The Climate Cult’s ‘Grave New World’ Thaddeus McCotter
A new and dire manifesto demands population control that would dictate who gets to eat, have heat, and procreate to save the world with “social integrity”—whatever that means, other than nothing good.
As a proud debunker of the apocalyptic climate scam, it’s only natural that the climate cult has a plethora of biodegradable slings and arrows to hurl at my person. Among their most common claims is that I use “straw man” arguments to describe the climate cult’s destructive agenda. Yet, no sooner is this straw man accusation leveled that some new fanaticism unwittingly provides me vindication.
For example: “Earth Needs Fewer People to Beat the Climate Crisis, Scientists Say” by Eric Roston in the “Climate Changed” (get it?) section of Bloomberg News (which I believe was founded by a billionaire former Republican mayor who oddly expects Democratic presidential primary voters to embrace his candidacy rather than confiscate his property).
In an “emergency declaration,” more than 11,000 of the climate cult’s high priests of politicized science pledged your lives, your fortunes, your sacred honor, and your genitalia to impose immediate, radical changes in how human beings acquire energy and food, and reproduce.
After noting that 40 years ago “scientists from 50 nations converged on Geneva to discuss what was then called the ‘CO2-climate problem’” and “predicted global warming would eventually become a major environmental challenge,” (but failing to note the earlier false alarms that the planet was heading into a “another ice age”) apparently “the scientists got to work, building a strategy on how to attack the problem and laying the groundwork for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the world’s preeminent body of climate scientists. Their goal was to get ahead of the problem before it was too late.”
So who screwed the pooch?
You did.
Here comes our first clue: “But after a fast start, the fossil fuel industry, politics and the prioritization of economic growth over planetary health slowed them down.” (Emphasis mine.) Such is the cost of a venal concern for people over planet.
While some compassionate folks consider allowing their fellow human beings to pursue their happiness and avoid starving to death or dying from exposure to be a moral good, such is the road to global warming hell and it’s paved with good intentions, like preferring not to see people die. Small wonder, then, the 11,000 Malthusian “experts” in their BioScience jeremiad warn: better to gain the world and lose some souls in the process.
After all, “this latest communique is exceptionally significant given the data that accompanies it. When absorbed in sequence, the charts lay out a devastating trend for planetary health. From meat consumption, greenhouse gas emissions and ice loss to sea-level rise and extreme weather events, they lay out a grim portrait of 40 years of squandered opportunities.”
Wow. That sucks. So let’s focus on our wondrous future if we “quickly implement” the climate cult priests’ demands: “[S]ystemic change to energy, food, and economic policies” and “population control ‘must be stabilized—and, ideally, gradually reduced—within a framework that ensures social integrity . . . .’”
Hmm. A dire manifesto demanding population control that, ultimately, will control who gets to eat, have heat, and procreate to accomplish all of this with “social integrity”—whatever the hell that means, other than nothing good. Wow, the climate cult’s “Grave New World” sucks even worse than the impending doomsday they soil themselves over. (Climate debunker’s pro tip: never ask the climate cult to “Give me liberty or give me death.” They’re only too happy to oblige.)
On the bright side, I wouldn’t have to long endure the climate cult’s chicken in every Pol Pot future. Doubtless, I’d quickly be “volunteered” to take one for the team and my biodegradable corpse can be used to fertilize an urban farm in what none dare anymore call the “Motor City,” unless it’s used as an epithet. Or maybe my free-range carcass will be shipped to Sweden to sustain a cannibalistic climate cult chapter. In either event, such would certainly constitute a systematic change in food production.
Perhaps this is just another reason among many the climate cult priests “still manage to strike an upbeat tone”—well that and the fact they don’t expect to sacrifice themselves for the greater global good any time soon:
We are encouraged by a recent surge of concern . . . Governmental bodies are making climate emergency declarations. Schoolchildren are striking. Ecocide lawsuits are proceeding in the courts. Grassroots citizen movements are demanding change, and many countries, states and provinces, cities, and businesses are responding.
Yeah, good times.
And what is a proper climate cult jeremiad sans a shout out at the “bad orange man”?
“The report, however, comes one day after U.S. President Donald Trump began the formal procedure of withdrawing America from the Paris climate accord.”
Thank God—and President Trump. This climate debunker isn’t quite ready to become fertilizer or food. The world is already being inundated with the climate cult’s odious intellectual manure.
Comments are closed.
