If your boss told you he wanted to increase the company’s sales revenue by 50% in fiscal year 2022, it would be wise to take him at his word and evaluate your position within the context of complying and aligning with the company’s goals.

If your son’s football coach tells the team they are going to include more passing plays because they have ‘gunslinger’ of a new quarterback, you might suggest to your son who plays center to pay more attention to the coach’s pass-blocking schemes.  I mean, it only makes sense ‘to ride the horse in the direction it’s going,’ right?

So why do we disregard what two of the highest-ranking officials at the UN’s Working Group on the Mitigation of Climate Change have to say when they explicitly detailed the organization’s purpose and intent regarding climate?  Doesn’t common sense dictate that we listen to them?

Dr. Ottmar Endenhofer, co-chair of the IPCC working group on Mitigation of Climate Change said, “We (the UN-IPCC) redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy…One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.  This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore,” and Christiana Figueres, Executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change told the world, “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model (i.e., capitalism) that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” so vis-a-vis those commentswouldn’t it would be wise to take their words at face value as you would your boss’ or your son’s football coach? 

And what does it say about a nation’s climate/energy policy (let’s face it, in today’s world they are one and the same) when the President of the United States, shuts down an American pipeline, gives the green light to a Russian pipeline and then begs OPEC to increase its oil production while gas prices climb in the U.S. skyrocket?  Nonetheless, the president is in Glasgow, Scotland to negotiate climate matters without having signed a climate package into law because congressional democrats are still fighting about a broader social-spending bill.

President Biden wants to mark a clean break from the Donald Trump and reestablish U.S. leadership on combating climate change.  But does anyone believe the president, with his miserable record of accomplishing nothing during his first nine months in office will be able to galvanize the rest of the world toward higher climate ambitions?  Take this to the bank, it ain’t happenin’ folks, Biden has too many strikes against him, and the European media doesn’t protect ole’ Joe as does ours.

Meanwhile, Chinese President Xi Jinping, whose nation leads the world in producing greenhouse gases will not be in Glasgow, my guess is he’s probably busy overseeing the 500 new coal fired power plants China is building across Africa, each with an estimated life span of 35-50 years.  As an aside, China currently produces 50% of the world’s coal and has enough deposits to last well into the next century.

Now if you still have a problem “doing the math,” consider, the Chinese lend money to third world nations to pay for these coal-fired power plants.  Then the Chinese are kind enough to supply the labor to build those plants thus guaranteeing construction work for Chinese laborers in the short term and built-in customers for the Chinese coal industry for the next half-century.  It’s a win-win-win-win – Chinese laborers are guaranteed work, the Chinese coal industry has built in customers for the next 35 to 50 years, the Chinese receive a return on investment, i.e., the interest for their loans, and the third-world African nations get a guaranteed energy source.

At the same time these third world nations shore up their energy needs, the UN estimates the world’s food supply needs will increase by 70% over the next 30 years, so allow me to pose a question you will never hear asked by the legacy media– where do you think third world African nations are going to allocate their resources – replacing their brand new state-of-the-art coal-fired power plants that have been paid for with Chinese money with wind and solar farms that someone is going to have to build and pay for, or do you think they might focus their resources and energy on providing the 70% more food they’ll need to feed their populations?

Only fools resist the notion that earth’s climate is changing, but deficiencies in climate data challenge our ability to untangle the response to human influences from poorly understood natural changes; said differently, the current state of climate science is insufficient to make useful projections about how the climate will change over the coming decades, much less, what we can do about it.

Climate activist will balk at the statement, but they will be unable to produce a single “peer reviewed” assessment delineating specifically what will happen to the climate, specifically when that or those events will occur and specifically what man can do about it–all for the simple reason that such a document does not exist, besides, the one activity climate activists are loath to engage in is “specificity”

As Dr. Endenhofer and Secretary Figueres have told us in their own words, the Green New Deal is a Trojan Horse.  Unfortunately, our schools and the legacy media have done a masterful job of brainwashing our kids on the matter.  As Vladimir Lenin once said, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.”  And this is precisely what’s going on today—the left, the media and our schools continue to indoctrinate our children about a matter that requires much more scientific research and infinitely less politicizing.

Quote of the day: “Global warming provides a marvelous excuse for global socialism.” – Margaret Thatcher

Discover more from L.S. "Butch" Mazzuca

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue Reading