'Climate Change' and Covid Both About Control

Inside every Leftist is a totalitarian screaming to get out.  And who's out to get us.

We see it over and over again, and the parallels between the hysteria of the “We’re All Gonna Die!” climate alarmists and the “We’re All Gonna Die!” COVID-19 mask fascists couldn’t be more telling.

Now, there’s a world of difference between finger-wagging, lecturing, and virtue signaling; and policy.  The former are just the usual Leftist busybodies telling us what to do, while the latter are Leftists directly assaulting our liberty.  We can live with the former, but must fight the latter.

The Climate Alarmists scream “we’re all gonna die” due to global warming, and that it will happen really really soon, probably even this generation.  Therefore, we should go through life as unhappy yet pious apostles of the Climate Cult, reducing our carbon footprint by returning to the Stone Age and internally retaining flatulence until we float to the moon.

Yet ask Cultists what they are doing to stave off the imminent apocalypse, and they invariably reply that they recycle and drive a Prius.  Maybe they even take public transportation.  What they don’t do is devote every waking moment to forestalling the End of Days which – remember – is going to happen in the next fifty years.  You’d think, given the expedited timeline and rather high stakes, that they’d be doing things with a bit more impact.

Instead they claim that they “do what they can,” which seems to run counter to the idea that we’re all gonna die in the next fifty years.  Confronted with this logical contradiction, and unable to reconcile their hypocrisy, that’s usually when they accuse us of being Climate Change Deniers and storm off to lecture some other unlucky soul.

Friendly persuasion works every time.

Even when provided with competing scientific data, they are unable to rebut it.  They wave their hands, claim “bias” on the part of the scientist (while their scientists are above reproach), and insist that all the other “experts” couldn’t possibly be wrong.

In other words, show them data and they ignore it, because they not only must live in fear, they must be certain that you live in fear.

The truth is that all they want to do is control other people.  

Some Leftists genuinely have a hatred of liberty.  Others have simply fallen sway to the unrelenting propaganda of how bad some intangible threat is and, lacking any feeling of control over their own lives, attempt to assert control over the uncontrollable by controlling other people.

After all, one cannot stop or reverse time, “global warming,” random gun violence, or just plain stupidity that results in death.  So the next best thing is to control people’s behavior in order to stop these things, which of course doesn’t stop anything at all. Which brings us to COVID-19.

The data is pretty clear at this point, after nearly five months of collection from almost every part of the globe.  Once the data settled in after about eight weeks, it hasn’t changed much.  Based on the latest data set from the CDC, here is what we know:

When we remove just these four places, the rest of the country experiences the following:

The aggregate rate of positive tests is 8.85 percent across the nation. 

The four states named above account for 15 percent of cases.

Rural states have positive rates of around 7 percent. States such as Delaware, Vermont, West Virginia, Alaska, and Hawaii are all under 3 percent.

The current trend for positive cases is down.

Finally, if one examines county-level and municipality-level data, one will find that the prevalence of the virus is highly dependent on locality. In other words, while one doesn’t want to experience symptoms of this virus, the risk of catching it is on par with seasonal flu (10 percent), and the risk of dying is extremely remote if you are not elderly.  Death is even more remote if you are also not obese or immuno-suppressed.

Yet governments at every level have shut down the entire economy, restricted movement and activity, and even threatened to cut off utilities to those who disobey their increasingly arbitrary edicts.  Government and its media enablers continue to terrify Americans, and are destroying our country in the process.

Par mon martin!

The repercussions of this tyranny will last for years, as those trapped under house arrest without work or income will turn to alcohol, drugs, and take their frustration out on their domestic partners and children.  This collateral damage was, and still is not, considered by those in power. 

The hypocrisy of those who willfully destroy American lives with their fear-mongering and tyranny runs in direct contrast to wanting to save humanity from the Climate Apocalypse.  That’s because what Leftists ultimately want is complete control over our behavior.  It has nothing to do with alleged climate change or a virus.

Indeed, those who object are told that forcible wearing of a muzzle is not an infringement on one’s “liberty.”  They put “liberty” in quotes, demonstrating their ignorance and contempt for it, until you mention that abortion should be banned. Then suddenly their liberty is being infringed upon. “My body, my choice” only extends to killing babies.  Maybe we should use the same phrase when told we must wear muzzles or keep restaurants closed.

When they claim that wearing masks is to protect others who don’t have a choice in what we do, demonstrate that the baby they are killing is exactly the same thing.  All that proves is that, again, they want to control our behavior while they do what they choose.

All of this is done under the guise of the nine worst words in the English language. With apologies to Ronald Reagan, those words are, “Do as we say.  It’s for your own good."

'Climate Cassandras' -- Plus ça Change

Remember “Anthropogenic Global Warming”?  “Global warming” became “climate change” because the warming… didn’t exist. It still doesn’t. The global temperature has, since 1997, flattened. This is explained-away by the climate alarmists as a “pause.” The problem? Here’s TIME magazine in 1974:

However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.

"Three decades." Or since circa 1944. Added to the 1997 – 2014 “pause,” the global temperature has been cooling or flat for at least 47 of the past 76 years, or more than half the time. And this as post-war prosperity accelerated and hundreds of millions of people increased their use of carbon-based fuels to enter into and prosper from the Industrial Age.

Exactly zero temperature data sets exist supporting warming. None. Never have. Sure – a few data sets exist by once-reputable climate science organizations (NASA, East Anglia / CRU), but those are re-manipulated every few years to show whatever curve is required to support the climate alarmism-of-the-day. This manipulation is of the original data sets, both at the upper end (“The earth has a temperature!”) and at the lower end (“See how fast the temperature is increasing?!”). The original data did not show the temperature increase or steeper slope demanded by the alarmists, so the data were … adjusted. This is called many things, but “science” is not one of them.

Remember the “Hockey Stick” curve that started all this? This “curve” has been the subject of constant controversy since its creation, the foundation of Al Gore’s ridiculous film – and the basis for world governments to waste hundreds of billions (trillions?) of our dollars. The problem? The curve doesn’t exist.

Loader Loading...
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

MIT also rejected the 'hockey stick' and the algorithm that created it, noting that random numbers provide a similar curve and fundamental mistakes are present in the underlying math. A large body of “science” supports the AGW argument, though, right?  Don’t 97 percent of scientists support "Climate Change"?

In a word? No.

Why, then, do so many researchers and academics support it? Here’s the answer from Dr. Richard Lindzen, the now-retired Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology:

It was the narrative from the beginning. In 1998, [NASA’s James] Hansen made some vague remarks. Newsweek ran a cover that says all scientists agree. Now they never really tell you what they agree on. It is propaganda.

So all scientists agree it’s probably warmer now than it was at the end of the Little Ice Age. Almost all Scientists agree that if you add CO2 you will have some warming. Maybe very little warming. But it is propaganda to translate that into it is dangerous and we must reduce CO2 etc.

If you can make an ambiguous remark and you have people who will amplify it ‘they said it not me’ and the response of the political system is to increase your funding, what’s not to like?

For the Left, “Science” is spelled “capitali$m,” as most “research” papers supporting “climate change” are written for, or occasioned by, grant money. We have a surfeit of unsupported climate fantasy funded by NGOs, academia and “philanthropic” organizations because academics can be greedy. They see Big Dollars or Big Careers (which equals Big Dollars) in supporting the climate flavor-of-the-month fixation of Big Government or Big Philanthropy. Whatever those organizations are demanding, they supply: the same kind of capitalism the Left is burning down America to protest.

Climate change policies are about one thing: collectivism. The ruling class rejecting the rising individualist middle class of the Western world and billing us for that rejection. It’s about rejecting the voice of people globally, people who, because of the internet and information awareness, now are knowledgeable of how badly and for how long the various Western governments have been and are continuing to screw their citizens.

Notice who the climate change “deniers” are: middle class Western individualists, while the climate change True Believers are anti-Western collectivists. Who makes the world go-round? Individualists (we invent everything). Who mooches off the going-round world? Collectivists (they invent nothing). And now the collectivists want to collect money from the individualists under the unsupported nonsense of “climate change,” usurping the power to choose what to do with our earnings, our property, our life’s work.

Every government needs authority and a common purpose in the eyes of those governed. These can be gained via both external and internal threats. Covid-19 masks and unlawful house arrest/lockdowns by some governors and mayors serve to control you. “Climate change” is being used to achieve that common purpose as well. It's all about control.

The data didn’t support anthropogenic global warming, so the name was changed, but the goals are the same: global totalitarian collectivism under our self-anointed betters, the destruction of entire industries, and robbing the West of wealth, progress, liberty and individualism in order to enrich the totalitarian ruling class in the guise of helping the Third World with cleaner air, cleaner water, cleaner parks and playgrounds, and better schools.

When even the globalists at the U.N. admit that the entire climate hoax is not about the climate, but about destroying capitalism, you can be pretty sure that climate change is a feature for the left, not a bug; an excuse to advance totalitarianism and crush the middle class – and to get the middle class to join in, and pay for, its own destruction.

Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism. "This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution," she said.

We’ve seen this movie before. In the words of Princeton Professor Emeritus of Physics, William Happer, in 2017,

I don’t see a whole lot of difference between the consensus on climate change and the consensus on witches.  At the witch trials in Salem the judges were educated at Harvard. This was supposedly 100 percent science. The one or two people who said there were no witches were immediately hung. Not much has changed.

At least we aren’t hanging “deniers.” Yet.