The science of CO2– the true state of climate contradicts the Western climate apocalypse crusade (i.e. the “climate crisis” and consequent irrational salvation scheme of decarbonization that renders Western societies vulnerable to totalitarian threat);
Critical factors in climate science that counter the false assumptions and claims of climate alarmism;
David Coe on “Climate change: Emergency or not?”;
Russian financing of Western anti-fossil fuel groups (Russia gaining strategic advantage by funding climate misinformation projects in the West- even Hillary Clinton acknowledged this);
Basics of climate physics (i.e. the “miniscule” role of CO2 in climate change);
Glen Greenwald on “The Neoliberal war on dissent”;
Comment on Woke Progressivism;
Jordan Peterson interview of military historian Frederick Kagan re Putin’s ideology (i.e. the messianic crusade to restore the “special destiny of Russia” that has been thwarted by the West);
Note on the arguments made here especially regarding the science of CO2 and the wider climate debate- The point is to challenge remaining public hesitancy to freely and fully embrace fossil fuels, a hesitancy that is largely due to the unproven, unscientific assumptions of alarmist narratives that have wrongly demonized CO2 and fossil fuels. The alarmist narrative on climate, and consequent decarbonization policies, has been widely embraced by the political classes on both sides, by celebrity elites, and by mainstream media and social media companies. We are all anxiously watching the dangerous outcomes of the Western embrace of irrational decarbonization (i.e. the weakening of our societies in the face of totalitarian threat). Most of us are deeply concerned about the world that we are handing our children.
Key summary points:
See the evidence just below from climate physicists on the “miniscule” role that CO2 plays in climate change (“Nearly 140 scientific papers detail the miniscule effect CO2 has on Earth’s temperature” by Kenneth Richard, and “Climate Change: an emergency, or not?” by David Coe).
This evidence overturns the core claims of climate alarmists, showing, to the contrary, that fossil fuels are not mainly responsible for climate change and climate change has not and is not becoming catastrophic in any manner (i.e. there is no “climate crisis”). This evidence nullifies the climate alarm narrative. Conclusion: There is no “settled scientific” reason to tax carbon or decarbonize our societies, as it has now become painfully obvious that decarbonization has strengthened totalitarian regimes like Russia and weakened energy-dependent Western nations.
In answer to the question someone asked recently- “Where is courage today?”- it is time for waffling politicians to make this evidence public and to oppose unscientific and irrational decarbonization policies.
What a mess we have gotten into, Wendell Krossa
Western nations have become more and more obsessed with an anti-CO2, anti-fossil fuel crusade based on an apocalyptic climate alarmism narrative. The panic-mongering by climate alarm crusaders has frightened populations into embracing the irrational salvation scheme of decarbonization. This has rendered too many Western countries dependent for energy on tyrannical regimes like Russia that outspokenly state their intention to overturn Western liberal democracy and install their own totalitarian systems of governance. It is never too late to turn things around. Begin by taking a thorough look at the full science of CO2. Go directly to the core assumptions/claims of apocalyptic climate alarmism, profoundly distorted and exaggerated assumptions and claims that alarmist narratives have used to fuel their crusade against the food of all life- CO2.
And to laser in on the fundamental importance of energy, a paraphrase of Bill Clinton: “It’s the energy, stupid”.
Added note: Remember also that apocalyptic movements (as in climate apocalypse) have a 100% failure rate across history. So a note to all alarmists- There is still time to abandon this climate apocalypse crusade and salvage your legacy. Unfortunately, alarmists like Stephen Hawking failed to do so in the final years of life. Others, like James Lovelock, exhibited the integrity and courage to admit they were wrong in propagating alarmism mythology that distorted the true state of climate (i.e. Lovelock admitted that climate was showing the “natural variation” that always governs climate).
Critical factors to explore and understand in regard to the current worldwide mess that Western nations find themselves in.
(1) The anti-science demonization of CO2, the food of all life, still in short supply at the tail end of a 140-million-year decline (i.e. at historically low levels compared to paleo-climate history where more optimal levels were in the multiple-thousands of ppm and life thrived with more of its basic food).
(2) The related anti-fossil fuel hysteria and decarbonization responses (the salvation scheme- i.e. “save the world”- of the apocalyptic climate alarmism crusade).
(3) The weakening of the West with state obstruction of fossil fuel resource development, consequent shortages, and rising energy costs harming the poorest people the most (i.e. “fuel poverty” that leads to increased suffering and mortality from cold in a world where 10 times more people die every year from cold than from warmth).
(4) Also, destabilized energy/electrical grids too dependent on unreliable, expensive, and environmentally damaging renewables.
(5) Add here the dependency of Western nations on the energy supplies of totalitarian regimes that seek the demise and overthrow of free societies (totalitarianism financed by the same energy-dependent Western nations).
These background factors, along with others, feed into the current geopolitical mess that we find ourselves in.
Good sources of information on the above include Wattsupwiththat.com, Global Warming Policy Forum’s “Net Zero Watch” newsletter, among other sources.
Numerous studies by climate physicists have noted the “miniscule” effect of CO2 on Earth’s temperature. Add to this that even that miniscule effect is often overwhelmed by natural factors that influence climate change. This means that there is no sound/settled basis to argue for decarbonization. There is no need to panic over our use of fossil fuels. The climate crisis is exaggerated panic-mongering. Yes, climate is changing but that warming has been mild, and with more atmospheric CO2, it has been net beneficial for all life.
Good summary of the “absurdity of fossil fuel suppression” by Francis Menton in “Ukraine and Energy Realism” at
Quotes from Menton’s article:
“… the cost of fossil fuel suppression is not merely a modest degradation in our comfortable lifestyles and impoverishment of the poor. As the situation in Ukraine is now demonstrating, fossil fuel suppression in the U.S., Europe and other Western countries also entails significant empowerment of our most significant geopolitical adversaries, and poses major risks to world security, and even to our national security.
“The coming of the Biden administration a year ago brought a full-on government war on the fossil fuel industries: cancellation of pipelines; ending of leasing of mineral rights on government lands and offshore; an order that all government agencies work by regulation to eliminate fossil fuels from electricity generation by 2035; threats by bank regulators against banks that lend to the fossil fuel industries; initiatives by the SEC to make it more difficult and costly for industries to use fossil fuels; dozens of initiatives in places like the Department of Energy and Interior Department to block projects using fossil fuels or make them more difficult or costly; and much, much more.
“As should have surprised no one, prices of fossil fuels responded by rising dramatically. Prices of crude oil have gone from a range of about $40-60 per barrel during the Trump years to close to $100 per barrel today. U.S. natural gas prices that averaged about $3/MMBtu during the Trump years are now about $4.50 (having spiked over $6 in late 2021). In Europe, where almost all fracking has been suppressed by governments out of supposed concern for the environment, the most recent price for natural gas imports is close to $30/MMBtu.
“Certainly, a direct impact of these rising prices has been increased costs to the consumer: increased electricity bills, increased home heating bills, increased costs for gasoline for automobiles. For example the average price of regular gasoline at the pump in the U.S. has gone from about $2.25 in January 2021 to about $3.60 today.
“But equally important is the degree to which these dramatic rises in energy prices benefit all the worst actors on the world state, starting with Russia. Russia is largely dependent on energy production and exports to the West for its government budget. A year ago, with energy prices in the toilet, Vladimir Putin was basically broke. Today, with energy prices having almost doubled, he is relatively flush. And suddenly we have an invasion of Ukraine, basically financed by Western countries that have suppressed their own production of oil and gas and thus must buy the stuff from Russia.
“So why, you might ask, don’t the Western countries just cut off imports from Russia and leave Putin high and dry? The simple answer is that the Western countries have invested hundreds of billions of dollars in wind and solar energy that don’t work and don’t provide the energy needed; so if these countries want to keep their electrical grid running, they need to buy natural gas, which principally comes from Russia.”
See “CO2 facts: The basics of climate physics” just below.
Below are quotes from articles posted on the Feb. 28, 2022 Net Zero Watch newsletter (“Mugged by Reality”) put out by Global Warming Policy Forum.
These all point to the critical issue of energy and the anti-fossil fuel madness (decarbonization) that has gotten us into the mess that we are facing today- a Western world weakened in the face of totalitarian aggression. Most egregious in this is the background fact that there is no sound, settled science proving that CO2 is “mainly responsible for climate change” (i.e. “human-caused” due to human use of fossil fuels and resulting emissions), and no evidence that climate change will be “catastrophic”.
Further, to the contrary, there is much good evidence that climate warming has resulted in fewer deaths from cold (https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-change-heat-cold-deaths-medical-journal-health-risk-energy-cost-fossil-fuels-11631741045), extended habitats for animal life (the highest animal/fish diversity is in the warmest areas of the planet), extended crop seasons, and more.
There is astounding evidence that more CO2 (basic plant food) has greened our planet with a 14% increase in green vegetation since 1980. That means more food for animal life and increased crop production for humanity.
But our Modern Warm Period is still the coldest period of our Holocene Interglacial and one of the coldest eras of the past 500 million years. CO2 levels are still at historical lows compared to paleo-climate levels in the multiple-thousands of ppm when all life thrived and there was no “climate catastrophe”. Meaning- more degrees of warming and more atmospheric CO2 would still be net beneficial for all life.
Do not believe the absurd narrative of climate alarmism that is based on primitive mythical themes (apocalyptic) and the anti-industrial society ideology of Declinism (Arthur Herman- The Idea of Decline in Western History).
Net Zero Watch articles:
From Patrick O’Flynn: “Britain needs a nuclear renaissance to end our decadent dependence on Russian resources”, The Daily Telegraph, Feb. 27, 2022
“A luxury mindset has dominated British public life for too many years, resulting in the elevation of trivial and divisive identity politics to a central position as well an eco-tyranny that brooks no compromise. As we enter what will be at best the era of a new Cold War we are going to need a much harder-headed approach if we are not to find it very chilly indeed.”
From Rupert Darwall: “Standing up to Putin means ditching Net Zero”, Real Clear Energy, Feb. 24, 2022
“Until now, Western leaders have been saying that the biggest threat to the world is climate change. Now comes Putin armed with nuclear weapons, tanks, and thousands of troops declaring his intent to overthrow Europe’s post-Cold War order. The dilemma for the West: you can’t win a geopolitical conflict lasting years or decades with an economy powered intermittently by wind turbines and solar panels.
“… the administration’s anti-fossil-fuel policies will progressively degrade America’s capacity to prevail against its geopolitical adversaries.
“The push for wind and solar power, which started in Germany with the Renewable Energy Act of 2000, means greater reliance on supplies of Russian natural gas to keep the lights on.”
From WSJ: “Energy, Russia and American Power”, The Wall Street Journal, Feb. 27, 2022
“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a 3 a.m. wake-up call to President Biden and America’s liberal political class: Cease your war on U.S. energy. Europe’s climate obsessions have rendered it vulnerable to Vladimir Putin’s extortion, and the U.S. is in danger of repeating that tragic mistake.
“No less than Igor Sechin, CEO of Russia’s state-owned Rosneft, warned Europe last summer: “Some ecologists and politicians urge for a hasty energy transition, yet it requires an unrealistically fast launch of renewable energy sources and faces issues with storage, ensuring reliability and stability of power generation.”
“Europe has been left to rely increasingly on natural gas to keep the lights on. But governments have effectively banned hydraulic fracturing, which would have let them charge their economies with domestically produced gas. Europe now imports almost all of its gas, with 40% coming from Russia…
“Mr. Biden ought to be exploiting America’s homegrown energy advantage. Instead he has spent a year disarming a la Europe. He has suspended leases in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, halted oil and gas leases on federal land, and killed the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have helped Canada develop its oil sands.
“Russia is investing heavily to develop its oil and gas resources, especially in the Arctic. And guess who benefits from high prices? Oil at $100 a barrel funds the cruise missiles hitting Kyiv. Mr. Putin will be the victor of the self-defeating U.S. war on fossil fuels.
“The casualties will be hundreds of millions of Americans, forced to pay more for energy that will become less reliable. Higher energy prices will crimp economic growth and standards of living. If Ukraine’s strategic shock doesn’t awaken Democrats to this reality, Republicans need to bang voters on the head with it every day through Nov. 8.”
From Susan Crabtree: “Russia’s Ukraine invasion scrambles Biden’s green agenda”, Real Clear Politics, Feb. 28, 2022
“Just how quickly and sharply Biden is willing to shift gears on U.S. fossil fuel production will play a crucial role in whether the West shows Russia and the world that it has learned its lesson, whether it continues to play into Putin’s hands or hits him where it really hurts – the energy sector.”
David Coe on “Climate Change, an emergency or not?” at
Extensive quotes from Coe’s report (data graphs are in the full report- do the math for yourself. It is worth stretching your mind to comprehend this basic climate/CO2 evidence to be more informed about the basic issues in the climate debate.):
(Note: Again, I would offer that the conclusions below are still subject to the further uncertainty posed by the fact that other natural factors appear to overwhelm even the small CO2 influence detailed in this report.)
“The atmosphere contains 400 parts per million (ppm), 0.04%, of carbon Dioxide (CO2) which is known to be a strong “greenhouse gas”. A “greenhouse gas” is one which is transparent to incoming solar radiation, but which is a strong absorber of outgoing infra-red energy radiated by a warming earth. The more CO2 in the atmosphere, the more outgoing radiation is absorbed and the warmer the planet gets. Simple!…
“Carbon dioxide just happens to be the vehicle for providing the carbon for the production of the complex organic molecules necessary for life, through the process of photosynthesis in plants which in turn provide the feedstock for all other forms of life. Without CO2 in the atmosphere there will be no life on earth. Photosynthesis extracts huge quantities of CO2 from the atmosphere on a seasonal basis. As a result, atmospheric CO2 concentrations exhibit a significant seasonal variation as shown in Figure 1, with the effect that CO2 levels undergo a rapid reduction in the northern hemisphere in the spring and summer as vegetation awakes from its winter slumbers and bursts into life with massive regrowth from the CO2 sequestered from the atmosphere.
“In addition to this seasonal variation there is an underlying persistent increase in CO2 levels, which has been attributed to the release of CO2 into the atmosphere from the combustion of fossil fuels which have powered the industrial economies since the start of the industrial revolution some 200 years ago. Since that time CO2 levels have risen from 280ppm to over 400ppm. It is also worth noting that the seasonal variation itself increases with latitude so that the seasonal variations in the arctic circle are some 10 times greater than the annual increase attributed to the combustion of fossil fuels, underscoring the role that nature plays in the atmospheric presence of CO2…
“It is this annual increase, however, which is fuelling the concerns over the warming of the planet. At first sight these concerns appear to be well founded and should not be dismissed. Equally, neither should the economic consequences of a “zero carbon economy” be ignored. It was absolutely right therefore for the United Nations to take a lead in determining the exact nature of the causes and implications of “anthropogenic global warming” by setting up the “Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” (IPCC) in 1988. Their mandate was and still is to identify the evidence to support the concept of global warming and seek methods to mitigate its impact.
“The IPCC set about its task with exemplary determination in seeking evidence to support the concept of anthropogenic warming, while, unfortunately, studiously ignoring any and all evidence which might suggest an alternative narrative. There is thus an inbuilt bias in the terms of the IPCC and certainly in the manner in which it operates…
“After some thirty years of extensive efforts by thousands of climate scientists around the world and the expenditure of billions of dollars, granted to universities and others for the research work, there is still considerable uncertainty about the impact on global temperatures of the so called “greenhouse effect”. This is summed up neatly by the UK MET office in its website “What is Climate Sensitivity?”, in referring to Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS), which is a parameter invented by the IPCC to represent the increase in average global temperature caused by a doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration.
“As there is no ‘perfect’ way of estimating climate sensitivity, it remains a hotly debated area of science and there remains a wide range of estimates of what the ECS could be.”…
“Why is there such uncertainty? Well, the atmosphere, while a relatively thin layer of gas around 50km thick, is an incredibly complex entity, often described as a non-linear chaotic system…
“The composition of the atmosphere has varied over history, but at this time comprises nitrogen (77%), oxygen (21%), argon (1%), Water vapour 1%, CO2 0.04% (400parts per million) with trace levels of methane (1.8parts per million) and nitrous oxide (0.32parts per million). Of these gases CO2, water vapour, methane and nitrous oxide are considered to be greenhouse gases. That is, they absorb some of the infra-red energy being radiated by the earth into space, while freely transmitting solar energy down to the earth’s surface…
“The earth’s average temperature is determined solely by the energy balance at the top of the atmosphere. The radiation emitted by the earth is a function of its temperature. The warmer the earth, the more radiation it emits. When the energy radiated by the earth into space is equal to the solar energy received from the sun, the earth temperature will have reached equilibrium and will be stable. When some of this radiated energy is absorbed by the atmosphere, the energy balance is disturbed, and the earth warms in order to restore the balance. The question is, by how much?
“Effective Earth Temperature
“The starting point for this question is, what would be the temperature of the earth if no atmosphere existed and the earth’s radiation was emitted through to space without any absorption? From a knowledge of the intensity of solar radiation received by the earth and the infra-red radiation emissions as a result of the earth’s temperature, it is widely accepted that the average earth temperature would be a chilly -18°C.
“The current average earth temperature is generally reckoned to be a comfortable +15°C and so the total impact of the atmospheric greenhouse effect is to produce a warming of 33°C. What we need to know is precisely the impact of each of the “greenhouse gases”, particularly that of CO2. How do they each contribute to this warming? The answer to this requires a detailed knowledge of the infra-red absorption characteristics of these gases.
“We are, therefore, fortunate to have HITRAN, a free access data base of molecular spectrographic data available to us. HITRAN was first introduced almost 50 years ago and has developed since then, particularly over the past 20 years, into the foremost repository of gaseous molecular spectra. From this dataset we can now calculate with high precision the radiation absorption characteristics of these “greenhouse gases”….
“First, however, it is necessary to know the nature of the radiation emitted by the earth. All bodies radiate energy, the hotter the body, the higher the emitted radiation intensity. Figure 2 shows the intensity and wavelength of the radiation emitted by the earth at its current average temperature of 15°C. This radiation spectrum extends from the near infra-red (3micron) to almost microwave (100micron) wavelengths. Micron is a common unit of radiation wavelength equal to one millionth of a metre. Visible light, for example, extends from blue light at 0.4micron to red light at 0.65micron, and is emitted in copious amounts by the sun as a result of its high temperature in excess of 5000°C. The 15°C temperature of the earth results in emitted radiation at much longer wavelengths up to 100micron…
“The small amount of atmospheric CO2 takes a large slice out of the emitted radiation, absorbing some 18.7% of the total radiated energy…
“Water vapour takes an absolutely huge bite out of the radiated energy, absorbing 67% of that energy, including all energy at wavelengths beyond 20micron. This would imply that the combined absorption due to CO2 plus water would be 18.7% + 67.0% = 85.7%. This would also be wrong!
“If you compare Figures 3 and 4 it will be apparent that the absorption bands of the two gases overlap to a large degree. In particular, because the water spectrum dominates, the impact of CO2 is much reduced so that when the two spectra are combined the absorption is as shown in Figure 5. In effect the two gases fight over the common absorption wavelengths, and of course due to its much higher abundance, water vapour wins…
“The result is that the total absorption by the combination of CO2 and water vapour is 72.6% and the impact of CO2 on absorption is thus to increase the absorption due to water alone from 67% to 72.6% an increase of just 5.6% not the 18.7% due to CO2 on its own. This has a major bearing on the role of CO2 with respect to its global warming potential…
“(Methane) has a much smaller absorption profile than CO2 providing a total absorption of 1.6%. So much for the erroneous claims that methane is 100 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2. As with CO2, the absorption bands overlap with those of water vapour and also those of CO2, so that the impact of 1.8ppm of methane increases the total absorption from 72.6% to 72.8%, an increase of only 0.2% The inescapable conclusion is that current methane levels have minimal impact upon atmospheric radiation absorption…
“The combined total effect of greenhouse gas absorption is put into perspective in the pie chart of Figure 8, demonstrating the dominance of water vapour in the absorption of emitted radiation…
“We know the solar energy reaching earth. It is the same value as used to calculate the Effective Earth Temperature of -18°C, with no atmosphere. It is also generally agreed that the average earth temperature is 15°C or thereabouts. From that temperature it is possible to calculate the amount of energy radiated by the earth. It is in fact the sum of the energies over the spectral range 3 to 100 micron shown in Figure 2. Now some of that energy will be absorbed and retained by the atmosphere. The rest will be transmitted through to space. It is a simple calculation, using the energy balance at the “top of the atmosphere” to show that, in order to maintain a temperature of 15°C only 61.5% of the radiated energy will be transmitted to space. Thus, a total of 38.5% of the radiated energy must be absorbed and retained by the atmosphere/earth.
“This is not conjecture. It is a simple fact.
“However, we have determined that the atmosphere currently directly absorbs 73% of the outgoing energy, therefore it is a further simple calculation to realise that only 52.7% of this absorbed energy is actually retained by the earth and its atmosphere (52.7% of 73% = 38.5%).
“This figure of 52.7% of absorbed energy retained does not differentiate between which gases are responsible for the energy absorption. It applies equally to all the absorbed energy no matter which gas is responsible. This enables us to determine how much energy absorption and retention can be attributed to each greenhouse gas. It is simply 52.7% of the absorption values shown in Figure 8…
“We see immediately that only 3% of the energy radiated by the earth is actually absorbed and retained by the CO2 in the atmosphere…
“Impact on Temperature
“The total energy absorbed and retained by the atmosphere (38.5%) produces the warming of 33°C to provide us with the current temperature of 15°C. Because we now know the absorption contribution for each of the greenhouse gases we can allocate their individual contribution to the 33°C warming (Figure 10)…
“Some 90% of the current warming, a total of 29.4°C can be directly attributed to water vapour. CO2 contributes just 3.3°C while the combined impact of methane and nitrous oxide is a barely measurable 0.3°C.
“Not only can we attribute the present warming to individual greenhouse gases, we now have a method of predicting the warming resulting from increasing levels of individual greenhouse gases from their respective infra-red absorption spectra and the HITRAN database…
“Warming due to the Increase in CO2 from 280 to 420ppm
“It is believed that prior to the industrial revolution, atmospheric CO2 levels were typically 280ppm. Since then, CO2 levels have increased to 420ppm. From the absorption spectra we can calculate that the absorptivity of the atmosphere will have increased from 72.7% to 73.0% during that period, due to this increase in CO2 levels. The increase in temperature resulting from that increased absorption of energy is 0.24°C. It is generally accepted that over this period the earth has actually warmed by around 1°C. It is therefore completely wrong to attribute this increase totally to anthropogenic global warming. Only 25% of that warming can be attributed to the increase in CO2 levels. More and more evidence is coming to light, that the earth undergoes regular variations (in geological timescales) in temperature, unrelated to atmospheric CO2 levels, possibly linked to the earth’s primary source of energy, the sun…
“Warming Due to Future Increases in CO2 Concentrations
“The following graph (Figure 11) shows the increase in absorptivity if CO2 concentrations were to increase up to 1600ppm, some 4 times higher than current concentrations. As can be seen from the graph, increasing CO2 concentration has only a small impact on total absorptivity, because of the near complete absorption of the emitted radiation corresponding to the greenhouse gas absorption bands. Adding more and more CO2 to the atmosphere has less and less influence on atmospheric absorption and hence global temperatures. This massive increase in CO2 would increase the atmospheric absorption from 73% to just 74.6% of the earth’s radiated energy…
“This would result in an increase in temperature of just 1°C (Figure 12)…
(Insert note: Climate physicists remind us that the warming influence/effect of CO2 declines “logarithmically” as levels rise above 400 ppm. Its ability to absorb and re-emit infrared radiation is already “saturated”.)
“Climate Sensitivity to CO2
“Climate sensitivity is the measure of the impact of greenhouse gases introduced by the IPCC. It gives a value for the temperature increase caused by a doubling of greenhouse gas concentrations. This value may be deduced for CO2 from the previous graph of earth temperature v CO2 concentration. At current CO2 concentrations the climate sensitivity for a doubling of CO2 concentration from 400 to 800ppm is just 0.45°C implying an average earth temperature of 15.45°C when CO2 levels reach 800ppm, which at the current rate of increase of atmospheric CO2 concentration of approximately 1.5 ppm per year (see Figure 13), will not occur for another 250 years. So much for the current climate emergency and hysteria…
“These levels of potential temperature increase are so small as to be almost unmeasurable. Yet according to the all-knowing cadre of climate scientists and fawning media they pose an existential threat to the climate and to our future…
“Fact 4: From these known characteristics of water vapour, the water vapour feedback effect would not lead to a runaway temperature but would result in an increase in a temperature of 1°C being increased by 12% to a temperature of 1.12°C. There is not, and never can be, a climate tipping point. The earth, to a large extent, owes its temperature stability to the characteristics of water vapour over which we have absolutely no control or influence. Large variations in water vapour concentrations have relatively little effect upon atmospheric absorption and hence earth temperatures…
“Contrary to the blitz of propaganda, there is no climate emergency or even any significant increase in temperature due to increasing levels of CO2. The climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO2 is 0.45°C which increases to 0.5°C when the feedback of water vapour is taken into account. A four-fold increase in CO2 concentrations to 1600ppm will increase temperatures by 1°C and it would take around 800 hundred years to reach that point at the current rate of CO2 level increases. It would however offer multiple beneficial effects, such as increased crop yields and greening of desert areas. The adoption of a zero-carbon economy, at a cost of not just billions of dollars, but trillions, will have no discernible effect upon the climate whatsoever, even assuming that all nations would adopt such a policy. The IPCC pronouncements, which form the basis for the headlong stampede to “zero carbon” are simply wrong. Their estimates of climate sensitivity are out by a factor of at least three and possibly ten!…
“Variations of earth temperature of many degrees Celsius, over millennia, are known to have occurred caused by entirely natural phenomena, particularly solar radiation intensity variations. The Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age are two recent examples. Scientific concern could perhaps be better focussed on the possibility, no probability, that we are approaching the end of an interglacial period at which point the earth will enter a new ice age. Our impotence to influence the climate will then be clearly and painfully realised.
“The data for this article is derived from the paper “The Impact of CO2 and Other Greenhouse Gases on Equilibrium Earth Temperature” published in the International Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Science.
“The link to the paper is http://www.ijaos.org/article/298/10.11648.j.ijaos.20210502.12 .””
From Tilak Doshi (Forbes, March 4, 2022) “After the Ukraine Invasion: Energy Realism Emerges in Germany While the US Doubles Down”
“In a landmark address on February 27th to the Bundestag, the German parliament, Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced a stunning shift in the country’s defence posture and its energy policies in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Commentators might be forgiven if they were reminded of Samuel Johnson’s adage that nothing better concentrates the human mind than the hangman’s noose. Russia’s invasion constituted the largest military attack of one state against another in Europe since the Second World War, marking in Scholz’s view a turning point in the continent’s history…
“In late 2020, Professor Fritz Vahrenholt – with a career that included positions in Federal Environmental Agency in Berlin and as minister for energy and environment in Hamburg state — stated baldly in a German TV interview that climate science was “politicized”, “exaggerated”, and filled with “fantasy” and “fairy tales”. He predicted that Europe “will reach the [climate policy] targets only if they destroy the European industries.” He castigated Germany as a country “in denial when it comes to the broader global debate taking place on climate science”. He went on to characterize Europe’s recent push for even stricter emissions reduction targets as madness akin to Soviet central planning that is doomed to fail spectacularly.
“Perhaps it takes a Putin with the hangman’s noose to convince Germans that Prof. Vahrenholt is right on the mark…
“If a modicum of energy realism has descended upon Germany after the shock Russian invasion of Ukraine, it would seem that the Biden administration – which joined Europe in the climate crusade immediately after it took office and which put “fighting climate change” as the country’s top national security concern- continues to pursue an incoherent energy policy that borders on ridiculousness.”
Pay close attention to the larger background story to what is happening in Ukraine today (i.e. the larger geopolitical context), notably the Russian/Chinese “long game” project to hand the West the rope with which to hang itself. Meaning, for example, things like Russian financing of Western Green NGOs to promote anti-fossil fuel hysteria (i.e. climate apocalypse narratives), and consequent Western decarbonization while both Russia and China move full steam ahead with their own fossil fuel programs.
Sources on this larger background:
Even Hillary Clinton was aware of Russian funding of anti-fossil fuel environmental groups… this from Rupert Darwall: “John Kerry – Putin’s Useful Climate Idiot”, Real Clear Energy, March 3, 2022
“In June 2014, Kerry’s predecessor as secretary of state complained about the impact of Russian money on financing “astroturf” environmental campaigns. “We were up against Russia pushing oligarchs and others to buy media. We were even up against phony environmental groups, and I’m a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort, ‘Oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you,’ and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia,” Hillary Clinton said.
“Putin understands the importance of energy as an essential component of American strategic power. John Kerry does not. That is why, to borrow from Lenin, Kerry acts as Putin’s useful climate idiot. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine plunges the world into its gravest emergency since the Cuban missile crisis sixty years ago. It puts into perspective the folly of those, like Kerry, who confuse imaginary crises with real ones.”
Individuals, making the costly sacrifice to express courage against tyranny, can spark similar courage in others to join them. Such is the best of the human spirit that determines, against great odds, to fight tyranny and to defend freedom. We are seeing this inspiring courage displayed today in Ukraine and other places.
Examples of costly sacrifice to exhibit courage:
This from Terry Glavin on “scythes against cannons”, the heroism of David versus Goliath courage.
Repeated climate summary points on this site: The material below on CO2 facts is critical to correcting the geopolitical mess the West has gotten itself into by embracing decarbonization policies (based on wrong assumptions about fossil fuels/CO2) and thereby weakening itself in the face of Russian/Chinese stated intentions to dominate the world.
The “skeptical” side of the climate debate has never been fully and clearly presented to the public at large because hyper-partisan media have obsessively focused only on the alarmist narrative of “climate crisis”. Most people embrace the alarmist narrative without even fully considering the vast body of evidence that shows an entirely different side to the climate issue.
(Insert note: What drives media? See David Altheide’s “Creating Fear: News and the construction of crisis”.)
Good contrary evidence shows that CO2 is not “mainly responsible for climate change”. Rather, other natural factors show stronger correlations to the change that we have seen over the past few decades and centuries, meaning- the climate change that we have observed over the past is due mainly to “natural variation”, not humanity.
And good evidence shows that climate change is not becoming “catastrophic” but rather has been mild and mostly net beneficial (Add also to counter alarmist narratives: The modern era “heatwaves” that media persistently claim are the “worst on record” are actually not as severe or common as they were in the 1930s, before you could “blame humanity”).
Overall, climate is still too cold and our Modern Warm Period is still the coolest part of our entire Holocene interglacial of the past 11,000 years. As the Lancet study showed, 10-plus times more people die every year from cold than die from warmth. Cold is still the real threat to all life, not more warmth. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00081-4/fulltext
Further, CO2 levels are still too low compared to most past history. We are at the tail end of a 140-million-year dangerous decline in CO2 levels (see Patrick Moore’s excellent “Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom” for the big paleo-climate picture). For much of the past 500 million years CO2 levels have been in the multiple-thousands of ppm and life thrived during such times. The slight rise in CO2 over the past has been hugely beneficial to all life with a 14% increase in green vegetation over just the past 40 years. That means more food for animal and increased crop production for humanity.
As often stated before: With the above evidence, it is irrational to tax carbon or decarbonize our societies. We need cheap fossil fuels to enable us to create more wealth that will enable us to adapt to whatever climate does. Besides, because CO2 is just a “bit player” in climate change, we cannot turn a CO2 knob and control what climate does. Adaptation, not mitigation, is the wiser, rational response to climate change.
More climate and CO2 detail below…
Its so much about the West’s climate alarm narrative and anti-fossil fuel crusade
Take the shackles off the American energy industry…
Posts from discussion group:
“Here is the great “wake-up” call now hitting the Western world. Energy has long been at the heart of this European conflict. Benny Peiser’s “Net Zero Samizdat” newsletter, part of the Global Warming Policy Forum, offers regular good updates on what is going on. As Bob Brinsmead has reminded us- Russia and China are laughing at the West’s self-inflicted suicide by embracing climate alarmism and decarbonization when there is no alternative for many decades to come.
“Solar and wind are still too unreliable, too costly, and too environmentally destructive. Maybe they will be more of the energy mix in the future, but as many are recognizing- probably not in this century. Now the West, especially Europe, has weakened itself by dependency on Russian gas/oil. Its time for Europe to come to its senses and get fracking. And the US was just energy independent a few years ago till Biden started shutting down fossil fuel development and pipelines. Sheesh, what madness.”
Net Zero Watch, Feb. 27, 2022
“This newsletter is just one good source of good information to help understand what is happening in Europe and how the climate alarmism movement contributed to the current crisis by making Europe weakened and dependent on Russian gas and oil. Green energy policies are dangerously weakening all of us and Biden has contributed to this with his shutting down pipelines and hoping the Saudis will make up the rest.”
“Oceanic Influences on Climate are little studied but have big effects”: Arthur Viterito, PhD. Environment and Climate News Podcast (natural sciences)
(This study by Viterito points to another of the many natural factors that influence climate and overwhelm the “bit player” influence of CO2 on climate.)
“Research published by Dr. Arthur Viterito indicates nature, not greenhouse gas emissions, is the largest driving force behind climate change. After surveying the literature in various disciplines, Viterito’s research shows a strong correlation between an uptick in subsurface oceanic seismic and volcanic activity in 1995, that is continuing today, that has a significant influence on large oceanic circulation patterns. This in turn effects ocean temperatures and other climatic activity, yet these influences are not accounted for in climate models.”
Hear these Ukranian voices (from Fox news report):
Milla Jovovich: “I am heartbroken and dumbstruck trying to process the events of this week in my birthplace of Ukraine. My country and people being bombed. Friends and family in hiding… My blood and roots come from both Russia and Ukraine. I am torn in two as I watch the horror unfolding, the country being destroyed, families being displaced, their whole life lying in charred fragments around them… I remember the war in my father’s homeland of former Yugoslavia and the stories my family tells of the trauma and terror they experienced. War. Always war. Leaders who cannot bring peace. The never-ending juggernaut of imperialism. And always, the people pay in bloodshed and tears”.
Regina Spektor, “Today my heart hurts because no matter how many great works of art and music (Guernica…. Masters Of War… Most of Okudzhava and Vysotsky… Vonnegut… Remarque… all those films in all those languages…) portray the horrors of war, new Masters of War seem to rise up again in all the nations… Sending new children to slaughter each other… There were, and still are, real Nazis in the world. But in Ukraine that are just millions of civilians being pulled into a war, and in Russia there are children being sent to fight and die for no reason other than the bottomless and horror filled ‘more more more more more more more’ of politicians and corporations. And it’s terrifying.”
Alexandra Kutas calling other to oppose the invasion: “Support cutting Russia off from SWIFT. As of now Germany, Italy, Hungary, and Cyprus oppose this idea… My beloved Kiyv. My homeland. I’m numb. Whenever you are outside of Ukraine go out today. Go to protest. We need to impose a no-fly zone over Ukraine!!!! NOW!!! It will save innocent lives!!!!”
Yara Zaya, “It’s honestly really hard for me because, yes, I do live in the United States now, but Ukraine, it is my home. I love my country, and it’s just so hard for me to even think that in 2022, in this world right now, war still exists, and people can kill other people for land and money… My friends are calling me all the time. I just talked to my friend, and she’s like, ‘Yara, I’m so scared. I’m hearing the bombs. I’m hearing the explosions. I don’t want to hear the noise,'” she said.”
Marian Tupy of Humanprogress.org has reposted comments from his 2013/10/30 Reason article “Progress: Not inevitable, uneven, but indisputable”. Good points.
Quotes by Tupy from Humanprogress.org…
“The “line” of progress is jagged, not smooth. Western Europe, for example, experienced tremendous economic, political, technological, scientific, and medical advances during the century that separated the end of the Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815) and 1914, only to descend into the barbarism of World War I and World War II. Yet Europe rebounded, just as it did after the fall of Rome and the subsequent Dark Ages. There are, in other words, rational grounds for cautious optimism. But optimism should not be confused with inevitability. We could yet destroy our civilization through human action, such as nuclear war, or watch helplessly as an asteroid hurls through the sky and wipes out most of the life on Earth.
“When we wrote those words, we could not have imagined that Europe, the continent of my birth, would yet again be mired in a bloody war. The long-term decline in all types of violence – including homicide, genocide, and international conflict – is very real and has been part and parcel of moral progress. The savage invasion of Ukraine by the Russian military does not negate that long-term trend, but it is a reminder of the fragility of human accomplishment. With every fiber of my body, I still believe that the future of humanity will be ever better. But, as we also noted in Superabundance, it will never be perfect.
“Progress does not mean that we will ever reach a paradisiacal end state where everything will be optimal for everyone everywhere. New problems will arise, and they will have to be solved, however imperfectly, by future generations. As such, the world will never be a perfect place. After all, the beings who inhabit it are themselves imperfect. As the German philosopher and advocate of gradual human progress Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) observed in 1784, “From such crooked timber as humankind is made of nothing entirely straight can be made.”
“The Russian onslaught on a peaceful people confirms the crookedness of human nature, but our flaws do not negate our ability to create beauty, prosperity, and peace. As we watch the conflict in Ukraine unfold and spare a thought for all the other conflicts in the world today, let us remember the causes of progress – including reason, science, freedom, and humanism. Let us be grateful for what we have and recommit ourselves to the defense of the values and institutions that have made liberal societies the best places on Earth.”
Honor freedom of speech and remain open to alternative viewpoints at all times.
Here is an interesting analysis of the Ukraine situation by Glen Greenwald (“Rumble Live Transcript: The War in Ukraine”). This is valuable for its comment on human emotional reaction to conflict (anger, outrage, fear), the retreat to irrationality and tribalism, and the need to maintain openness to alternative views/opinions/disagreement even in the “fog of war hysteria”. Full transcript available at…
Background notes: Energy policy has been fundamental to the European conflict that we are now witnessing. Western governments, unquestioningly embracing exaggerated climate alarmism narratives, have opted to rapidly decarbonize their societies, while Russia and China continue their development and use of fossil fuels. Unilateral decarbonization has put Europe in a weakened position of dependency on Russian energy as renewables are too unreliable to replace fossil fuels. Renewables may play more of a part in the future energy mix of humanity but it is doubtful that renewables will ever fully replace fossil fuels, and certainly not anytime soon.
What grates on the psyches of many is that the current suffering from rising energy costs is so entirely unnecessary as fossil fuels, since the breakthrough on fracking, should have become plentiful all over the planet and consequently would have remained inexpensive. Cheap fossil fuels would have maintained lower energy costs that would have especially helped the poorest people to survive comfortably and to achieve improved living conditions. But energy costs have now risen sharply all over, hurting the most vulnerable people with subsequent fuel poverty, forcing many to choose between basic necessities like heating their homes or eating properly. Fuel poverty has pushed many hundreds of thousands of people in Europe off energy grids and even led to excessive mortality from cold.
This energy mess can be traced to decarbonization policies where governments have refused to permit development of new fossil fuel resources or have purposely blocked such development, and added more and more punishing taxes on fossil fuels in order to force consumers to embrace other less energy intensive and unreliable energy sources. At the same time the fossil fuel alarmists have also blocked the development of clean energy sources like nuclear. And all this irrational policy (“war on carbon”) is based on an exaggerated climate alarmism narrative that is more apocalyptic mythology than scientific fact.
Eric Worrall in “Green Revolution? No Sanctions Planned for Russian Energy” says the following on the European energy situation…
“Self destructive Western climate policies have left major nations, including the USA, helplessly dependent on Russian energy, and unable to impose the one sanction which could financially cripple Putin’s Wehrmacht.
“It didn’t have to be this way. European countries have access to more than enough frackable hydrocarbons to supply their own needs. But pressure from green groups and a weak, innumerate political class has sabotaged the development of genuine energy independence in Europe.
“France has a level of energy independence, thanks to their 1970s national security initiative to replace fossil fuel with affordable nuclear power. France kept prices down by mass producing standardised components, and implementing a national security mandated predictable planning process.
“I’m no fan of French President Macron, who went out of his way to attack President Trump and belittle America, but it has to be said that French energy policy is an island of sanity in the midst of the green European Russian gas dependency disaster.
“The USA is not far behind Europe when it comes to self inflicted energy dependence on hostile powers. Biden’s attacks on Keystone and fossil fuel leases have left the US economy utterly vulnerable to shifts in global energy prices. This dependence on imports gives President Putin substantial leverage over US gasoline prices, and leverage over the political fortunes of the US Democrats.
“In my opinion it is no accident Putin struck during a US election year, during a period when Democrats are desperate keep gasoline prices under control.
“I’m only speculating, but given Europe’s desperate energy situation, it would not surprise me if European leaders actually want Russia to score a quick win, to crush Ukrainian opposition and secure the gas pipeline which feeds Europe against partisan attacks. Perhaps that is why Germany blocked NATO from supplying heavy weapons to the Ukraine, in the leadup to the current war.
“As Europe suffers sky high energy prices and faces an aggressive Russian army right on their doorstep, and witnesses the destruction of a democratic country very like any other European nation, perhaps the European people will finally wake up, and begin to hold their leaders accountable for their gross green energy negligence and incompetence.”
A repeated point on this site is that the central assumption of the climate alarm movement is fundamentally wrong- i.e. that rising CO2 is causing excessive climate warming and that warming will become “catastrophic” (i.e. “climate crisis” narratives). Both sides (liberal/conservative) affirm this alarmist narrative and agree that decarbonization should be the main response, though disagreeing over how fast or how much.
But the most credible climate physicists have consistently raised counter evidence showing that CO2 is not mainly responsible for climate change but is in fact a minor player in a complex mix of other natural factors that show stronger correlations to the climate change that we are observing.
The takeaway is that much uncertainty remains around climate science and there is no good evidence that rising CO2 and the mild warming of the past are dangerous but in fact the warming has been hugely beneficial to all life (weather events like heat waves have always occurred and were at their worst in the 1930s, the “pre-blame fossil fuels” era). More plant food has resulted in a massive greening of Earth over the past 40 years, and more warming has been life-saving in a still abnormally cold world where 10 times more people die every year from cold than die from warmth.
Here are some points on the physics of CO2 by climate physicists. They raise challenges to the claim that CO2 is mainly responsible for climate warming and that the warming will be “catastrophic”, hence we must decarbonize our societies, despite the horrific costs to the most vulnerable people.
Go to the critical issue in the climate debate– the role of CO2 in warming
CO2 has a warming effect on climate. This is fact.
The basics of climate physics:
Incoming solar radiation (sunshine) has to radiate back out to space. The amount of incoming and outgoing radiation is defined in watts per square meter, averaged over the Earth because the amount differs from the tropics to the poles. This returning radiation of heat would leave the Earth bitterly cold except that greenhouse gases prevent all that radiation from returning to space. They “trap” some returning thermal/infrared radiation and that warms the surface of our planet so life can exist and thrive.
Water vapor (clouds) is the most important greenhouse gas responsible for up to perhaps 90% of the greenhouse gas influence on climate (by both reflecting incoming radiation back out before it reaches Earth’s surface, and by trapping some outgoing radiation from Earth near the surface).
Other trace gases share the remaining percentage of the climate warming influence- i.e. carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, and CFCs.
CO2 is a significant though “bit player” in the mix and helps warm climate by absorbing some of the outgoing infrared radiation that is returning out to space from the surface of the planet. It absorbs and re-emits that radiation in all directions- back down, sideways, and up, thereby contributing to climate warming.
Key points by climate physicists: As CO2 levels rise in the atmosphere, the warming influence of CO2 declines rapidly, logarithmically. Currently, with CO2 levels at just above 400 ppm, the warming ability of CO2 has become “saturated” in terms of its ability to absorb and re-emit infrared radiation. Hence, a further rise from 400 ppm to 800 ppm may contribute very little to any further warming.
Richard Lindzen estimates such a rise in CO2 levels may contribute another 1-2 degrees C more warming. But that assumes you are not accounting for all the other natural influences on climate that appear to overwhelm and negate the CO2 influence (i.e. multi-decadal shifts in ocean currents such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, and solar radiation shifts from solar maximums to solar minimums, shifts in Earth’s albedo/reflectiveness, etc.).
Most of the 140 papers on the warming influence of CO2 by physicists (posted on Wattsupwiththat.com) estimate possible further warming in the range of 0.5 to 1.0-plus degrees. Again, these estimates discount all the other natural influences that appear to repeatedly overwhelm the CO2 influence, thereby making climate change “natural, not human-caused”.
Takeaway: If the CO2 warming effect is “miniscule” then CO2 is not mainly responsible for climate change. That means human fossil fuel use is not responsible for climate change. Therefore, there is no “human-caused climate crisis”. And further, warming has not been “catastrophic… an existential crisis”, and will not become catastrophic even if we get several more degrees of warming.
Add also the significantly beneficial elements of more warming in our abnormally cold “ice age era”. Most of our Holocene interglacial has been much warmer than today, and most of the past 500 million years of the history of life have been much warmer than today’s ice-age era. In our abnormally cold world, 10-plus times more people die every year from cold than die from warmth (Lancet study https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00081-4/fulltext).
Further, add the benefits of more plant food in the atmosphere- notably, the 14% increase in green vegetation across the Earth since 1980 resulting in more food for animal life and increased crop production for humanity.
“The Earth-Atmosphere Energy Balance
“The earth-atmosphere energy balance is the balance between the incoming energy from the Sun and outgoing energy from the Earth. Energy released from the Sun is emitted as shortwave light and ultraviolent energy. When it reaches the Earth, some is reflected back to space by clouds, some is absorbed by the atmosphere, and some is absorbed at the Earth’s surface.
“However, since the Earth is much cooler than the Sun, its radiating energy is much weaker (long wavelength) infrared energy. We can indirectly see this energy radiate into the atmosphere as heat, rising from a hot road, creating shimmers on hot sunny days.
“The earth-atmosphere energy balance is achieved as the energy received from the Sun balances the energy lost by the Earth back into space. In this way, the Earth maintains a stable average temperature and therefore a stable climate.”
“The balance between incoming energy from the sun and outgoing energy from Earth ultimately drives our climate… To balance the absorbed incoming energy, Earth must on average, emit the same amount of radiation to space. This balance results from several processes that occur at Earth’s surface and atmosphere.
“Incoming solar radiation
“The average amount of solar energy falling on one square meter of level surface of Earth’s atmosphere is about 342 watts. To simplify the explanation of how global radiation balances over a 1-year period, we will use a measurement of 100 units in place of 342 watts (noted above) as the base unit of measurement for incoming solar radiation falling on 1 square meter.
“Of the 100 units of incoming solar radiation, 30 are scattered or reflected back to space by the atmosphere and Earth’s surface. Of these 30 units, 6 units are scattered by the air, water vapor, and aerosols in the atmosphere; 20 units are reflected by clouds; and 4 units are reflected by the Earth’s surface. The 70 units of incoming solar radiation make it into Earth’s atmosphere. This is equivalent to 240 watts per square meter (70% of 342 W/m2).
“The atmosphere and clouds absorb 19 units of this incoming solar radiation, leaving 51 units of solar radiation that is absorbed at Earth’s surface. These incoming 51 units consist of shorter wavelength solar radiation (mostly in the visible region of electromagnetic spectrum), which is absorbed by land, water, and vegetation.
“Outgoing Terrestrial Radiation
“In the process of being absorbed, the radiation is converted into heat energy. Some of this absorbed radiation or heat energy is then emitted away from Earth’s surface s longer wavelength infrared radiation.”
New research on climate change notes strong correlations with natural elements other than CO2.
Note, for example, this paper by Arthur Viterito:
“The Correlation of Seismic Activity and Recent Global Warming (CSARGW) demonstrated that increasing seismic activity in the globe’s high geothermal flux areas (HGFA) is strongly correlated with global temperatures (r=0.785) from 1979-2015. The mechanism driving this correlation is amply documented and well understood by oceanographers and seismologists. Namely, increased seismic activity in the HGFA (i.e., the mid-ocean’s spreading zones) serves as a proxy indicator of higher geothermal flux in these regions. The HGFA include the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, the East Pacific Rise, the West Chile Rise, the Ridges of the Indian Ocean, and the Ridges of the Antarctic/Southern Ocean.
“This additional mid-ocean heating causes an acceleration of oceanic overturning and thermobaric convection, resulting in higher ocean temperatures and greater heat transport into the Arctic. This manifests itself as an anomaly known as the “Arctic Amplification,” where the Arctic warms to a much greater degree than the rest of the globe. Applying the same methodology employed in CSARGW, an updated analysis through 2016 adds new knowledge of this important relationship while strengthening support for that study’s conclusions.
“The correlation between HGFA seismic frequency and global temperatures moved higher with the addition of the 2016 data: the revised correlation now reads 0.814, up from 0.785 for the analysis through 2015. This yields a coefficient of determination of .662, indicating that HGFA [high geothermal flux area] seismicity accounts for roughly two-thirds of the variation in global temperatures since 1979.”
Or this by Wallace Manheimer:
“[T]he actual data show that up to now fears of imminent climate catastrophe are not supported by data, or else involve processes occurring since long before excess CO2 in the atmosphere became a concern. Based on actual measurements and reasonable extrapolation of them, there is no reason why the responsible use of fossil fuel cannot continue to support worldwide civilisation.
“The argument to greatly restrict fossil fuel rests entirely on the theoretical assertion that at some point in the near future there will be a sudden and dramatic change in the very nature of the data presented here. If implemented, these would be sufficient to greatly upset the lifestyle of billions of people, and to further impoverish the already most impoverished parts of the world. … [N]othing in the past suggests that future climate will be significantly different before mid century because of rising levels of CO2.”
Another by D. J. Easterbrook:
“CO2 makes up only a tiny portion of the atmosphere (0.040%) and constitutes only 3.6% of the greenhouse effect. The atmospheric content of CO2 has increased only 0.008% since emissions began to soar after 1945. Such a tiny increment of increase in CO2 cannot cause the 10°F increase in temperature predicted by CO2 advocates. Computer climate modelers build into their models a high water vapor component, which they claim is due to increased atmospheric water vapor caused by very small warming from CO2, and since water vapor makes up 90–95% of the greenhouse effect, they claim the result will be warming.
“The problem is that atmospheric water vapor has actually declined since 1948, not increased as demanded by climate models. If CO2 causes global warming, then CO2 should always precede warming when the Earth’s climate warms up after an ice age. However, in all cases, CO2 lags warming by ∼800 years. Shorter time spans show the same thing—warming always precedes an increase in CO2 and therefore it cannot be the cause of the warming.”
Keep hope alive…
Remember, eruptions of madness produce widespread revulsion in the many (on all sides) who retain common sense and who then reject the “madness of crowds” and affirm a more sane stance in life.
This from the “Net Zero Watch” newsletter of the Global Warming Policy Forum (11/2/2022):
“Editor’s Note: Attentive observers are beginning to acknowledge what readers of this newsletter have known for some time: the green bubble has burst and the green policy rollback has begun.
“Of course, it’s not all over yet for the eco-socialist Net Zero agenda, but the economic, political and energy security pressure and the global demand for energy that is both affordable and reliable will eventually overwhelm climate fanatics and green activists, leading to a gradual sobering up and a slow return to more realistic climate and energy policy approaches.
“Sadly, sobering up after a period of collective hysteria is a rather slow process as Charles MacKay (1814-1889) noted almost two centuries ago: “Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.”
— Benny Peiser
The warnings keep coming…
A Liberal commentator on how identity politics took over the Canadian Liberal party…
Adam Pankratz: Trudeau using Emergencies Act is the logical conclusion to his identity politics
“With astonishing speed, opponents of government action could quickly be labelled racist, misogynist, homophobic or any other of a litany of insults intended to personally scar opponents and discredit them as the worst society has to offer, without addressing the substance of their argument.
“The enlightened Trudeau showed the way, and no opposition would be countenanced. While Trudeau talked tolerance and openness, his actions were marching towards control and conformity…
“What did cause revulsion was the horrendous hypocrisy of a party that would regularly shout down opposition to their ideas as racist, and yet defend a leader who actually wore blackface, as though nothing had happened…
“Invoking the Emergencies Act is ultimately an incredible admission of the failure of governance. This failure, however, can trace its beginnings back to the incessant identity politics and characterization of political opponents as not simply people who hold differing views, but people who are fundamentally evil and deserve to be demonized, shunned and shamed.”
Adam Pankratz is a lecturer at the University of British Columbia’s Sauder School of Business. He was the Liberal candidate for Burnaby South in the 2015 federal election.
And this good comment on fear from
A Taxonomy of Fear
“There is a pattern in the way speech is silenced. Understanding it can help us stand up to the illiberalism of this moment.
“We live in a time of personal timorousness and collective mercilessness.”
More quotes from The Taxonomy of Fear…
“… as more and more topics become too risky to discuss outside of the prevailing orthodoxies, it makes sense to constantly self-censor, feeling unbound only when part of a denunciatory pack.
“Institutions that are supposed to be guardians of free expression—academia and journalism in particular—are becoming enforcers of conformity. Campuses have bureaucracies that routinely undermine free speech and due process. Now, these practices are breaching the ivy wall. They are coming to a high school or corporate HR office near you.
“The cultural rules around hot button issues are ever-expanding. It’s as if a daily script went out describing what’s acceptable, and those who flub a line—or don’t even know a script exists—are rarely given the benefit of the doubt, no matter how benign their intent. Naturally, people are deciding the best course is to shut up. It makes sense to be part of the silenced majority when the price you pay for an errant tweet or remark can be the end of your livelihood…
“James Bennet’s resignation from his position as the editorial page editor of the New York Times quickly became the genesis story of today’s debate about “cancel culture.” Bennet was pressured to depart after he ran an op-ed by Tom Cotton, a Republican Senator from Arkansas, whose argument that the military should be used to respond to riots caused an uproar among the paper’s staff.
“The language used by the Times staffers is indicative of a wider trend. In The Coddling of the American Mind, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt describe the recent emergence and rapid spread on college campuses of what they call “safetyism,” a view that “equates emotional discomfort with physical danger.” Safetyism, they write, teaches students “to see words as violence and interpret ideas and speakers as safe versus dangerous.”
“Confronted with words, ideas, or decisions they dislike, a growing number of people are asserting that they are in danger of suffering psychological or even bodily harm.
And on the 150 people who signed a letter defending open debate. One person felt the letter rendered her “less safe”…
“How could signing a letter decrying the intolerant atmosphere on the left render a colleague less safe? Because, VanDerWerff argues, the letter was also signed by people she characterized as “prominent anti-trans voices.” Though the letter itself made no mention of trans issues, and VanDerWerff has never accused Yglesias himself of expressing objectionable views on the subject, this, she claims, was enough to harm her.
“VanDerWerff’s note certainly illustrates safetyism. Going one step further, it also assumes the truth of a principle of “contamination by association.” People, the logic goes, cannot only be made unsafe by the beliefs or statements of their colleagues but also by those with whom their colleagues associate…
“Today, people are held to account for everything they have said or written, no matter how long ago, and no matter how much their minds may have changed. But under the rules of contamination, any affiliation with anyone else means everything they have said and done is your responsibility, too. Under such circumstances, any rational person is going to think of everyone else, first and foremost, as a potential human landmine; better, then, to draw the circle of one’s friends, colleagues, and collaborators as narrowly as possible…
“As Nick Gillespie commented in Reason, “in moments of raw pain and anger, it’s especially incumbent upon authorities to act with discernment, judgment, and restraint. Yet all around us, legal, political, and cultural leaders drive in the opposite direction, intensifying fear, hysteria, and resentment.”
“Whether or not the accused had an intent to commit wrong-doing is a central question in many criminal prosecutions. Though it might be less obvious, understanding someone’s intent is just as crucial to our social functioning. If we decline to understand why others acted the way they did, or to take into account whether they intended any harm, we multiply the number of violations we perceive—and often end up treating benign people as moral wrongdoers…
“More and more things are now perceived as a threat to safety… And what happens when a statement is deemed worthy of criticism in one of these myriad ways? The authorities get involved…. The push to turn uncomfortable personal interactions into officially reportable incidents began on campus… Young people are now routinely told that dealing with conflict is what the professionals are for, and students are encouraged to report all transgressions… . In one of the more absurd examples, a student at Colby College was reported for being ableist for using the phrase “on the one hand.”…
“Of course, some things do need to be reported. But when you live in a society in which people are primed to disclose all discomfort to authority figures, trust and goodwill quickly erode. It also means being aware that you yourself might end up as the subject of a complaint…
“One of the most disturbing examples of this trend is that high school students are now being encouraged to excavate each other’s social media, looking for instances of racial insensitivity and making them public…
“Over the past thirty years, America has become a hyper-punitive society, and our zero-tolerance mindset has led to an addiction to punishment. This has resulted in mass incarceration, causing the destruction of millions of lives and of entire communities. But many of the same people who abhor the excesses of our criminal justice system applaud this new form of social ruin…
“Some on the left still claim cancel culture doesn’t exist. Mass firings, they say, are not taking place. Only a few people—who probably deserved it!—have lost their jobs.
“But it doesn’t require mass dismissals to put many people in a genuine state of unease and intimidation. A few chilling examples are enough to spread the fear to a lot of people that an inadvertent error can destroy your life. As New York Times columnist Ross Douthat writes, “the goal isn’t to punish everyone, or even very many someones; it’s to shame or scare just enough people to make the rest conform.”
“And so dread settles in. Challenging books go untaught. Deep conversations are not had. Friendships are not formed. Classmates and colleagues eye each other with suspicion.”
Quote from “The Woke Outrage Cult” in section below…
“Mature humanity will also understand and accept that there are many things to be hurt and offended by in a free world where diverse opinions are held by the human family, and sometimes expressed in offensive language. But as Akaash Singh (Flagrant 2) has said so well, “You may feel hurt and offended but you are not oppressed” (meaning- suck it up, buttercup).”
“The Neoliberal War on Dissent in the West: Those who most flamboyantly proclaim that they are fighting fascists continue to embrace and wield the defining weapons of despotism”.
Glen Greenwald comments on the authoritarian repression that has become standard practice in Western “neoliberalism’, also known as Woke Progressivism.
Greenwald details the spread of the authoritarian crusade to crush dissent that is now the go-to response of neoliberal elites. The “Neoliberal war on dissent” also embraces Green extremism (i.e. the anti-fossil fuel, anti-industrial society crusade) that has long exhibited the same intolerance of dissent with censoring and banning of skeptical climate science and demonizing of dissenting scientists. Green alarmists refuse to allow public discussion or debate of contrary evidence that shows there is no “climate crisis”. Pres. Obama’s AG, Loretta Lynch, even tried to criminalize skeptical climate science in 2016. Note also the strains of re-emerging Marxism in the Neoliberal mix.
Others have noted how dangerous it becomes when people view themselves as standing in a morally superior position to their opponents and when they frame their differences as a “righteous battle against evil”. The purported evil must not just be stopped, but it must be purged entirely because it poses an “existential threat” to democracy and to life itself. This is how climate alarmists frame their crusade to “save the world”.
(Insert note: Who said that the most dangerous people in our societies are those who believe they know what is best for all others, and believing that they are doing good (i.e. acting for the “greater good”) they will use force to coerce disagreeing others to embrace or yield to their vision and programs.)
Quotes from “The Neoliberal War on Dissent”:
“Few things are more dangerous than a political leader who convinces themselves that they are so benevolent and well-intentioned that anything they do is inherently justified in light of their noble character and their enlightened ends. One of the few things more alarming is a political movement that truly comes to believe that they are engaged in a battle not against political adversaries but in an existential and world-historic war against seditionists, traitors, insurrectionists, and terrorists.
“Once a person or movement becomes convinced that their opponents have exited the ordinary playing field of politics, then they are instantly convinced of the righteousness of any and all tactics used to attack them. Within the logical world where one is convinced that they really are fighting a white nationalist, fascistic, insurrectionary global movement to overthrow liberal democracy, then all the weapons we were long taught to view as despotic suddenly become ennobled, even tools necessary for the protection and advancement of democracy. And it is through this self-glorifying tale which Western neoliberals are telling themselves that they have become exactly what they shrilly insist they are battling.”
Note: One of the characters in the Netflix movie “Munich, The Edge of War” said, “We don’t choose the time that we are born in, but we do choose our response”. Someone else asked, “Where is courage today?” I would add: Where is forgiveness, mercy, kindness, love today- the basic features of humanity that enable the functioning of a cooperative, peaceful society?
Classic Liberal principles hold that all people possess inherent rights and freedoms simply by virtue of being born human. Government does not grant these rights and freedoms but has been created by the people to protect them. Rights and freedoms include freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, and the right of free assembly which are the essence of contemporary liberal democracy. Government must not infringe upon or violate these rights and freedoms.
John C. Goodman https://www.goodmaninstitute.org/about/how-we-think/what-is-classical-liberalism/
“Prior to the 20th century, classical liberalism was the dominant political philosophy in the United States. It was the political philosophy of Thomas Jefferson and the signers of the Declaration of Independence and it permeates the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Federalist Papers and many other documents produced by the people who created the American system of government. Many of the emancipationists who opposed slavery were essentially classical liberals, as were the suffragettes, who fought for equal rights for women.
“Basically, classical liberalism is the belief in liberty. Even today, one of the clearest statements of this philosophy is found in Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence. At that time, as is the case today, most people believed that rights came from government.
“People thought they only had such rights as government elected to give them. But following the British philosopher John Locke, Jefferson argued that it’s the other way around. People have rights apart from government, as part of their nature. Further, people can form governments and dissolve them. The only legitimate purpose of government is to protect these rights.”
Note: The freedom of speech Amendment in the US Constitution upholds the freedom to express information, ideas, and opinions, free of government restrictions on content.
A Chilliwack writer on Trudeau’s authoritarianism (shout-out to my hometown)
Note: What Trudeau did (though now revoked) speaks to larger trends and approaches still operating in our societies.
Glen Greenwald has just posted (23/02/2022) this excellent article by a young Chilliwack writer Rav Arora on what is happening in Canada with the Trudeau government and colluding media supporting authoritarian repression against a peaceful protest.
Arora says that since 2016 we were told by Progressive politicians and media to fear government tyranny from the Trump regime, which they demonized as “fascist”. Mainstream media in both the US and Canada pushed this narrative of threat from right-wing authoritarianism but they ignored the similar and even greater threat from the liberal authoritarians. Now Justin Trudeau is wielding “liberal” authoritarianism against a display of peaceful civil disobedience and demonizing protesters as “alt-right supremacists”. His, and media’s, demonization of protesters is based mainly on two fringe guys who showed up but were quickly dispatched. The Swastika guy, according to Jordan Peterson, was protesting the government as acting Nazi-like, not supporting Nazis. The other guy was sent packing after having his Confederate flag taken away.
But those two exceptions were used to demonize the entire protest, and media in both Canada (CBC) and the US ran with that narrative of distortion.
Arora notes the many diverse ethnicities- i.e. Indo-Canadian, blacks, others- who attended the protest and found protesters to be welcoming, friendly, and generous, behaving more like attendants at a fun celebration than a protest, with outdoor parties, games, and so on.
Even when protesters draped a flag over the Terry Fox statue, they did so to affirm his Canadian status, but media went hysterical claiming that they were defacing him. Protesters later built a protective cordon around that statue.
Arora notes that Trudeau persisted with his media allies in demonizing the protesters and resorted to excessively draconian repression. He continued his “politically-manufactured hysteria” and sent in the troops with pepper spray, batons, and horses. The result was that some 20 people with injuries ended up in hospitals.
As Arora says in the Greenwald post- the repression relied on the elaborate exaggeration of threat- i.e. the claim of “grave threat” to liberal democracy that no one has yet explained. There was no looting or widespread violence or civil unrest as in the BLM and Antifa riots in US cities that left 25 dead, with widespread arson, vandalism, and looting resulting in several billion dollars in damages. And the Trump administration did not respond with the excessive repression that Trudeau is using against a peaceful protest. Yet, for years politicians and media warned us to fear the dictatorial Trump regime.
Arora also includes updates on Covid science and the changing data that shows there is no more justification for vaccine mandates.
Pejoratives like “Fascism” or “Nazi” are thrown around loosely today by both sides of the political divide. The Left, though, has taken unhinged hysteria to new heights in claiming that any who disagree with Woke Progressivism today, including fellow Progressives/Democrats/liberals, are to be demonized as “racists, White supremacists, alt-right” and so on. Woke Progressives even label black people as “the face of white supremacy” and “racist” (e.g. Larry Elder, Winsome Sears).
This short video clip below (2 minutes) from Jordan Peterson is helpful on the meaning of ‘fascism’ as defined by Mussolini and others- i.e. the integration of corporation and state. I remember similar definitions from university political science courses.
Peterson points directly to the Canadian state broadcast corporation- the CBC- to illustrate the press/government collusion as an example of state/corporation integration. Peterson argues that institutions like the CBC have become corrupt and unreliable, and now just propagandize the Woke Progressive narrative of governments such as Trudeau’s. Peterson has also noted, along with Rex Murphy, that conservatives are shut out by the CBC, or their narratives are distorted as “right-wing, extremist”, etc.
The real root of alarmism (ancient ideas now deeply embedded in our subconscious)
One of the earliest beliefs of humanity is the myth that there are Forces/gods behind all the elements of nature- i.e. gods of trees and rocks, gods of streams, sky gods (gods of thunder, lightning, rain, storm), gods behind earthquakes, sea gods, gods of the varied forms of animal life, gods behind disease and predatory cruelty (both animal and human), and so on. Because the varied elements of life were often threatening and destructive, early people logically reasoned that the gods were angry and punishing them for being bad.
Early people also reasoned that we deserved punishment and destruction for our imperfections (“sins… mistakes”) so we needed to pay/atone the gods with sacrifices and consequent suffering. Guilt, shame, and fear all worked to enforce these lines of thought and reasoning. Over history, much of this primitive thinking has become deeply embedded in the human subconscious.
There is enough to fear in nature without adding the unnecessary psychic burden of metaphysical threat behind nature, on top of the natural threats and consequences that already exist all through life. Across history humanity has been burdened, enslaved, and tormented with the extra psychic burden of divine threat behind physical suffering.
So now, have we finally freed ourselves of such primitive nonsense in the modern scientific world? No, we haven’t. Many today have simply shifted their perspective to embrace “secular/ideological” versions of the same old mythology/pathology. Today we still have threatening deities behind nature in the form of “vengeful Gaia, Angry Planet/Mother Earth, punitive Universe, and payback karma”.
Fortunately, rational science frees us from such mythology. We continue to improve our understanding of the natural world, and we continue to create technology that enables us to adapt to nature and protect ourselves from the harsher elements of nature. Our progress on many fronts has resulted a 90-plus percent decline in deaths from climate/weather disasters just over the past 100 years. The world will never be perfect, but we adapt to it and make life better all the time. https://reason.org/wp-content/uploads/files/deaths_from_extreme_weather_1900_2010.pdf
Point? Reject the primitive mythology of metaphysical threat behind the natural world, including the threats from “secular/ideological” versions of deities. Apply this rejection of mythical threats especially to contemporary apocalyptic mythology as in climate apocalyptic.
Both sides of the climate debate (i.e. alarmists/liberals and many skeptics/conservatives) today concede the unproven and exaggerated alarmist narrative that there is a climate crisis and humans are responsible in some large measure. But the public has not been given a thorough presentation of the contrary evidence that shows humans are not mainly responsible for climate change, and actually play a very small role, a role that is still uncertain and poorly quantified. Media have never given the full evidence from the skeptical side. There has never been a robust public presentation and debate that includes all the evidence. The exaggerated apocalyptic narrative of the alarmists on climate crisis has dominated news media and the political realm.
Key data on the actual role of CO2 tell another story altogether. Good skeptical evidence affirms that CO2 does not play a dominant role in climate change, therefore meaning that human emissions are not a serious problem, and more critical, climate change is not an “existential crisis”. In fact, much evidence shows that the mild warming, along with the rise in CO2 over the past century, has been immensely beneficial to all life. Media and most politicians on both sides will not touch this evidence out of fear of alarmist/Woke outrage and threats of censorship, cancelling, and more.
The public has been grossly misled by the alarmist narrative on the climate situation and the costs of rushed mitigation policies are becoming overwhelmingly unbearable for the poorest members of our societies as energy costs rise. There are still immense reserves of fossil fuel resources that should make for plentiful fuel cheap to energize economies and enable the ongoing creation of wealth for all. Instead, the crusade to decarbonize has led to government interventions to block fossil fuel development of new resources. This has resulted in unnecessary scarcity of fossil fuels, the consequent rising prices of energy that impact all else (fossil fuels produce over 5000 other things vital to our lives). Add here the costly and environmentally damaging shift to renewables that has led to destabilized electrical grids. What a mess we have created, entirely unnecessary but due to the apocalyptic alarmist narrative against CO2, the very food of all life.
As Bob Brinsmead says, “The war on carbon is a war on life itself”. His comment exposes the insanity of the climate alarmism narrative.
Note this circular validation thing today. Jordan Peterson calls it “governing by polls”.
Politicians first alarm the public with an endless stream of concocted “crises” (H. L. Mencken: “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.”
The alarmism approach is used by both sides, but Woke Progressives have become notorious for taking this approach to new heights of unhinged hysteria with their identity politics feature of demonizing all opposition as “racist”.
Now highly partisan news media (mainly Woke Progressive) have come out of the closet to collude with Progressive governments to widely publicize the politicized alarms. Any who disagree with the alarmist narrative of Progressives will face an identity politics onslaught of pejoratives of being “racists, white supremacists, terrorists” even if they are moderate liberals or independents. All disagreeing with the Woke Progressive narrative are demonized as “far right extremists”, not worthy of having space to voice their “dangerous” opinions.
Then, after alarming the population re the existential threat of those who disagree, citizens are polled to reveal their concerns, which politicians then use to argue- Aha, there, that is what people are worried about and support.
It is a self-validating cycle. First the politician and media incite fear of some purported threat or enemy. Then they poll the populace they have alarmed. The poll results are then used to affirm the original fear-mongering and subsequent policy proposals.
Example: Jordan Peterson noted the closed-cycle reasoning in a poll that showed 70% of Canadians supported removing the peaceful protesters in Ottawa. But an earlier poll had shown that 70% of Canadians, just like the protesting truckers, wanted government mandates removed.
Peterson questioned the validity of the support for government action against a peaceful protest when previous protests were not even challenged by government (i.e. no shutdown of BLM protests, or pipeline protests, and almost entire media silence on the violent attack on Gaslink in BC).
Keep an eye on developing trends:
We have entered an era of renewed authoritarian threat from inside our societies.
For decades I have embraced the principles of Classic Liberalism. Applied today, this includes notably the elements of criminal justice reform, full gay/trans rights, free choice for women (reproduction rights), ending the drug war (full decriminalization of drugs), etc.. But because I refuse to embrace extremist Progressivism I would be, along with many other moderate Independents/liberals, still demonized as “racist, white supremacist” among other pejoratives. Insanity, eh. Simply for disagreeing with Woke Progressivism.
The political/social pathology that is Woke Progressivism, also embraces Green extremism (the “climate crisis” narrative) along with resurging Marxism. This hodgepodge ideology is trying to dominate societies with a new intolerant authoritarianism that censors, bans, silences, de-platforms all dissent/opposition. What Trudeau just did to a peaceful protest in Canada (2022) illustrates the harsh approach of this new intolerant Progressivism.
And much mainstream media (CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post, BBC, CBC, and many more) collude with the authoritarian Progressive governments- demonizing opposition to Woke Progressivism with the now obsessively used identity politic pejoratives “racist, white supremacist, misogynist” and so on. We have watched the shift of mainstream media to highly partisan commentary and conspiracy theories for years in the great Russia collusion lie in the US, and more.
Thankfully, there has been the emergence of alternative news media today in the podcast movement with more fair and balanced reporting from sources like Saagar and Krystal of Breaking Points (Spotify), Timcast IRL (also Spotify), Tim Dillon, Joe Rogan Experience, Jimmy Dore (YouTube, Spotify), Glen Greenwald, Singh and Schulz on Flagrant 2, and many more. These all are great fighters for freedom, especially freedom of speech. And interestingly, most of these are Leftist liberal or Independent (or Classic Liberal, Libertarian).
Dissent from or challenge to Woke Progressivism (even by fellow liberals/Democrats) is now full-on “Nazism” (“white supremacy, racism, terrorism”, etc.). This illustrates the extreme forms of lunacy that possess ideologues at times.
“Canadian MP claims ‘honk honk’ is code for ‘heil Hitler'”
“Canadian MP says truckers, social media users saying ‘honk honk’ are spreading pro-Hitler message (this illustrates the nature of unhinged hysteria over disagreeing others)
By Timothy H.J. Nerozzi
“Canadian Liberal MP Ya’ara Saks stated Monday that the onomatopoeia “honk honk” was a coded message meaning “heil Hitler.”
“Saks gave her testimony before Parliament on Monday, where she lamented perceived government inaction regarding the truckers.
“”How many guns need to be seized?” Saks asked from her podium. “How much vitriol do we have to see of ‘Honk Honk’ – which is an acronym for ‘heil Hitler’ – do we need to see on social media?”
“Honk honk” has become an unofficial slogan of the Freedom Convoy – a reference to the protesters’ use of horns to pester and annoy residents and government officials until pandemic mandates are lifted.
“Saks claimed the onomatopoeia was an “acronym” for “heil Hitler,” a phrase historically used by neo-Nazis as a declaration of support for White supremacy. It is likely that Saks misspoke – acronyms are an abbreviation of a phrase by the first letter of its words.
“Saks received strong backlash on social media from users accusing her of fabricating the hypothesized link between “honk honk” and “heil Hitler.”
“However, Sake doubled down on her assertion the same day on social media.
“”For those who think that ‘Honk Honk’ is some innocuous joke. I’ll just leave this here,” Saks wrote Monday.
“Saks linked to posts by “antifascist” and “organizer” Gwen Snyder as the source for her claim. Snyder previously claimed that “honk honk” was intended to mask the phrase “heil Hitler,” which is sometimes abbreviated to “HH.”
“Snyder claimed that the phrase was explicitly chosen as a White supremacist symbol. She offered a screenshot of a 4chan post without context as evidence.
“‘Honk honk’ is associated with the honker,” Synder said, referencing an image of internet meme Pepe the Frog in a rainbow wig.”
Watch the excellent Jordan Peterson interview with Frederick Kagan, a Russian expert and professor of military history at West Point Military Academy.
They note that Putin shares the long-held view (from deep in Russian history, since the Ivan rulers) of Russian “special destiny”, a kind of messianic take on a nation’s place in history and in the world. Related to this, Putin shares the paranoid view that the West is thwarting Russian special destiny, hence his sense of grievance and bitterness toward the West, for not letting Russia “get off its knees”.
Also, good insight on Russia’s “Reflexive control hybrid warfare”, a version of misinformation warfare where you create a public narrative for your enemy to embrace, encouraging them to follow a course of action that they believe is in their best interest but is actually what you want them to do. Peterson and Kagan discuss how this hybrid warfare worked to Russia’s advantage in the 2014 Crimean takeover and the West fell for it.
Kagan sets forth the varied evidence that Putin probably did not originally intend to invade Ukraine but just wanted to threaten the West. Evidence? Scattered battalions of Russian soldiers pulled from diverse places in Russia, and this does not follow traditional Russian military protocols. Also, Putin did not prepare the Russian public properly for an invasion, another sign of improper preparation related to the absence of original intention to invade.
So when the US exposed his misinformation campaign (i.e. such as the “false red flag” incidents) Putin was enraged as seen in incidents like his outburst against one of his information specialists- “Speak, speak, speak clearly”. Kagan suggests that since he was exposed, Putin decided- what the hell, just go for it and invade.
The warning from Kagan is to remember what the Russians did in Syria- i.e. cutting off civilian neighborhoods (no food or water), intentionally bombing hospitals, and so on. That may be next for Ukraine and then how does the West respond to that? Stand by and watch?
The danger is that the bear is cornered and measured responses are critical, especially since Putin has put forth the nuclear threat. Overall, it appears the post-WW2 era of relative peace that we have enjoyed is now over and we are in a new world of geopolitical threat. As Kagan concludes- military defense budgets will have to be raised seriously now.
The link to a detailed report on Russia’s use of “Reflexive control” information warfare…
“When life produces what the intellect names evil, we may enter into righteous battle, contending from ‘loyalty of heart’: however, if the principle of love (Christ’s “love your enemies”) is lost, our humanity too will be lost. ‘Man’, in the words of the American novelist Hawthorne, ‘must not disclaim his brotherhood even with the guiltiest’”, Joseph Campbell, Myths to Live By (p.168). The love Campbell referred to- love of enemies- is not about feeling warm or fuzzy toward people committing atrocities against innocent populations. Outrage is the only human response to such horrors. But despite the intensity of natural feelings, as Tolstoy argues below, we must maintain our humanity in the worst situations that life throws at us by treating even our enemies humanely.
A stunning example of “love your enemies”…
Quotes from this article “Russian captive soldiers cry for their mothers”, The Sunday Times, Mar. 2, 2022
“In a field surrounded by the people he had been sent to fight, a young Russian prisoner of war hungrily gulped down the tea and bread they offered him.
“A Ukrainian woman calmed him, telling the soldier not to worry. Using her phone, she made a video call to his mother. As soon as his mother appeared on the screen, he burst into tears.
“Everything is OK,” his female captor said, while others stroked his back. “Natasha, God be with you. We will call you later. He is alive and healthy.”
“Video of the incident has circulated on Ukrainian and Russian social media channels, and has been hailed as an example of human compassion in wartime.
“Numerous other clips, apparently showing Russian prisoners of war captured by Ukrainian soldiers or civilian fighters, have been widely shared. Many of the captives appear to be no more than teenagers.
“One soldier, who gave his name as Daniil, was forced to lie on the ground while civilian gunmen tore the badges from his uniform. The soldier, who said he was from Buryatia, a republic on the border with Mongolia, gave his year of birth as 2003.
“Another video shows a soldier in handcuffs telling his mother that he loves her and: “They sent us to death, everyone killed everyone.”
“In another, a soldier said that they were not allowed to collect the bodies of their fallen comrades, and there were “no funerals”.”
Tolstoy said it well, “The whole trouble lies in that people think there are conditions excluding the necessity of love in their intercourse with man, but such conditions do not exist. Things may be treated without love; one may chop wood, make bricks, forge iron without love but one can no more deal with people without love than one can handle bees without care… (and) You can love a person dear to you with a human love, but an enemy can only be loved with divine love”.
As Glen Greenwald noted in his article below, it is in times when emotions erupt with anger, outrage, and intense tribal feelings that it is most critical for us to maintain our humanity, and related to the point that he was making, to protect the freedom of speech of all by permitting contrary voices to speak and challenge the dominant narratives on critical issues of the day.
Other interesting insights:
Jordan Peterson on comfort/discomfort in the brief video below (general comments on engaging the nasty side of life):
Points? Beware of seeking too much comfort. Get involved in the messy struggles of life. Getting into life is uncomfortable. There is tragedy and suffering but in enduring that we learn the critical lessons of life and maturity and become better for embracing it. We grow and develop. So have great dreams and go out and get into life, not letting the good substitute for the better, for the great.
Peterson notes Michelangelo’s painting of Mary with the broken body of the dead Christ. That, he says, illustrates the cross of the mother, to send her children out into life, to let them suffer and even sometimes die, but to accomplish something. Its dangerous to go out into life but more dangerous not to go out and embrace life. Seeking safety and comfort will kill our souls.
These are Joseph Campbell’s points also- that we go out into life, we engage battles, suffer and are wounded. But we have to engage the hero’s journey of struggling to slay a dragon/monster. That is how we gain insights, learn lessons, and mature as humans, developing empathy with struggling and suffering others, and making our contribution to improving life.
Here is “Comfort will kill your soul”.