At UN Climate Summit, Alarmists Put Dogma Over Science

Looking back, the climate alarmist’s movement started with Al Gore’s 2007 movie when he proclaimed the imminent extinction of the polar bears due to global warming.

Since the population of polar bears has blossomed over the last decade, we’ve yet to hear another word from Al Gore on that subject.

The doomsday forecasters are now grasping at new names to rebrand the movement.

What was once global warming, is now climate change, climate disaster, global meltdown, climate collapse, scorched earth, climate emergency, and the latest movement, “We don’t have time.”

Like Gore’s initial predictions, all the tweets lack the basis for their dismal projections.

The parents of millennials may remember from the late 1950s this most-known quote: “Just the facts, ma’am” from Sgt. Joe Friday with the TV series Dragnet.

A few decades later there was Clara Peller who was a manicurist and American character actress who, at the age of 81, starred in the 1984 “Where’s the beef?”  advertising campaign for Wendy’s fast-food restaurant chain.

The short emotional tweets from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) with 5.9 million followers, Greta Thunberg with 3 million followers, Al Gore’s 3.1 million followers, Tom Steyer’s 250 thousand followers, and Jane Fonda’s 500 thousand followers, all bumble about the doomsday that’s coming.

The tweets are void of any “beef or facts” as to what’s going to cause this forthcoming demise.

They tweet rhetorical questions and emotional statements, and the millions of followers being brainwashed with scaremongering dogma slurp it up, as environmentalism has become the new religion.

The alarmism over global warming, climate change, etc., is at the forefront of these tweeted fear tactics, but when such alarmist conclusions are openly rebutted, the rebutters are being besieged with oratory that 97 percent of “all” scientists and even the non-scientific community of 175+ organizations active on climate change believe mankind has played a role in changing the earth’s climate.

I have two problems with that 97 percent claim, 1) common sense tells us that no large group of people on our planet could ever reach 97 percent agreement on anything, even the world being round, and 2) shockingly, none of the scientists of the 97 seem to have a name, it’s just a holistic group of no-names!

It seems that none of these “97” are able to “talk” specifically about selective microscopic sound bites from vast data that are the supposedly the basis of these dire warnings about time running out and the idea of a 12-year deadline for the annihilation of life as we currently know it.

Of the almost 8 billion people living on this planet, we know that 80% of them, or more than 6 billion, are living on less than $10 a day.

Obviously, those poor in underdeveloped countries cannot afford to subsidize themselves out of a paper bag and continue to use what’s readily available – coal.

It must be the other 20 percent of the population, or about 1.6 billion, in developed countries that are the targets of these climate alarmists rebranding efforts.

The tweeters are promoting a global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty.

Yet, it’s that same 20% that have come out of poverty in the last 100 years as a result of what those deep-earth minerals and fuels have provided society, enhancing their lives and improving their standard of living.

Basically, the same fossil fuels that are being deprived of the other 80% that now live in abject poverty with no hope of reaping the benefits of what prosperous societies are enjoying.

The folks in prosperous societies that have embraced and increased their production of fossil energy have been amply rewarded with greater economic development and growth, and a healthier society.

Virtually all diseases are now under control with medications and medical equipment that was not available in the 1800s, before fossil fuels starting to run everyone’s lives.

Today, we can live in any weather condition and we’ve got military equipment, airlines, merchant ships, cruise ships, trucks and cars all over the world that dominate the lifestyles of prosperous societies.

The fossil fuel industry would not be needed except to meet the demands of the current users in those prosperous societies.

My belief is that those users are less inclined to go back to living in medieval times without all the amenities that the thousands of products and the various fuels that the fossil fuel industry has been able to fulfill in their daily lives.

I presume the alarmists that constantly refuse to surface from behind their tweet machines to debate is because they have no case to debate the facts that they are using to justify their growing alarmist vocabulary.

Unless there’s a face to face debate with the supposed deniers, that have more data than words, we’ll never hear both sides of the climate discussions.

It’s definitely time for the alarmists to show us “where’s the beef” behind their tweets and marches, so the public can decide for themselves to consider the data from each side or just continue to accept the barrage of tweeted words of impending climate disasters that will end life as we know it.

From the extensive data available on temperatures, weather, sea levels, emissions, etc. that several scientists have shared, I don’t see the cause for such a dismal outlook for the earth and its civilization.

I suspect that classifies me as a “denier.” I’m willing to join the doomsday parade, but only if the tweeters would come out from behind their tweet machines and “show their cards.” Looking forward to face-to-face discussions.

Read more at CFACT