RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://pjmedia.com/trending/great-exploitations-greta-thunberg-to-get-her-own-bbc-show/

Well, it’s starting to become more clear why Greta Thunberg wanted to trademark her name. It turns out that BBC Studios is developing a TV show about Greta Thunberg.

As of this writing, there is no release date, no number of episodes set, and no network attached yet. If there’s no title yet, I think it should be called “Skipping School.”

But, we do have a series description courtesy of BBC Studios:

The series will follow Greta’s international crusade, which takes her to the front line of climate change in some of the most extraordinary places on earth, as she explores what actions could be taken to limit climate change and the damage it causes.

As she travels Greta meets not only leading scientists but political leaders and business heavyweights, exploring the scientific evidence with them and challenging them to change.

The films will also charts her own journey into adulthood as she continues to be confronted by the real world consequences of inaction; and will share some of the quiet moments as she writes the impactful speeches that are now broadcast and analysed around the world, as she lives a teenage life like no other.

Greta is also the subject of a new documentary at Hulu that is also being developed.

“Climate change is probably the most important issue of our lives so it feels timely to make an authoritative series that explores the facts and science behind this complex subject,” said Rob Liddell, the producer of the upcoming series on Greta. “To be able to do this with Greta is an extraordinary privilege, getting an inside view on what it’s like being a global icon and one of the most famous faces on the planet.”

Is it just me, or this girl being over-exposed?

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/02/renewable_energy_fairy_tales.html

The very wrong energy policy being pursued in the U.S. and even more so in Europe has its roots in a 1987 report from the United Nations. The report called Our Common Future is normally referred to as the Brundtland Report after Harlem Brundtland, a Norwegian Politician, and chairman of the committee that wrote the report. Mrs. Brundtland in the introduction to the report states that: “We became convinced that major changes were needed, both in attitudes and in the way our societies are organized.” Scandinavian reformers always believe that they are a model for the rest of the world. By 1987 Norway was already well on the way to becoming an extremely wealthy country due to its offshore oil fields. It’s not that surprising that Norwegians may perceive accidental geological wealth as proof of their moral superiority.  Nor is it surprising that the Norwegians opted not to preserve the oil for future generations. The failure of Scandinavian ideology is most evident in Sweden where massive third-world Moslem immigration has devastated the country. The Brundtland Report takes a dark view of the world and sees its dark view as a good reason to rearrange the world along Scandinavian lines.

The key finding of the Brundtland Report is this:

“Humanity has the ability to make development sustainable to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/01/government_by_equiry_great_way_to_burn_forests.html

Politicians hide behind enquiries — their magic answer to all problems, especially bushfires.

Announcing enquiries give the impression of decisive action.  They generate fees for armies of barristers, lawyers, and bureaucrats, and they provide momentary excitement for the media.

The proposed 2020 Australian Bushfires corrobboree will provide an opportunity to grandstand for the Climate Rebellion Mob, who will get starring roles on ABC/Fairfax.  Big business will probably propose a carbon tax to fight bushfires, while foresters and land owners will hardly be heard.

When the final report is ultimately delivered, the media will be off trumpeting some new climate “emergency” to scare the public.  The expensive new report will be quietly filed with all the others.

We’ve had at least 57 bushfire enquiries since 1939 — about one every two years.  Anyone who bothers to read them will soon deduce what should be done.  Nothing much has changed except that there are more people living in fire-prone zones with no protection, and more forest and private land was locked up with heavy fuel loads.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/14/environmentalists-caused-australias-fires-not-climate-change/

Is this kind of conflagration too convenient to ever try to prevent, insofar as such generates righteous ‘Thunbergian’ green thunder across the world, solving nothing, but further empowering the bureaucrats?

These greenies and the government don’t want to burn s— off. We’re going to lose all our houses and properties because of you useless pieces of garbage will not burn off when its supposed to, through the winter time like we used to do years ago out in the farms up in the mountains; burn all the undergrowth off so everything was safe. But you p—–, you want to have a really good look at this, look at the state you’ve caused here. You are the biggest bunch of useless loser pieces of garbage God ever had the misfortune to blow life into.”

– Australian resident of New South Wales, January 7, 2020

Environmentalist regulations are the reason for this year’s devastating wildfires in Australia. These misguided measures prevented landowners from burning off dry brush. For decades, every year during the Australian winter, across the continent, brushfires were deliberately set to safely burn the undergrowth. Even in pre-colonial times, the aborigines set brushfires to prevent tinder from accumulating.

If you want to watch an authentic, eyewitness account of what really happened—quoted above—you’ll find it 2:56 minutes into “The Truth About the Australian Bushfires,” a January 7 video by the inimitable Paul Joseph Watson. (But watch out. Most of the profanity is edited out of the above transcription.)

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2020-1-7-climate-change-advocacy-application-of-science-or-religious-cult

Each day you listen to unceasing climate change advocacy, always claiming the mantle of “science.” But you can’t help noticing the steady drumbeat of the standard narratives used by religious cults. The end of days is nigh. You have grievously sinned. Your sin is taking you down the road to damnation. Yet salvation is at hand. But only if you and all humanity immediately repent and follow the gospel of your new climate change priests. If not, the apocalypse of judgment day shall soon be upon you.

Of course these narratives pervade the rhetoric of the fanatics seeking to be messianic leaders of the climate movement, from the Greta Thunbergs to the Al Gores. But over in the more sober organs of elite thought leadership, surely the climate advocacy must be based on actual science. Right?

If you are struggling with that question, perhaps you should take a look at some of the recent coverage of the wildfires in Australia that has appeared in our elite media. Today I will pick on a couple of my usual suspects, the New York Times and the Washington Post. Both of those have featured multiple pieces over the past several days the gist of which is that Australia’s wildfires are the punishment for its grievous sins of failure to follow the true climate change gospel.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/09/politics/trump-proposal-national-environmental-policy-act/index.html

The Trump administration plans to rewrite decades-old regulations to make it easier to build major infrastructure such as pipelines, which would have the effect of relaxing government efforts to fight the climate crisis.

President Donald Trump announced Thursday morning the changes to National Environmental Policy Act rules, which requires federal agencies to assess the environmental impact of projects such as the construction of mines, highways, water infrastructure and gas pipelines.
Trump and administration officials said the changes are necessary to speed up approval for needed infrastructure projects.
“These endless delays waste money, keep projects from breaking ground and deny jobs to our nation’s incredible workers. From day one, my administration has made fixing this regulatory nightmare a top priority,” Trump said at the White House.

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Andrew Wheeler said NEPA rules are a “Frankenstein of a regulatory regime” and “welfare project” for trial attorneys.
The proposal would set time limits on environmental assessments and changes what impacts must be considered, two significant moves that could make it easier to approve projects.
Agencies will no longer have to consider “cumulative” effects of new infrastructure under the new rule, which courts have interpreted as a mandate to study effects of emitting more greenhouse gas emissions, according to The New York Times and The Washington Post, which reported the proposals earlier Thursday. That includes the impacts of climate change, including rising sea levels.