this statement is your jackets are made from the oil and gas products the hardworking men and women of our industry produce. I think this stance by your company is counterproductive virtue signaling, and I would appreciate you re-considering this stance. We should be celebrating the benefits of what oil and gas do to enable the outdoors lifestyle your brands embrace. Without Oil and Gas there would be no market for nor ability to create the products your company sells…

…“Low-cost, reliable energy is critical to enable humans to flourish. Oil and natural gas are the two primary resources humanity can use to create low-cost and reliable energy. The work of my company and our industry more broadly enables humans to have a quality of life and life expectancy that were unfathomable only a century ago.”

The ultimate irony with all this woke corporate virtue signaling is that these social justice warriors often get shown up for a complete lack of understanding about the very subject the publicly protest about.

We met a staffer from an Aussie bank the other week who proudly boasted it was stopping lending to companies that haven’t committed to reduce emissions by a certain amount. The argument was that shareholders are demanding it. We retorted that a small select number of activist industry funds who often don’t meet the very requirements they try to enforce on others, are trying to promote the sale of SRI/ESG funds because of the higher fees they can get by appealing to investors who think they’re making a difference when in reality they aren’t.

We did a more conclusive study during a business school lecture. Three funds with three different results were presented in a chart over 10 years. The students didn’t know which fund was what but all selected the one with the highest returns. Naturally.

Before the different funds were revealed we asked whether people would invest in a socially responsible investment fund to feel better about themselves? When it was revealed the SRI fund had the worst performance and the best performing fund rejected such virtue signaling, all still wanted the highest return in retirement. Who knew?

If we believed the science 50 years ago

50 years ago we were told to prepare for an ice age. Now we’re told to prepare for rising global temps. Believe the science or the activists?

We always like to refer people to the UN’s own survey on itself as to the (lack of) robustness in the scientific process in the very climate bibles we are told are the gold standard. Note, the contributing scientists’ words. Not ours.

Whatever side of the coin you maybe as goes climate change, one can’t deny this is incredibly damning and highlights that it is almost exclusively about politics and wealth redistribution than saving Johnny polar bear.

That hasn’t stopped climate alarmists rejoicing the prospect of Biden rejoining the cabal of capital misallocation. One wonders whether the climate apparatchiks will carry out their promise to jail climate skeptics.

And isn’t it funny the mainstream media celebrates China’s commitment to be carbon neutral by 2060? Not sure if many of will be around to find out. Maybe that’s the point. At least by then Greta Thunberg will be in her 50s. We hope not traumatized knowing that she was totally hoodwinked.

How to sum it up? The climate change industry wants us to believe that highway service station diners are worthy of Michelin stars. Thank God we may have John Kerry telling soccer mums to refrain from taking the kids to soccer practice in a second hand SUV as he pontificates from one of his six houses.

Watch the hips, not the lips.

America’s new climate czar

John Kerry: Joe Biden’s pick for Climate Envoy. The hypocrisy of being lectured to by a man who is hardly setting the example.

If politicians were surgeons you’d never ask them to operate on you

And so the path to globalism marches on.

Former Secretary of State John Kerry will be the new climate envoy in a Biden administration, assuming the high probability he takes office in this still contested election.

Expect more blovating nonsense on climate change to satiate salivating crony capitalists. If COVID doesn’t kill you, climate change will! Got that, peasant?

Kerry is another career politician. He is the man who said peace in the Middle East was impossible. 3 peace deals later under a different administration and how stupid does he look? So should we believe his pontificating around climate change? Of course not.

Seriously, if politicians were surgeons there is no way you would ask them to operate on you given a glance at their win/loss ratio. Yet, Kerry will be afforded all of the media puff pieces on how he’ll be pivotal to saving us all despite reading geopolitics so poorly.

We await the grandiose statements about how close to doom we are. We await more nonsense around the Paris Accords – which grants China the ability to pollute as it pleases til 2030 – while the rest of us tip into the UN jar to misallocate resources for political favours.

You have to hand it to the political class. Await slower growth, higher electricity prices and more inefficiency which will end up in more debt fueled big government.

We’ll leave you with how the scientists believe in the science in a wonderful report compiled by the UN on its own processes. Donna Laframboise noted in her book, “The Delinquent Teenager” the following,

“In early 2010 the InterAcademy Council, an organization comprised of science bodies from around the world, took an historic step. It established a committee whose purpose was to investigate IPCC policies and procedures.

The committee posted a questionnaire on its website and invited interested parties to respond. Answers to those questionnaires were eventually made public after the names of the respondents had been removed. Those provided by IPCC insiders can be separated from the ones submitted by concerned citizens because the questionnaire begins by asking what role the respondent has played in the IPCC.

People with direct experience of this organization were remarkably frank in their feedback. According to them, scientific excellence isn’t the only reason individuals are invited to participate in the IPCC.

Remember, this is a UN body. It therefore cares about the same things other UN bodies care about. Things like diversity. Gender balance. Regional representation. The degree to which developing countries are represented compared to developed countries.

The collected answers to the questionnaire total 678 pages. As early as page 16, someone complains that: 

“some of the lead authors…are clearly not qualified to be lead authors.” 

Here are other direct quotes:

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 person whose comments appear on page 330 agrees:

“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.”

Remember we are told to believe the IPCC is the final word in climate change science. Look forward to shared misery.