Section topics further below:
Green policies ruining societies,
The real “righteous battle” of life takes place inside each of us,
Endless eruptions of hysterical outrage,
YouTube discussion- Jordan Peterson with Africa Brooke,
All human beings are imperfect- forgiveness in our stories,
Metaphysical basis of equality?,
Posts to old friends on climate facts,
One post on some features of the dying process (personal story),
The SEC disclosure rule and the Lindzen/Happer (climate physicists) exposure of the unscientific basis of the rule,
Study: Cold in China kills 45 times as many people as heat,
Pushback against ESG undemocratic infiltration of the business world,
Joseph Campbell’s insights on human development,
Bjorn Lomborg on cold killing far more people than heat,
Defining themes of profoundly religious crusades like climate alarmism,
Scientist Lennart Bengtsson: “There is no climate crisis”.
Green policies ruining societies with the decarbonization crusade, Wendell Krossa
An apocalyptic/millennial narrative, a doom story, has possessed our world. The story of “climate crisis”. And despite claims of climate alarmists that their story is scientific, it is actually thoroughly anti-science, a quite profoundly religious story, no different from myriad similar apocalyptic stories across human history that also led societies to self-inflicted ruin (see, for example, Richard Landes’ “Heaven On Earth” for detail).
The climate crisis story is based on the themes listed just below in “The defining themes of ‘profoundly religious’ alarmism crusades” and the fuller complex of themes in “Humanity’s worst ideas, better alternatives” posted in the section “An adventure/quest for ultimate freedom” near the bottom of this site’s opening page. I will repost this last and fuller complex of themes again soon.
This apocalyptic narrative of climate crisis persists because it’s themes resonate intuitively with most people as true. The themes of apocalyptic millennialism resonate with deeply embedded ideas that still dominate the subconscious of most people.
This site has affirmed often that the worldviews of most people have been shaped by the mythical/religious themes of apocalyptic millennialism- history’s most dominant narrative (a form of salvationism religion). I base this conclusion on the proxy evidence that 85% of people on earth still affiliate with the major world religions that embrace and promote the main features of this narrative, and most of the remaining 15% (“unaffiliated”) still hold “secular/ideological” versions of this same narrative.
And yes, even the Eastern religious traditions- Hinduism and Buddhism- have varieties of apocalyptic/millennial themes as noted by scholars like Mircea Eliade (History of Religious Ideas). Both hold versions of declinism that is central to apocalyptic mythology- the myth of life declining toward something worse, toward collapse and ending (i.e. Hindu meta-cycles of rise, then decline toward catastrophic ending; Buddhist myths of historically decreasing human life-spans).
Here again are some of the basic themes of this historically persistent and anti-science narrative:
(1) A lost original paradise, a paradise ruined by corrupt/greedy humanity.
(2) Life now heading toward a worse future, toward some great collapse and even ending (apocalypse).
(3) The hope of salvation if humanity immediately purges life of a great threatening evil. The imagined evil today- too many people consuming too many resources like fossil fuels and thereby threatening the apocalyptic destruction of the world.
(4) The hope of salvation involves making atonement for humanity’s sins. Hence, the apocalyptic millennial narrative, like many religious stories across history, demands a sacrifice (payment/punishment). If humanity makes the sacrifice of giving up the good life in industrial civilization (especially giving up its plentiful fossil fuel energy), and does so in haste, then the apocalyptic prophets claim that the lost paradise may be restored. “Haste” is demanded because the looming apocalypse is always “imminent”- just up ahead a few years or decades, hence, the calls for “instantaneous transformation” of societies via decarbonization.
(5) This meta-narrative also presents people with the hope of engaging a heroic venture in a righteous crusade against enemies, against evil. This satisfies deeply embedded human impulses for meaning in terms of tribal battles against others.
This salvationism narrative has been entirely wrong about life, like all apocalyptic/millennial crusades before it. There is no “climate crisis” taking the world toward an apocalypse. Yet the widespread belief in this irrational story is leading many countries to engage self-inflicted ruin with salvation schemes (radical policies to “save the world”). Sites like Wattsupwiththat.com and Global Warming Policy Forum (Net Zero Watch) are daily tracking the mounting damage to countries from the rush to embrace Green extremist policies (i.e. renewables).
Note Ralph Schoellhammer’s comment in his July 7, 2022 Newsweek article, “A Popular Uprising Against the Elites Has Gone Global”, https://www.newsweek.com/popular-uprising-against-elites-has-gone-global-opinion-1722653?mc_cid=2b4630a0fc&mc_eid=bbd9cad85f
Schoellhammer says, “Ultimately, there is a risk that climate policies will do to Europe what Marxism did to Latin America. A continent with all the conditions for widespread prosperity and a healthy environment will impoverish and ruin itself for ideological reasons.” Make that, “will ruin itself for an irrational story”.
As always here- I affirm the good work by climate physicists like Richard Lindzen and William Happer, notably their evidence on the rapidly declining influence of CO2 on climate. They rightly tell us that there is no climate crisis that has to be solved by eliminating human use of fossil fuels. There is no scientifically justified reason to tax carbon or decarbonize our societies. See details on climate physics in sections below. In terms of climate science always go to the core issue- the physics related to CO2.
Yes, good climate science is critical to counter this false story but scientific fact alone will not change many minds. I would argue that you also have to counter the deeply embedded beliefs that have long shaped such narratives- the myths of apocalyptic millennialism, salvationism. You have to confront the meta-story or meta-narrative itself. This project includes confronting the dominant religious traditions of our world that still propagate the primitive ideas of apocalyptic millennialism and continue to re-enforce these myths in people’s minds. Add also, confronting the Hollywood story-telling machine that has become the major propagandist for primitive apocalyptic mythology in today’s world.
Confronting religious traditions is not an advocacy for abandoning all forms of spirituality but for purging primitive religious themes that “bury diamonds in dung” as per Jefferson and Tolstoy’s arguments re the New Testament (i.e. the New Testament Christ myth buries the radical insights of Historical Jesus, a person with an entirely opposite message to Paul’s Christ). Again, see my “Humanity’s worst ideas, better alternatives” posted in the section “An adventure/quest for ultimate freedom” below, and “The Christ Myth: Separating diamonds from dung” (under the section below titled- “Ongoing project: Go to root themes/ideas”).
These apocalyptic millennial themes have been beaten into human consciousness over multiple millennia, rendering most people susceptible to every new apocalyptic prophet that comes along. You have to deal with the core themes of human narratives/worldviews if you are seriously going to free people from ongoing susceptibility to these primitive ideas.
More on Green energy policies causing inflation…
“The Rise and Fall of Boris Johnson”, Editorial, The Wall Street Journal, July 7, 2022
“Britain is now in the grip of an inflation crisis that Mr. Johnson has made worse at every turn. Green taxes and regulations in service of Mr. Johnson’s net-zero carbon ambitions helped energy prices spiral upward. Households saw their rates for home electricity and natural gas spike 54% in April with another 40%-plus expected in October. This is feeding through to other prices, and overall inflation is expected to exceed 10% later this year. Inflation is a political killer.”
The defining themes of “profoundly religious” alarmism crusades: Wendell Krossa
(1) The loss of an imagined original paradise (e.g. Eden, Dilmun) caused by corrupt/sinful, fallen humanity (i.e. life degenerating toward something worse over the long-term, from a “better past”, and a “self-loathing” of humanity as essentially evil and at fault for the degradation of the world and life).
(2) Prophesies of looming apocalypse (the decline of life toward a worsening world, toward some great collapse and ending of life). Apocalyptic panic-mongering incites the survival impulse and pushes people to embrace irrational salvation schemes.
(3) Required salvation scheme to offer hope (a contemporary version- decarbonization to “save the world”).
(4) A necessary violent purging of “evil”, a great cleansing of the world, a purifying of life (today- the crusade is to purge the purported “evil” of the “pollutant” CO2, and overall industrial civilization).
(5) The hurried push for “instantaneous transformation” of life as the apocalypse is always “imminent” (dates for the end are always set and reset just a few years or decades in the future- reset because the end never arrives in an ever-improving world).
(6) The felt need for the heroic engagement of a “righteous battle against evil”.
(7) The felt need to make a sacrifice/atonement, to make a payment for one’s sins, to suffer some form of punishment for being imperfectly human (i.e. give up the good life in modern civilization and return to a “morally superior” simple lifestyle, return to primitivism).
(8) The stark tribal division of humanity- i.e. identifying one’s side as good, against some other side as evil.
(9) After purging the evil from the world (e.g. over-population, too many over-consuming people), there is the promise/hope of a restored paradise or new millennial utopia.
(10) Never admitting that your apocalyptic vision is essentially mythical (even though given contemporary “secular/ideological/scientific” expression) and that it distorts entirely the true state of life (i.e. again, endlessly resetting the dates for the end of life, as the end never arrives because life is on an endlessly improving long-term trajectory).
Why do so many people today continue to hold these primitive religious/mythical themes in their personal worldviews? One explanation: Apocalyptic movements like climate alarmism incite the survival impulse in populations. Alarmed people tend to become irrational, susceptible to confirmation bias affirmation of their belief systems (i.e. embracing only the evidence that confirms their beliefs, and denying contrary evidence). Frightened people (desperate to survive) also become susceptible to irrational salvation schemes like decarbonization even if such schemes cause self-harm (harm to their own group/society). And the people embracing irrational and mythically-based salvation schemes are often people who self-identify as scientifically “rational, secularist/materialist… even atheist”.
Aroused fear pushes us to retreat to deeply embedded “archetypes”- mythical themes long beaten into human consciousness/subconscious, themes that incite and validate our worst animal impulses to tribalism (small band versus small band), to domination (alpha male/female), and to punitive, destructive response to others outside our band, our “enemies” (i.e. hatred of the differing other that “threatens” us). Incited fear pushes us to abandon our more rational and humane impulses for a retreat to the deeply embedded subhuman/inhuman, to the more primitive inheritance of archetypes that shape our subconscious and thereby our entire lives.
Note: The above-listed beliefs differ little in content from similar themes that were(are) common all through ancient Sumerian/Akkadian, Babylonian, Zoroastrian, Hindu, Jewish, Christian, and Islamic traditions.
The real “righteous battle” of life, Wendell Krossa
Psychologist Jordan Peterson has commented that before we go out to engage public battles of varied sorts we should first engage and win the greatest battle of all- i.e. the inner battle with our darker, subhuman side. He quotes Solzhenitsyn in this regard,
“The line separating good and evil passes not through states, not between classes, nor between political parties either- but right through every human heart- and through all human hearts… If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.”
Aristotle said this in regard to the greater inner battle against evil:
“I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies; for the hardest victory is over self”.
Joseph Campbell added that the call to orient our lives to “universal love, to “love our enemies”, was the weapon that defeated our inner evil and made us the heroes of our personal stories. Loving our enemies enabled us to “tower in stature as maturely human”. Loving our enemies was how we maintained our humanity as we engaged the various “righteous battles” of life.
“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 thereby, our humanity too will be lost. “Man” in the words of the American novelist Hawthorne, “must not disclaim his brotherhood even with the guiltiest”.”, Myths to Live By.
What prominent features shape the distinction between inner good and evil? I frame this struggle in terms of the most dominant of inherited animal impulses and their more humane opposites:
(1) The animal impulse to small band mentality or tribalism (us versus the outsider to our group), (2) the animal impulse to domination of weaker others (alpha male/female), and (3) the animal impulse to destroy the competing other (punitive justice).
We counter these with (1) the humane impulse to inclusion of all as equals in the one human family, (2) the humane impulse to treatment of all as free equals (no domination/submission relating with others), and (3) with the humane impulse to restorative/rehabilitative justice for all human failure.
Note: Humanizing “domination/submission” relationships is not so much about changing the hierarchical organizational structures that we engage all through life but more about our interactions and the way that we treat others/subordinates within such structures. Think kindness, mercy, forgiveness, respect, gentleness, generosity, benefit of the doubt (not assuming the worst of the other person), and other such humane features of human interaction no matter what formal organizational structure human interaction occurs within.
An elderly man demonstrating and holding this sign in public: “Stop hating each other because you disagree”.
Worst heat waves?
Good presentation of data on 1930s heatwaves that were far worse than those today. We are not experiencing “the worst heat waves on record” as media incessantly and wrongly claim. Another evidence-blow to climate alarmism.
Hurricanes have not been increasing in frequency or intensity with the mild warming over past decades…
Southern Hemisphere experiencing record cold…
There are no “increasingly devastating climate-fueled extreme weather events” as repeatedly claimed by climate alarmists.
And this from one of the best theological minds to have ever graced this planet…
A summary of the past two centuries of historical Jesus research, Bob Brinsmead
“The other morning, as I was waking, I began to thinking over all the major things that scholarly/literary research has discovered over the last two hundred years of historical Jesus research. On the major lines of research, there seems to be a basic agreement, whether the scholars are Protestant, Catholic, Jewish or even atheists such as Casey or Ehrman. Here I have jotted down the areas of research progress. Most of the issues were flagged in the first half of the nineteenth century or about 200 years ago. What has been achieved are the principles of the Enlightenment applied to literary and historical research.
“I list below the points where there is a general consensus:
“1. The historical Jesus is not the Christ of faith.
“2. None of the NT was written by eyewitnesses to the historical Jesus. We don’t have access to any historical witnesses or extant records of him, either inside or outside the NT.
“3. Except for the letters of Paul, we don’t know who wrote the NT documents to which false names were attached to give them “apostolic authority” when in fact the documents are post-apostolic.
“4. The Gospels were written after the 70 CE destruction of Jerusalem which wiped out that Jewish world and destroyed most records. The Gospels were written by non-Palestinians, none of whom knew Jesus personally, his family clan or core Galilean followers. They were overseas authors who wrote in a foreign language. They often portray a lack of understanding of Jewish culture or even Palestinian geography. It would have been something like having a bunch of non-English speaking foreigners doing a life of Shakespeare two or three generations after Shakespeare died.
“5. The Evangelists shaped or massaged the story of Jesus to support the religious narrative which they wanted to promote, but they did preserve enough of the authentic parables and aphorisms of Jesus that when examined do not support their core religious (apocalyptic) narrative. Also, the tensions and contractions between the four Gospel accounts have been well documented, putting paid to assumptions or claims of any Biblical inerrancy– e.g.
(a) two contradictory Nativity stories and four contradictory resurrection stories,
(b) the whopping differences between the Synoptic Gospels and the Fourth Gospel (John’s gospel),
(c) a Jesus who celebrated a Passover meal with his disciples (i.e. the Synoptics) versus a no Passover meal (i.e. John’s Gospel),
(d) the crucifixion event on the Passover Thursday evening in John versus the Friday crucifixion in the Synoptics, and
(e) a Jesus who spoke publicly only in parables (Synoptics) versus a Jesus who uses no parables but gives long monologues about himself (John’s Gospel).
“6. The tension and disagreements between the Jewish Christians of the Jerusalem church led by James, the brother of Jesus, and the Gentile Christians following the teaching of St. Paul. The serious nature of the conflict between Paul and the Jerusalem apostles was first identified by F.C. Baur as early as the 1830s and has been a developing area of investigation now for nearly 200 years. What has finally become crystal clear is that the primitive or apostolic church was the one at Jerusalem led by James for over a generation after the death of Jesus, and that this church did not teach that Jesus was divine or virgin born and did not teach that he died for the sins of the world. Those who generally talk most about returning to the faith and practices of the apostolic or primitive church have no idea what they are talking about.
“7. Around the same time, the hypothesis of the existence of a Q Sayings Gospel used as a source material for Matthew and Luke was proposed and has been a matter of research and development ever since.
“8. The clear identification of Apocalyptic as a distinct genre of literature- distinct from the Law and the Prophets- was also made around the middle of the nineteenth century. This too has proved to be an area of ongoing research over the same period of time. One area not yet resolved among the scholars is whether Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet (the Schweitzer view) or a sapiential rather than an apocalyptic Jesus (the Jesus Seminar view). This remaining divide in Historical Jesus scholarship can only be resolved when the matter is viewed in the light of the final and most astonishing area of Historical Jesus research. (Point 9 below)
“9. The area often touched on superficially and skirted around like a root out of the dry ground is the matter of the anti-sacrificial movement launched by John the Baptist and brought to a head by the very issue that led directly to the death of Jesus. This is the matter of the real nature of Jesus’ temple protest. This was always destined to become the central issue of all Jesus research. No one disputes that Jesus died. If the temple event is seen as Jesus carrying forward the anti-sacrifice mission of his cousin John, then Jesus has to be seen as utterly against the whole religious idea that a sacrifice, an act of violent blood-letting to make an atonement for sin, should ever be required for reconciliation with God or with one another.
“This would mean that the Christian religion was founded on a false interpretation of the meaning of the death of Jesus, and it was out of this grave misunderstanding, that the whole edifice of its Christology arose– the Christology of a divine, virgin born and absolutely sinless man by whom God supposedly defeats evil by an act of apocalyptic violence, first in the Christ event and finally in a holocaust at the end of the world.
“Or to put it more simply, Jesus died protesting at the temple, the place where sacrifices were offered, affirming that God requires no sacrifice (no blood-letting violence) to put us right with God; yet the Christian religion turned the death of Jesus into God’s supreme sacrifice to put us right with God. Rightly understood, point 9 resolves the issue of point 8, that is, whether the historical Jesus was an apocalyptic Jesus or a sapiential Jesus. Bob Brinsmead
“This is just a rough draft from the top of my head”.
Endless eruptions of hysterical outrage
It is unsettling to observe the ongoing eruptions of unhinged hysteria in mainstream media over varied societal issues (social, environmental, and other). Many of the issues are framed in extremist terms. The proponents of either side are damned for promoting policies that are purported to bring results that will be “catastrophic… the end of democracy… the end of the world… an existential crisis…” and more. That is highly irresponsible exaggeration and catastrophizing. Disregarding the hysteria of such extremists, most ordinary folks generally move along through their lives as ever before.
I suspect the virtue-signaling, enraged folks are actually a fringe minority on both sides but media love the ratings response they get by promoting these people as representative voices of the mainstream.
And we wonder why these people are so enraged and willing to express what appears to be such venomous hatred toward others that disagree with them. Well, it does not help calm nerves when the “other” is demonized as an existential threat to democracy, life, and the very world. That incites the survival impulse in most people, resulting in a shift to the irrational thinking and acting that results from panic-mongering.
Both sides are guilty of this unhinged hysteria regarding the “other” but as Woke Progressives control most media (and other public institutions) the exaggerated catastrophizing tends to come mainly from one side today.
And what drives all this apocalyptic scale hysteria and exaggeration?
The motivation behind much of this often appears to be straightforward hatred of the differing other. I know those affiliating with catastrophe crusades would protest- “No, I am standing against an evil and for something just and righteous”. We all defensively want to believe that we are engaging some heroic quest for good and against evil.
My counter would be- “Yes, some battles are against real evil but most are just against opponents with differing views on issues. And there is no justifying the vilifying, humiliating, and the destroying of the differing other in those situations (e.g. cancel crusades). And even in battles with real enemies we are still obligated to treat them in a humane manner”. Wendell Krossa
This brief YouTube video (see link just below) repeats one of the most important points that Jordan Peterson is making today re the sacredness of the individual versus collectivism- a deadly ideology now making new inroads in our societies through Woke Racism ideology (CRT ideology) and Progressivism in general (see for example “Woke Racism” by John McWhorter and “War on the West” by Doug Murray). New versions of collectivism are pushed today in terms of generalized racial categories, something even Martin Luther King argued against. The video clip is only 9 minutes long- worth a listen.
YouTube discussion with Africa Brooke, a black woman, on racism issues.
Peterson notes that every human being has in-group preferences and out-group skepticism/fears. This is part of being human, a sort of natural tribalism (thinking in terms of my band, my group). He has pointed out this issue in other videos also.
He notes that anthropologists have found that every group in the world uses the word that refers to human beings in relation to their group and some other word to describe everyone else. This tendency to in-group preference in everyone is something everyone has to fight against. In-group preference/racism is something all humans struggle with.
Africa, the black woman, shares how she had been caught up in such thinking but felt something was wrong in blaming others- whites- and her questions led her to challenge her own involvement with the Woke narrative of white domination and black disempowerment/powerlessness. She did not feel disempowered by anyone and why was she being told that she was?
Peterson then ends with how this focus on group identity (i.e. blacks versus whites) devalues the sacredness of individual particularity that empowers all of us. I see the relation here between Woke culture (and other contemporary Leftist things like Progressivism in general) and Marxism with its focus on collectives versus individuals. Which is where Peterson sort of points near the end in referring to Nazism.
Peterson rightly warns there is a dangerous totalitarianism in this thinking that has become so common all over our societies in all sorts of forums.
An anti-dote? A full embrace of human oneness, that the human family is one family of equal individuals, that human identity is found most critically and fundamentally in being commonly human (i.e. possessing human mind/consciousness), not in the minor dividing categories of race, nationality, gender, religion, politics, or whatever other dividing categories that we embrace for identity.
All human beings are imperfect.
Ha. Well, that’s a brilliant insight, eh.
All human beings fuck up in ways big and small, and in all sorts of ways in between.
This reality of human imperfection makes forgiveness critical to peace (including our own peace of mind) and our overall success as harmonious societies.
Especially critical is the forgiveness of our “enemies”.
Qualifier: Forgiveness is not a fuzzy, warm feeling toward offenders and their offenses. It is an act of intention to do the mature, humane thing despite how one feels. To contribute to greater goals of general peace and harmony. To contribute to life moving toward a better future.
Forgiveness also holds the offender responsible in terms of restitution and other forms of making things right where necessary.
But forgiveness does not wait for the right response from an offender before forgiving. Authentic forgiveness is free and hence often a costly sacrifice.
Forgiveness becomes an act of heroic courage when it takes the initiative to forgive despite no response in kind from an offender (no sign of remorse or regret, no apology). Like a Mandela.
As an ancient wisdom sage said,
“If you love only those who love you, what credit is that to you? Everyone finds it easy to love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Everyone can do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Most will lend to others, expecting to be repaid in full. But do something more heroic, more humane. (Live on a higher plane of human experience) Love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then you will be just like God, because God is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. God causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. Be unconditionally loving, just as your God is unconditionally loving”. (My paraphrase of Luke 6:32-36.) Wendell Krossa
Additional points, Wendell Krossa
Metaphysical basis of equality? (Insights related to the re-defining of basic metaphysical reality with the feature of unconditional)
Varied spiritual traditions have offered the insight that the creating Mind/Consciousness/Intelligence is most essentially “unconditional love”. Note the Near-Death Experience movement in this regard. Discovering that deity is an inexpressibly stunning no conditions love is the central discovery of many experiences in that movement.
Related insights include the point that the creating Mind/Consciousness has incarnated in all humanity in some inseparable relationship to the human spirit, meaning that the essence of every human person is that same divine unconditional love. That love is our true self, our true nature. We are persons created to love unconditionally. Our essential nature as unconditional beings means this is an essential purpose of human existence.
With the unconditional human spirit constituting our very core nature, and the human spirit being some form of incarnated deity, then all of us are most fundamentally beings of no conditions love. This is our most fundamental identity, our truest self, our most authentic self or person. Hence, the advice of the sage Jesus to “Be unconditionally loving, just as your God is unconditionally loving”. Be or become what you really are.
But we also have an inherited animal brain with its dark impulses to things like tribalism (us versus enemies), to domination of weaker others (alpha male/female), and to punitive destruction of enemies. And each of us is free to choose how we will think about our lives, how we will feel about varied things we encounter in life, and how we will respond to the myriad daily situations/events that our unique stories will present to us over a lifetime.
Each of us faces the choice daily to either indulge the darker animal impulses or to rise above in relation to our human spirit with its higher impulses to love inclusively (not tribally), to respect everyone as a free equal, and to treat the failure of our opponents with humane justice (restoratively, rehabilitatively).
(“Between stimulus and response, there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response”, Viktor Frankl.)
Despite our failures, it helps to constantly reorient ourselves to this fundamental truth that our essential nature is no conditions love. That is our truest self, not our failures where we indulge the darker animal impulses of our inherited brains.
This truth of deity incarnated in all humanity equally, provides a new basis for human equality. Deity did not just incarnate in special holy people, in religious heroes like Buddha, Jesus, or Mohammad. Deity incarnated equally in every human person means that we are all equal members of the one human family and are all equally possess the same common human spirit that is the presence of the creating deity in all of us. We all have equal and immediate access to the universal Mind historically known as God. We do not need the mediation of priesthoods or other gurus.
The equal incarnation of every person by God offers a new lens through which to view the horrific failures of others. Their failures may have been due to their choices that were overwhelmingly shaped by early life trauma that deformed their minds and hence, resulted in their failure to live as human. And while some people are too dangerous to permit them to live freely in human society, they still deserve to be treated humanely in the criminal justice system as fellow members possessing the same core human spirit.
Here is Joseph Campbell’s comment on viewing others/enemies in terms of their real status as equals in the one human family:
“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 thereby, our humanity too will be lost. “Man” in the words of the American novelist Hawthorne, “must not disclaim his brotherhood even with the guiltiest”.” Myths to Live By.
Loving even our enemies is about maintaining our own humanity in our interactions with one another, including the worst failures among us.
Note the report further below from Wattsupwiththat.com on the Lindzen/Happer challenge to the SEC ruling that companies must disclose climate impacts, a kind of coercion of business to toe the ESG line. Lindzen and Happer, both climate physicists, expose the unscientific basis of that ruling. It is based on climate alarmism politics.
Posts to old friends from many a year ago… I am recuperating from a prostate operation and waiting for the biopsy results to see if cancerous or not. Hence, more time to sit around, think, and share some thoughts with others.
These are recent posts to old friends. We worked together with the upland Manobo tribal groups of Mindanao (Bukidnon and Davao del Norte provinces) many decades ago, engaging healthcare, agricultural, educational, and other livelihood programs/projects. Wendell Krossa
We noted climate issues…
“We touched on weather/climate the other day. That brings this to mind as climate alarmism has become a dominant public narrative today across the world. It is a version of the ideology of Declinism (Arthur Herman’s “The Idea of Decline in Western History”). Herman stated that Declinism has become the most dominant and influential theme in modern life. Declinism states the belief life is getting worse and heading toward disastrous collapse and ending. He traces the history of the formulation of this belief.
“My point- decades ago a friend, Bob Brinsmead, got me to read Julian Simon’s “Ultimate Resource”, perhaps the single best book I have ever read and quite life-changing. People have said that is why Ronald Reagan was such an optimist, as he had read Simon’s book.
“Julian Simon was a professor of economics, and a population specialist. He had previously believed the environmental alarmist message that the world was going to hell in a handbasket and it made him a clinically depressed man, according to his autobiography. He believed apocalyptic prophets like Paul Erhlich who was telling us that it was all over back in the 1960s and 70s (due to global cooling and mass starvation), and has continued to do so into the present.
“So Simon decided to research the best sources of data and find out for himself what the true state of the world was. And he surprised himself in finding that while there are problems everywhere, humanity was doing a good job in solving problems and taking care of life on Earth and that overall life was improving over the long term. All the evidence pointed to this fact.
“Media ignore such positive news and constantly prowl to find “anecdotal” events and things that make their case for life worsening (see David Altheide’s “Creating fear: News and the construction of crisis” for a good analysis of how news media operate).
“Simon looked at all the main indicators of the state of life- i.e. forests, ocean fisheries, land species, soils, and more. Life was not perfect but it was improving on all fronts.
“Simon taught us to get to the true state of something by looking at all the evidence, not succumbing to “confirmation bias” by only looking at evidence that affirmed our beliefs but also looking at evidence contrary to our beliefs and honestly accepting such evidence.
“And Simon said that we understand the true state of things by looking at the longest-term trends associated with whatever we look at.
“When we do this with climate then a very different picture emerges, contrary to the climate alarmism of today.
“Now, here is the point with climate/weather- Our Holocene interglacial is now about 11,000 years long, since the end of the previous glaciation in North America, the Wisconsin.
“The warmest period in our interglacial was the Holocene Optimum of about 10,000 to 6,000 years ago when it was about 3 degrees C warmer than today. That was the warmest period of our interglacial and the time when agriculture was developed and the great ancient civilizations emerged.
“Since the end of that Optimum the climate of our interglacial has been on a long-term cooling trend. The Roman Warm Period of about 250 BC to 400 AD was about a degree warmer than today and the Medieval Warm Period of about 950 to 1250 AD was also about a degree warmer than today.
“Our modern warm period is still the coolest warm period of our interglacial. Meaning this interglacial will end in the future and the next glaciation will begin just as this pattern has been true for previous millions of years (100,000 year cycles of glaciations and inter-glacials tracked in such evidence as the Vostok Ice core samples).
“Rather than fear warming we ought to fear cooling as that Lancet study showed 20 times more people die of cold every year than die of warmth. The Lancet being the most respected medical journal on the planet.
“This “skeptical” evidence convinces me to challenge climate alarmism as a great distortion and more a political movement than a scientific one. Add into the mix the anti-industrial civilization element of climate alarmism.” Wendell Krossa
“I am putting this material below on my site today as it is from two of the best scientists that challenge the global warming alarmism narrative- physicist William Happer of Princeton and physicist Richard Lindzen formerly of MIT. I used to watch Larry King interview Lindzen.
“Both are specialists in the physics of CO2 and show solid evidence that the warming influence of CO2 is large at small ppms (parts per million in the atmosphere) but that influence declines “logarithmically” with increasing levels and has already reached “saturation” in physics terms- meaning its ability to contribute to further warming has been greatly diminished. (Lindzen says it may contribute another degree or so to further warming, many other climate physicists estimate perhaps 0.5 to 1.0 degree C and that would be net beneficial in our still too cold world where most die from cold than from warmth).
“This evidence undermines entirely the alarmist claim that human emissions are causing catastrophic warming and the looming end of the world (Congresswoman AOC’s claim re 2030).
“Anyway, this from Anthony Watts good site Wattsupwiththat.com, going up on my site today…
“The point made by climate physicists like Lindzen and Happer has to do with things like the Stefan-Boltzman law of physics and how this relates to climate, about net energy balance being restored. All the solar radiation coming in to Earth has to be radiated back out again to space (similar to elements of the Second Law of Thermodynamics). So without greenhouse gases the Earth would be a frozen wasteland.
“The heat radiating back out changes wavelength to become infrared. And CO2 among other greenhouse gases acts to “block” that returning infrared radiation. Jim Steele points out that “block… or blanketing” are incorrect in terms of the physics of CO2. Recycling the radiation, and instantaneously, is a better description of how CO2 acts in the atmosphere.
“CO2 molecules absorb the returning heat radiation and then instantly re-emit it, scattering it in varied directions, some back down toward the surface of Earth (about 50% of what they absorb). But with more CO2 molecules in the atmosphere that ability to absorb and re-emit declines logarithmically. Dropping off radically with higher levels (ppms).
“Hence the warming influence of CO2 declines with increases in the atmosphere. Hence, human emissions are not a threat to climate and not mainly responsible for climate change. And further, there is not evidence climate change is becoming “catastrophic… an existential threat… a crisis”.
“A further “hence”- There is no good scientific evidence that we need to tax carbon or decarbonize our societies. This is more a political movement as traced by researchers like Michael Hart in “Hubris: The Troubling Science, Economics, and Politics of Climate Change”.
“One can add here the masses of evidence that human emissions are a tiny part of the carbon cycles on Earth (about 3% of all carbon emissions) and even that tiny amount is subject to question. Human emissions are not “the main cause” of rising CO2 as claimed by alarmists. Hence, we are not responsible for climate change when many other natural factors show stronger correlations to the climate change we are observing.
“And that is another whole area to note but I won’t tire you with that stuff. Just note the impact of multi-decadal ocean current shifts from warming to cooling phases (i.e. the PDO- Pacific Decadal Oscillation), and the influence of cosmic rays on cloud cover (clouds being responsible for 95% of the warming influence). Henrik Svensmark, a Danish scientist, details the influence of cosmic rays in his “The Chilling Stars” (that all has to do with where our solar system is in one of the spiral arms of the Milky Way that has a lot of supernovae activity). Hadron collider experiments affirmed his research a few years back.
“All this to say, this is what is behind climate today and this science does not support the fanatic response of governments to decarbonize our societies and we are already seeing the horrifically damaging outcomes of this crusade on our daily lives and pocketbooks. It hurts the poorest people the most and that is irresponsibly wrong.” Wendell Krossa
Another on climate
“I am stuck home convalescing from this bloody prostate operation (unsettling thing to see blood coming out your urethra when peeing or even when not). They “reamed” it out as my Dad would say. Gutted the core of it. Poor ____ is outside doing the yard work while I pretend to busy myself inside.
“So I am going to take out my boredom on you two, as I am just warming up to this climate warming issue and have already discussed it too much with varied others over past years. The climate issue never ends as we continue to discover new things about the complexity of the climate system, things that show humanity is not responsible for climate change and climate change is not becoming a crisis or catastrophe but has been “net beneficial” (i.e. the mild one degree C of warming over the past century has lessened human deaths from cold that are far more than any increased deaths from warmth. And more CO2- the basic food of all life has resulted in a 15% increase in green vegetation across the Earth just since 1980, meaning more food for animal life and increased crop production for humanity).
“But oh, how complex is this climate thing and it concerns all of us because alarmists are trying to tell us we are facing the end of the world and must decarbonize immediately. This has horrific impacts on the poorest people. Note, just for example, the increased deaths from cold in Britain every year, people not able to afford energy due to rising costs directly related to Green policies to shut down fossil fuels, making scarce supplies much more expensive. They estimate up to 50,000 vulnerable Brits (older, weaker) die in some years from cold. Cold kills more slowly, over weeks, while heat kills more suddenly, and this is partly why news media ignore the more serious cold threat. Up to 100,000 Americans also die every year from excess cold.
“But back to climate basics…
“Climate changes endlessly. There is no stasis in nature, no static optimal state. So no one “denies climate change” as media fraudulently report all the time. And CO2 contributes to warming, no one denies such. But CO2 is only a “bit player” and often overwhelmed by other natural factors that influence climate.
“I mentioned the cosmic ray influence and Svensmark’s research. Cosmic rays come in from outer space to charge atmospheric molecules around which water vapour forms.
“To quote one explanation: “cosmic rays are atomic fragments – mostly nuclei – blown into space from exploding stars that constantly bombard the Earth. When they enter the atmosphere, their electric charge helps form clusters of molecules – aerosols – that in turn act as seeds, or nuclei, for water droplets to condense around, creating clouds”.
“Cosmic rays extend the lifespan of those molecules that would otherwise more immediately disappear. That extended life allows clouds to form, mainly the low clouds (below 3000 meters) that are more reflective of incoming sun radiation. So simply put- cosmic rays coming in cause more clouds and that blocks sunlight which then results in climate cooling.
“But the sun is a cyclical beast and goes through regular cycles of high activity (solar maximums) and low activity (solar minimums). We see that in sunspots and solar flares and the sun’s magnetic field spreading out across our solar system. When the sun is active and sends its magnetic field out, that blocks incoming cosmic rays. Hence, less clouds form and more solar radiation gets to Earth’s surface, hence climate warming.
“The sun was active at the end of last century hence we had a warming period. Since then, the sun has been in a solar minimum state and hence the flat line in climate (no further warming since early Oughts, and the 2015/16 warm years were due to strong El Ninos). Media say little about this flat line in climate change over past decades even though some alarmist scientists have admitted it. Media choose to focus on every heat event and claim “the worst on record” which is not true as the worst heat waves were in the 1930s before industrialization could be blamed. Specifically 1935-36.
“All this points to the complexity of the climate issue and how insane it is to claim one small element- CO2- is mainly responsible when so many other natural factors are involved. And then the demonization of CO2 as a pollutant when it is the food of life and more of it has benefitted all life with a massive greening of the Earth over past decades. Sheesh, eh.
“We also have evidence that life flourishes in a much warmer world, with extended habitats for all life. Scientists have discovered the remains of tropical plants and animals at both poles. Those were once tropical regions. And look at tropical regions today- that is where the most diverse forms of life, both plant and animal, are found. Not in colder regions. Greens should welcome a warming world with extended habitats for life, and more diverse life in now cold regions.
“Further, more warming does not necessarily make already warm areas hotter because the great ocean and atmospheric convection currents (Hadley tropical air current) carry the extra heat to the polar regions, warming the colder areas, the colder seasons (winter) and colder times of day (night). So that evens out the climate across the world. And makes for less storminess because there are less severe gradients between cold and warm areas, severe gradient differences being responsible for tornadoes forming and other storms. Does this explain why US tornadoes have been at historical lows over past decades of warming?
“And finally, I also go after the apocalyptic element in all this- the repeated claims we are facing the end of the world, claims that are just as repeatedly proven wrong as life continues as ever before.” Wendell Krossa
This from Net Zero Watch newsletter, June 28, 2022
“Climate change appears to be reducing the likelihood of tropical cyclones across the world, researchers suggest.
“They found that the annual number of such storms decreased by about 13 per cent during the 20th century, compared with the period between 1850 and 1900.”
Added note on the Hadley Circulation cell https://perhapsallnatural.blogspot.com/2021/12/how-pressure-systems-control-climate.html
The Hadley Circulation cell covers about 7000 kilometers across the equatorial region. It is driven by intense solar heating at the equator, resulting in rising moist air. That air cools and condenses as it rises, resulting in the heavy rainfall of the tropical zones.
It is a convection cell that carries warm air toward both polar regions. And after losing its moisture while rising, that air sinks a few thousand kilometers both north and south creating the world’s great desert regions. Cold ocean currents also contribute to those dryness of those desert regions (notably off the coast of Chile and Southwest Africa).
Another on life in general and old age diseases like cancer
“I gained a more intense sense of my mortality around 50. I realized, hey, this life thing does come to an end in a few decades. I have never feared death itself but as with most people one hopes the dying process won’t be uncomfortable. Leonard Cohen has a bit on that from his friend the poet Irving Layton who said, “Its not death that concerns me but I hope the preliminaries won’t be too unpleasant”.
“I observed this watching my Dad die, over his last weeks. He hated hospitals and was in for some regular heart thing as he was having multiple heart attacks. He tried to leave the hospital and fell and bruised his rib cage, quite nasty looking. He was 87 and had been suffering dementia also.
“After that escape attempt, he settled right down and accepted that he was going to die. There was a huge hard mass in his intestinal area and they did not even bother biopsing it due to his age. They just gave him enough morphine to make him comfortable but not totally drugged out so we could continue to communicate. He called mom over one day and asked her- “Are you going to be OK?” and she affirmed she would and that relaxed him. He seemed to accept this was the end and he was OK with that.
“They say the main concern of the dying is for those they leave behind.
“After that Dad was moved to hospice and they took good care of him there. He seemed comfortable and gradually grew more tired to the point of not being able to open eyes or move but still conscious and communicating. We were all pleasantly surprised that the last days did not appear uncomfortable or distressing in any way. And psychology says that people who accept the final process and end, actually adjust better and have less distress.
“And we all, over our lifetime, find the beliefs that help us make sense of life and death and the hereafter, that give us the hope that all humanity longs for. As one honest atheist confessed many years ago- “Look, I know all the explanations of atheism but still I do not want to not exist”. He desperately wanted to continue to exist, and I thought that was an honest admission given his hopeless belief system.
“Dad said some interesting things in his final days to old family friends that came to visit. He once whispered to a visiting lady, “Just forgive her”. We did not know what that was about.
“And another- they note that as the brain decays with age (i.e. dementia) and then during the dying process as the human person begins to separate from their decaying brain getting ready to depart, there can be a brief return to lucid consciousness. We saw that with our Dad, his dementia receded over his last days and he became more lucid and aware. Interesting.
“Yes ____, here in Canada we have the wait issue so hopefully that “urgent” listing will open up perhaps a cancellation somewhere. We are in the age range when all these diseases of old age start to show.
“And ___, I am amazed at your attitude after going through what happened to you years back with that accident (paralyzed when hit by a SUV while biking). That took courage.” Wendell Krossa
More on Dad’s final days...
I continued a teasing tradition with Dad right to the end. He was known as an experienced professional teaser. As one family friend said after he died- “Your Dad often teased us, but he never crossed the line into hurtful teasing. It was always fun. We loved it”.
And one feature of family life was desert time after supper. Sometimes Dad would have to leave the table for a potty break before eating his desert. Just to keep us vultures from consuming his desert he would pretend spit on it. Enough to keep us at bay.
On one of the last days before he expired (past his “due date”) the hospice staff brought him a favorite desert- lemon pie. Opportunity presented. Dad was immobile, eyes closed. I leaned in close and said, “Hey, I am going to eat your lemon pie. Ha”. Tired as he was, his eyelids flickered and his mouth edges curled up slightly in an end-of-life attempt to smile. Laughing in the face of death.
I hope to expire in similar fashion- laughing in the face of death. Like that artistic person who died in a Paris hotel. His final words, “Either that horrible wallpaper goes, or I do”. He died right after.
“Yes ____, on the will to live. It is something our Creator places in us, in all life actually- the survival instinct but in humanity a more intense sense of wanting to live for some purpose, some meaning. Hence the Holocaust survivor and psychiatrist Victor Frankl (author of Man’s search for meaning) who said that the impulse for meaning was the most primal human impulse.”
This excellent report from
First the SEC climate disclosure rule: “The US Securities and Exchange Commission has proposed a new rule that… would require public companies to provide detailed reporting of their climate-related risks, emissions, and net-zero transition plans”. This is all related to the ESG attempt to takeover the business world and force compliance with Green policies (i.e. the decarbonization of societies).
See for example,
Then this from the Wattsupwiththat.com report:
“The submission to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) by eminent physicists William Happer and Richard Lindzen is discussed. They detail how the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) abandons the scientific method to arrive at politically negotiated reports, particularly the Summary for Policymakers. The divergence between science and IPCC is illustrated by the large and growing divergence between atmospheric temperature trends and IPCC models.
“In arriving at its proposal accepting the false claim of dangerous global warming from greenhouse gases, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) failed to perform necessary due diligence. It is as if SEC is putting out slick promotional brochures rather than factual profit and loss statements showing little change. The importance of due diligence is discussed, and that investment advisors are subject to criminal prosecution if they fail to take adequate steps.”
And then this on response to the SEC ruling that greenhouse gases will “cause dangerous global warming”…
“IPCC Reports Are Not Science: After giving their qualifications, Happer and Lindzen begin their comments: Unless noted otherwise all boldface is in the original.
“Comment and Declaration
“Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed SEC requiring disclosures of climate related risk caused by fossil fuels and CO2.
“We are career physicists who have specialized in radiation physics and dynamic heat transfer for decades.
“In our opinion, science demonstrates that there is no climate related risk caused by fossil fuels and CO2 and no climate emergency.
“Further, nowhere in the more than 500 pages of the proposed rule is there any reliable scientific evidence that there exists a climate related risk. None. It refers to the International Panel on Climate Change (“IPCC”), the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (“TCFD”) and other outside groups, but never provides any reliable scientific evidence that supports the rule. The science is just assumed. Therefore, there is no reliable scientific basis for the proposed SEC rule.
“Further, contrary to what is commonly reported, CO2 is essential to life on earth. Without CO2, there would be no photosynthesis, and thus no plant food and not enough oxygen to breathe.
“Moreover, without fossil fuels there will be no low-cost energy worldwide and less CO2 for photosynthesis making food. Eliminating fossil fuels and reducing CO2 emissions will be disastrous for the poor, people worldwide, future generations and the country. Finally, the cost of the proposed rule is enormous and would have no public benefit. It would increase the reporting burden to companies to $6.4 billion, which is 64% more than the $3.9 billion all SEC reporting requirements have cost companies from its beginning in 1934. Id., 87 Fed. Reg., p. 21461.
“Thus, the rule must not be adopted or, if adopted, ruled invalid by the courts. Here’s the science why.
“I. RELIABLE SCIENTIFIC THEORIES COME FROM VALIDATING THEORETICAL PREDICTIONS WITH OBSERVATIONS, NOT CONSENSUS, PEER REVIEW, GOVERNMENT OPINION OR MANIPULATED DATA”
“After substantiating this assertion, they assert
“II. SCIENCE DEMONSTRATES THERE IS NO CLIMATE-RELATED RISK CAUSED BY FOSSIL FUELS AND CO2, AND THEREFORE NO RELIABLE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE PROPOSED RULE”
“They go on to explain that in geological time, even 20 million years is nothing, rendering EPA assertions in its Endangerment Finding about greenhouse gases being unprecedented meaningless. After discussing matters such as how trivial the IPCC dates are, they explain how the IPCC politicizes good science. [Footnotes omitted]
“F. The IPCC is Government Controlled and Only Issues Government Dictated Findings, and Thus Can Provide No Reliable Scientific Evidence for the Proposed Rule
“Unknown to most, two IPCC rules require that IPCC governments control what it reports as “scientific” findings on CO2, fossil fuels and manmade global warming, not scientists. IPCC governments meet behind closed doors and control what is published in its Summaries for Policymakers (“SPMs”), which controls what is published in full reports.
“The picture below tells all. [Picture omitted here]
“This is not how scientific knowledge is determined. In science, as the Lysenko experience chillingly underscores, and as Richard Feynman emphasized:
“No government has the right to decide on the truth of scientific principles.”
And much more available at the link above.
Note especially how the IPCC Summaries for Policymakers ignore the scientific consensus of the IPCC’s own scientists to come up with the contrary political claim that climate warming is human caused.
First, IPCC scientists concluded that “No study to date has positively attributed all or part (of the climate warming observed) to (manmade) causes.”
Yet the politicians in the Summary for Policymakers contradicted this scientific finding to conclude the exact opposite:
“The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate.” 1995 Science Report SPM, p. 4.
If governments had followed the science then as Happer and Lindzen state, there would be no need for the “Green New Deal,” Net Zero” regulation, efforts to eliminate fossil fuels, huge subsidies of renewable energy and electric cars.”
“In conclusion, none of the IPCC SPMs, models, scenarios and other findings asserting that dangerous climate warming is caused by human CO2 and GHG emissions and fossil fuels are reliable scientific evidence, they are merely the opinions of IPCC governments.
“Thus, the IPCC SPMs, models, scenarios and other findings provide no reliable scientific evidence there is any climate related risk caused by fossil fuels, nor do they provide any reliable scientific evidence to support the proposed rule.”
Happer and Lindzen go on to assert:
“The Endangerment Findings and National Climate Assessments Rely on IPCC Findings and Thus Provide No Reliable Scientific Evidence to Support the Proposed Rule”
They give details for this assertion with examples of false science. Further, they explain how nature and humanity are benefiting from increasing atmospheric CO2. They conclude with:
“Thus, in our opinion, science demonstrates that there is no climate emergency and no climate related risk caused by fossil fuels and CO2. Therefore, there is no reliable scientific evidence that supports the SEC proposed rule.
“Further, contrary to what is commonly reported, CO2 is essential to life on earth. Without CO2, there would be no photosynthesis, and thus no plant food and not enough oxygen to breathe.
“Moreover, without fossil fuels there will be no reliable, low-cost energy worldwide and less CO2 for photosynthesis making food. Eliminating fossil fuels and reducing CO2 emissions will be disastrous for the United States and the rest of the world, especially for lower-income people.”
True Egalitarianism (musing on the ultimate “meaning thing”), Wendell Krossa
I am an egalitarian. Not in the strictly material sense as per Marxism and its vision of classless human society. Not in terms of any form of communalism (i.e. Robert Owen’s 19th century utopian socialist communes). Not in terms of equality of material outcomes, equality in terms of sharing material goods.
I am egalitarian in terms of our larger life purpose defined by humanity’s highest ideal- love. Any human being can attain ultimate heroic status, the supreme form of human achievement, the ultimate stage of human maturity, in terms of loving others. Love as our highest human ideal levels us all as human beings. Achievement in common love is the single greatest achievement that any person can make in life. It outdistances all else that we can achieve in life.
Further, love takes human life to the pinnacle of achievement, the epitome of maturity, when it reaches the embrace of unconditional “love of enemies”. Then we really “tower in stature as maturely human” (i.e. Joseph Campbell’s comment that we reach maturity when we orient our lives to universal love). When we love universally, unconditionally we then become the true heroes of our story, of our life quest.
We saw this highest of human achievements brilliantly illustrated in Nelson Mandela forgiving his oppressors and working to include them in the post-apartheid South Africa. We all know people, whether materially successful or not, who stand out among us as exceptional examples of common love.
To repeat this most fundamental form of egalitarianism- Every one of us can achieve the best of being human, the ultimate of human existence, life, and story, not materially, but in terms of what matters most in life- in achievement with regard to love, the one feature that most singularly defines us as human.
Love alone resonates across the cosmos after life. It lasts forever when the material ceases to be.
So I am an egalitarian in regard to this most important feature of human story. Every one of us- from poorest to richest- has equal opportunity to succeed at love, the single most important achievement in human life.
Another study shows that cold in China kills 45 times as many people as heat does…
And how Biden’s appeasement of climate extremists is responsible for soaring inflation…
Quotes from above link:
“Unfortunately, the Biden Administration refuses to restart the energy independence it inherited. On its first week in office, it halted all new oil and gas leases on federal lands, which federal courts held was unlawful. Then, after sanctioning importation of Russian oil, liquefied natural gas, and coal to the United States, a White House delegation traveled to Venezuela to discuss “energy security,” according to former Press Secretary Jen Psaki. But the United States should never be dependent on murderous thugs or despotic regimes for its energy needs.
“President Biden remains beholden to leftwing climate activists, which is why he is vigorously opposing a return to successful energy policies. Many of these radicals, who are now influencing or directing energy policies, are actively hampering production from private companies through market manipulation or allocation based on investment firm imposed environmental, social or governance (ESG) factors. That’s why our office has launched an investigation of this potentially unlawful behavior.
“There are many imprudent extreme energy policies of the Biden Administration, and the list continues to grow as this crisis broils into a catastrophe. President Biden revoked a key permit to the Keystone Pipeline, ceased drilling for oil in Alaska, ballooned the “social cost of carbon,” and paused new oil and gas leases. With a legacy like this on such a vital component of a functioning nation, it’s no wonder why Americans are being financially devastated at the gas pumps….”
As with everything else (i.e. inflation) will Biden now blame Putin for his spill when getting off his bike the other day? The Dems have blamed Russia for pretty much everything over past years- i.e. the election of Trump (the greatest “conspiracy theory” ever), the Hunter Biden laptop (“Russian disinformation” according to many “intelligence” people), and more.
Pushback against ESG infiltration of the business world, a version of the Chinese “social credit” scoring program.
Milton Friedman noted back in 1970 that the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) movement was a kind of back-door subversive crusade of socialist/environmentalist extremism to reshape the business world, something these branches of ideology could not gain support for through the normal democratic process of societies. CSR is the same as the contemporary ESG movement- “Environmental and Social Corporate Governance”.
Friedman’s point was that businesses should exist to fulfill the founding purposes of their owners/shareholders/customers- to provide some service or product. They do not exist to fulfill broader public services, such as welfare or environmentalist projects, though they may also contribute to such outcomes simply as natural by-products of their main purpose (i.e. all businesses are obligated to follow general codes to not pollute their environments). Contributing to other social concerns should be based on general public support gained via democratic processes and legislation.
Contributing to other social concerns, aside from the main founding purpose of any given business, should be the personal projects of the members of the given business, but those people should use their personal funds to fulfill their personal choices to engage such projects, and not use the funds of the business (i.e. other’s money) to do so. Using the general funds of the business to push other social responsibilities is not democratic and undermines the freedom of others, that is to say- freedom in general.
Pushback against these non-democratic crusades to reshape business (CSR, ESG) started with Milton Friedman’s New York Times essay in 1970:
Over subsequent years others have exposed and taken up the task to counter this attempted socialist/Green takeover of the business realm.
Other links to commentary on ESG….
Phil Gramm and Mike Solon: “The ‘Stakeholder Capitalism’ war on the Enlightenment” (Wall Street Journal, May 23, 2022)
Rupert Darwall: “Capitalism, Socialism and ESG” (the ideology of ESG)
Matthew Lau: Memo to Bank of Canada
Best of late night comedy shows
This is another brilliant piece by Greg Gutfeld on social issues and the reason why his ratings swamp all other late night shows (his numbers are exaggerated in this bit for comedy effect but probably not far off in terms of actual ratings comparisons). Especially note the clip of Supreme Court Justice (liberal/Democrat) Sonia Sotomayor praising justice Clarence Thomas for his humanity and kindness. They disagree on many court rulings but respect one another as friends.
This mutual respect is becoming rare in a world where politicians and their mainstream media colleagues incite endless hatred for those they disagree with, smearing opponents endlessly with “racist… evil… white supremacist…end of democracy” slanders (both sides do such). Those of you on the Left side, try to get over your fear of Fox News just to listen to this brilliant bit of social commentary typical of Gutfeld…
Joseph Campbell offered some good insights on human development, often focusing particularly on the development of young males.
One critical thing: The first step in beginning the process of development as a human being, said Campbell, is to take responsibility for your mistakes and failures. Own them and learn from them. And then correct those areas of failure to live as human.
Admitting failure is difficult for most people to engage. We all naturally become defensive, especially if our failures are pointed out by others in a less-than-loving manner (i.e. if accusatory).
There are ways that parents can encourage the acceptance of failure in the development of their children, as a less threatening process.
Here is an example of a non-threatening approach: “Parents who raise ‘confident, smart and empathic’ children do these 5 things when their kids misbehave” by Lynne Azarchi…
And to the contrary, we have numerous public examples of people refusing to take this first step in human development- i.e. the admission/acceptance of failure- notably, public figures like Bill Cosby, now in his Eighties (and with a doctorate in education). Cosby refuses to even start the process of owning failure that most 4 and 5 year-olds (or younger children) have already begun to learn.
Another critical point in human development and maturing:
Campbell noted that we reach full human maturity (i.e. we “tower in stature as maturely human”) when we orient our lives to “universal love”. Then we become the authentic heroes of our story, of our life quest. Like a Mandela.
Campbell framed this ultimate stage of mature human development in terms of learning to inclusively love even enemies. He said that life would test us in this regard and we could maintain our humanity by remembering that even our enemies are still intimate family.
“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 thereby, our humanity too will be lost. “Man” in the words of the American novelist Hawthorne, “must not disclaim his brotherhood even with the guiltiest”.”
Yes, we all serve as either inspirations or warnings to one another.
Watch as summer progresses across the Northern Hemisphere and every hot day or hot spell becomes further evidence for alarmism prophets to buttress their climate apocalypse narrative.
Here is some counter evidence from Skeptical Environmentalist author and professor of statistics, Bjorn Lomborg (meaning he knows data). Here are quotes from his book “False Alarm” where he notes that the far greater threat humanity faces is from cold, not from more heat. Further climate warming will benefit all life, and save many more people from cold deaths than might die from heat deaths.
“There is nothing good about heat waves- they are dangerous and kill people. But in fact, cold weather is far more dangerous and kills more of the population. This means that as the world gets warmer many people will actually benefit.
“Scientists who undertook the biggest ever study of heat and cold deaths, published in Lancet in 2015, examined seventy-four million total deaths from all causes in 384 locations in thirteen countries… The scientists found that heat caused almost 0.5 percent of all deaths, but more than 7 percent of all deaths were caused by cold. For every heat death, seventeen die from the cold…. Deaths caused by the cold get less attention partly because they are less sudden. Heat kills when body temperature gets too high, and this alters the fluid and electrolyte balance in weaker, often older people. Cold usually kills because the body restricts blood flow to the skin, increasing blood pressure and lowering our defenses against infections.
“Essentially, heat kills within a few days, whereas cold kills over weeks. In just the thirteen countries examined in the massive Lancet study, one hundred forty thousand people died from heat each year, and more than two million from the cold. We hear about heat waves that in a few days cause hundreds of deaths, but we do not hear about the thousands of slower cold deaths; this is because there are no TV cameras when mostly elderly, weak individuals expire over weeks or months in anonymous apartments.
“… One example- the United Kingdom. Each year, the UK experiences 33 cold deaths for every heat death. In one recent winter in England and Wales, the cold killed 43,000 people… Yet, this didn’t become a widely known story because these cold deaths didn’t fit the broader climate change narrative.
“It is similarly true for India. Recently, CNN capped a monthlong report on the frightening impact of heat in India with the headline “Dozens Dead in One of India’s Longest Heat Waves”. It was a powerful story told by media and climate campaigners around the world. But it was also rather curious because it focused on the smallest risk from temperature- related heat deaths. In fact, the scientific literature shows that while extreme heat kills 25,000 people each year in India, extreme cold kills twice as many. Indeed, the biggest killer is moderate cold, which kills an astounding 580,000 each year.
“CNN could have written plenty of stories telling us “Normal cold temperatures in India kill more than a half million people”, but it never did…
“The latest US data… shows that heat deaths are few and are in fact declining (because, in spite of the research assumption, people do buy air conditioning), whereas cold deaths are far larger, and are actually increasing.
“Why? It turns out that reducing death from heat is easier than reducing death from cold, in part because heat is a short-term phenomenon. You need an air conditioner just for a heat wave, and maybe you sit in the room where its working for the worst days, whereas the cold requires long-term structural responses such as insulating your home and workplace, and continuous heating throughout the winter months.
“If we assume there is no adaptation, it is true that rising temperatures mean heat deaths will increase. But surely, we should also recognize that higher temperatures mean fewer people will die from cold. And since cold deaths outweigh heat deaths almost everywhere, it turns out that even without adaptation, moderate temperature increases will likely mean that the people who didn’t die of cold will roughly outweigh the additional deaths from heat…. Since it is much easier to adapt to heat than to cold, it is likely that the big killer will remain cold.
“Two lessons… First, hearing only about deaths caused by heat means we end up believing things are much worse, leading to more fear. Second, it means we focus on the smaller problem of heat deaths that in many places is relatively easily solved by simple adaptation measures already being undertaken.
“Instead, we focus too little on the bigger and often stubborn problem of cold deaths… A 2015 analysis of heat and cold deaths in Madrid showed that not only are cold deaths outweighing heat deaths five to one but also heat deaths are declining especially in the older age groups, however, cold deaths are increasing for all groups.”
And so on… Excellent research from a respected climate expert.
Another good one from Lomborg:
Quotes from above Lomborg link:
“The developed world’s response to the global energy crisis has put its hypocritical attitude toward fossil fuels on display. Wealthy countries admonish developing ones to use renewable energy. Last month the Group of Seven went so far as to announce they would no longer fund fossil-fuel development abroad. Meanwhile, Europe and the U.S. are begging Arab nations to expand oil production. Germany is reopening coal power plants, and Spain and Italy are spending big on African gas production. So many European countries have asked Botswana to mine more coal that the nation will more than double its exports.
“The developed world became wealthy through the pervasive use of fossil fuels, which still overwhelmingly power most of its economies. Solar and wind power aren’t reliable, simply because there are nights, clouds and still days. Improving battery storage won’t help much: There are enough batteries in the world today only to power global average electricity consumption for 75 seconds. Even though the supply is being scaled up rapidly, by 2030 the world’s batteries would still cover less than 11 minutes. Every German winter, when solar output is at its minimum, there is near-zero wind energy available for at least five days—or more than 7,000 minutes.
“This is why solar panels and wind turbines can’t deliver most of the energy for industrializing poor countries. Factories can’t stop and start with the wind; steel and fertilizer production are dependent on coal and gas; and most solar and wind power simply can’t deliver the power necessary to run the water pumps, tractors, and machines that lift people out of poverty.
“That’s why fossil fuels still provide more than three-fourths of wealthy countries’ energy, while solar and wind deliver less than 3%. An average person in the developed world uses more fossil-fuel-generated energy every day than all the energy used by 23 poor Africans.
“Yet the world’s rich are trying to choke off funding for new fossil fuels in developing countries. An estimated 3.5 billion of the world’s poorest people have no reliable access to electricity. Rather than give them access to the tools that have helped rich nations develop, wealthy countries blithely instruct developing nations to skip coal, gas and oil, and go straight to a green nirvana of solar panels and wind turbines.
“This promised paradise is a sham built on wishful thinking and green marketing. Consider the experience of Dharnai, an Indian village that Greenpeace in 2014 tried to turn into the country’s first solar-powered community.
“Greenpeace received glowing global media attention when it declared that Dharnai would refuse “to give into the trap of the fossil fuel industry.” But the day the village’s solar electricity was turned on, the batteries were drained within hours. One boy remembers being unable to do his homework early in the morning because there wasn’t enough power for his family’s one lamp.
“Villagers were told not to use refrigerators or televisions because they would exhaust the system. They couldn’t use cookstoves and had to continue burning wood and dung, which creates air pollution as dangerous for a person’s health as smoking two packs of cigarettes a day, according to the World Health Organization. Across the developing world, millions die prematurely every year because of this indoor pollution.
“In August 2014, Greenpeace invited one of the Indian’s state’s top politicians, who soon after become its chief minister, to admire the organization’s handiwork. He was met by a crowd waving signs and chanting that they wanted “real electricity” to replace this “fake electricity.”…
“This is why, for all the rich world’s talk of climate activism, developed nations are still on track to continue to rely mostly on fossil fuels for decades. The International Energy Agency estimates that even if all current climate policies are delivered in full, renewables will only deliver one-third of U.S. and EU energy in 2050. The developing world isn’t blind to this hypocrisy. Nigeria’s vice president, Yemi Osinbajo, articulated the situation elegantly: “No country in the world has been able to industrialize using renewable energy,” yet Africa is expected to do so “when everybody else in the world knows that we need gas-powered industries for business.”
And this on the media claim that climate change is worsening wildfires…
This site promotes the evidence showing that there is no “climate crisis” and the mild warming of the past century or so (roughly 1 degree C) has been significantly beneficial to all life in our sub-optimally cold world- i.e. compared to paleo-climate history showing that for over 90% of the past 500 million years of life, the Earth has been entirely ice-free with evidence of the remains of tropical plants and animals found in the polar regions. Meaning that a much warmer world results in expanded habitats for all life, with the migration of the far more diverse flora and fauna of tropical regions into colder regions of Earth. Hence, why such hysteria over melting ice on our planet? An ice-free world, in paleo-climate context, is historically normal, natural, and optimal for all life.
(Insert note: Physicist Freeman Dyson and climate physicist Richard Lindzen, among others, have noted that global warming does not necessarily make warm areas of the world hotter but the increased heat is carried by ocean and atmospheric convection currents to the colder regions of the planet. Hence, increased warming beneficially impacts colder regions, colder seasons (i.e. winter), and colder times of day (i.e. night). All net good for life.)
Further degrees of warming will continue to be net beneficial to all life and more basic plant food (CO2) will continue to green our planet, as it has over the past century (15% more green vegetation across the Earth over just the past 40 years).
This site will also continue to tackle the basic mythical themes, the apocalyptic mythology, of alarmism movements (“profoundly religious crusades”). Climate change alarmism has incited the public’s survival impulse, rendering populations susceptible to irrational salvation schemes like decarbonization. Wendell Krossa
Polar bear expert Susan Crockford on evidence of polar bear subpopulation surviving well without sea ice, just as polar bears have survived previous ice-free interglacials…
This from latest Net Zero Watch newsletter (June 16, 2022)…
“Rich nations hit brakes on climate aid to poor at UN talks
Associated Press, 16 June 2022
“BERLIN (AP) — Rich countries including the European Union and the United States have pushed back against efforts to put financial help for poor nations suffering the devastating effects of global warming firmly on the agenda for this year’s U.N. climate summit.”
“Suffering the devastating effects of global warming”. This mantra is proclaimed endlessly in news media and is quite entirely distorting of the true state of things. It is a reference to the scattered heat waves of our modern era and associated mortality (episodes that are related more naturally to weather, not climate). Note in this regard that the respected medical journal The Lancet states that far more people die every year from cold than die from warmth. And the mild warming of past decades has resulted in far more people saved from cold deaths than any increased mortality from heat deaths. Meaning, global warming has been net beneficial to humanity and more warming in our still abnormally cold world would be further beneficial to all life.
Again- There is no “climate crisis” (except for still too much cold in our world) and no need to tax carbon or decarbonize our societies.
Note: The worst heat waves in North America occurred in the 1930s, notably 1935-6. Contrary to media reporting, we are not experiencing “the worst heat waves on record” today.
The key issue in the climate debate is the role of CO2. The framing question of the debate- Is CO2 the main influence on climate change and is climate change becoming “an existential threat… a crisis… a catastrophe”? Evidence shows that the warming over the past decades, and century, has been mild and beneficial to all life.
Further, counter evidence shows that other natural factors overwhelm the CO2 influence, rendering CO2 a “bit player” in climate change. And further, the CO2 warming influence decreases logarithmically with rising levels and will not contribute to much more warming. Again, the increase in CO2 has been hugely beneficial in greening the planet (a 15 % increase in green vegetation across the Earth since 1980).
The apocalyptic scenarios of the climate alarm crusade are based on climate models that have been discredited for falsely predicting excessive warming that has not occurred.
Conclusion? Once again, there is no sound scientific reason to tax carbon or decarbonize our societies.
This article from Die Welt, translated by Alex Bojanowski and posted in latest Net Zero Watch newsletter (June 16, 2022 Net Zero Samizdat):
(Note: I am not affirming Bengtsson’s comments that we need to engage the transition to renewables because good science contradicts the alarmist claim (1) that CO2 is mainly responsible for climate change and (2) that climate change will become “catastrophic” with further rising CO2 levels and further warming. In fact, the opposite is proving true- that further warming will continue to result in net beneficial outcomes for all life and more basic plant food will continue to green our planet, meaning even more food for animal life and increased crop production for humanity. Alarmist media ignore these beneficial outcomes for ongoing hysteria over their apocalyptic narrative re naturally changing climate.)
Lennart Bengtsson: “Knowledge is the best medication against climate fear”
Die Welt, 15 June 2022
“There is no climate crisis, (Bengtsson) says, a warming climate is beneficial in some parts of the world, and the consequences and impacts of global warming can be curtailed. Climate policies that are too ambitious could even be harmful.
“(Bengtsson) I don’t think the current warming should be called a crisis. Global food production, for example, is increasing. And despite a rapidly growing population and continuing warming far fewer people die as a result of extreme weather than in the past.
“The number of people dying from extreme weather events has decreased significantly due to more accurate forecasting and improved warning systems. I’m afraid the news media are often not in the picture on this subject, they often present too much of a simple picture. In fact, far more people die from the cold than from the heat.
“Most extreme weather events are not caused by high temperatures but are caused by temperature differences. This is why storms are more intense during the winter season. In fact, it is to be expected that certain weather extremes such as extratropical storms could become even weaker in a warmer climate.
“I find it difficult to accept that a warmer climate is higher latitudes should be negative. An ice-free Arctic Ocean will encourage and enable more fishing, simplify shipping and transport and create better living conditions, better opportunities for farming and more productive forestry in places like Canada, Scandinavia and Russia.
“I think the general public debate tends to regard all climate change as something negative, without pointing out that some climate changes are positive or even natural processes that have always existed. The warmer climate in Europe today is more favorable for society than the typical climate of the 19th century.
“But there are disagreements about how fast the warming is taking place and how damaging the warming could be. There isn’t a real consensus on whether or not extreme weather has gotten worse
“(Die Welt interviewer) What do you say to young people or your compatriot Greta Thunberg, who is in panic over this prospect?
“Bengtsson: My recommendation to the younger generations is that they engage intensively with the topic and learn more about the climate system. Knowledge is my opinion the best medication against climate fear.
Here is the Introduction to Lennart Bengtsson’s interview in Die Welt, by Alex Bojanowski:
“Lennart Bengtsson is one of the most renowned climate scientists – and he opposes catastrophism: There is no climate crisis, he says, a warming climate is beneficial in some parts of the world, and the consequences and impacts of global warming can be curtailed. Climate policies that are too ambitious could even be harmful.
“The climate scientist and Nobel Prize winner Klaus Hasselmann paid tribute to his Swedish colleague: “He is an experienced and highly respected meteorologist and climate expert,” writes Hasselmann in his dedication to Bengtsson’s new book. The Swede makes “a realistic yet optimistic assessment of the available options for change,” Hasselmann summarises.
“Bengtsson’s book “Vad händer med Klimatet” (“What’s happening to the climate?”) has just been published in Swedish. It offers matter-of-fact, basic knowledge about climate change.
“WELT spoke to Bengtsson about his perspective on global warming.”