“It is difficult
to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not
understanding it!” Upton Sinclair.
The
global climate change industry is worth an annual $1.5 trillion, according to Climate Change Business Journal. That’s
the equivalent of $4 billion a day spent on vital stuff like carbon trading,
biofuels, and wind turbines. Or — as Jo Nova notes
— it’s the same amount the world spends every year on online shopping.
But
there’s a subtle difference between these two industries — the global
warming one and the online shopping one. Can you guess what it is?
Well,
it’s like this. When you go to, say, Charles Tyrwhitt to buy a nice, smart
shirt, or Amazon to buy the box set of Game
of Thrones, or Krazykrazysextoy.com to replace your girlfriend’s
worn out rabbit, no one is holding a gun to your head. You are buying these
things of your own free volition either for yourself or for someone you love.
You have paid for them, out of your own money, because you have made the calculation
that they will make your life that little bit better. Better than it would,
say, if you’d kept the money in your bank account or spent it on something less
desirable — a novelty dog poo ornament, say, or a hand knitted sweater with
Jimmy Savile’s face on it and “I HEART paedos” picked out in gold lamé
lettering.
When,
on the other hand, you buy stuff from the climate change industry, you have no
choice in the matter whatsoever. It’s already priced into your taxes, your
electricity bills, the cost of your petrol, the cost of your airfare, the cost
of every product you buy and every service you use. It is utterly inescapable,
this expenditure. Yet unlike your online shopping — which, remember, costs
roughly the same as you spend each year on the climate change industry
— you get precisely nothing in return.
No,
it’s worse than that. You get less than nothing. You get stuff forced on you
that you really don’t want: bat-chomping, bird-slicing eco-crucifixes looming
on your horizon, keeping you awake, trashing your property values; fields
of solar panels where they used to grow wheat or you used to walk your dog;
prissy missives from your local council expecting you to be grateful for the
fact that now you’ve got to separate your trash into seven different recycling
bags rather than the previous five, and that they’re only going to collect your
rubbish once a fortnight instead of once a week; teachers filling your kids’
heads with junk science propaganda; free parking slots for electric cars you don’t
own but which you subsidize for richer friends who do; feel-bad nature
documentaries about how it’s all your fault that this stuff “may” soon
disappear; energy-saving light-bulbs that take your nocturnal home back to the
kind of sepulchral gloom Western civilization thought it had bade farewell to
in the 1890s; the Prius, the car which recalls the style and comfort of the
cars the fall of the Berlin Wall was supposed to have ended; yawning gaps where
used to grow the woods which have been chopped down and chipped to create
biomass for burning in power stations which used to run more cheaply and
efficiently on coal…
Then
there are the people who benefit financially from this $1.5 trillion climate
change industry: the carbon traders; the dodgy academics; the vulture
capitalists pecking on the bloated carcass of renewable energy; the
environmental NGOs; the environmental consultancies who specialize in giving
“expert” testimony at planning appeals, arguing on the most spurious grounds
that no the bats and birds in this area aren’t going to be affected by this new
wind turbine they’re going to be happier than ever no really; the
sustainability officers at every level of local government; the green advisers
attached to every business who advise them how to reduce their CO2 count; the
PR companies that specialize in green awareness; Dale Vince….
These
people do not deserve your money. Not a penny, a cent, or a sou of it. Look, I don’t begrudge anyone the right to
earn a living — just so long as they’re providing someone, somewhere with
something they actually need. Not a single person working in the climate change
industry fulfils this criterion. Not one. If you scrapped Michael Mann’s job
tomorrow the world would not suffer the slightest loss and science would be all
the better for it.
Sure,
you might argue, there’s some kind of trickledown effect as the money we’re
force to pay these shysters and bludgers and charlatans and scroungers via
various taxes and tariffs feeds back into the economy. But you could make the
same argument were these people paid the same amount of money by the government
to dig holes in the ground and fill them up again — which would be a
vastly preferable use of tax payer money because then these utterly useless
parasites would be reminded every day how pointless the “work” they do actually
is, whereas as things are, many of them suffer under the delusion that their
green non-jobs are somehow virtuous and important.
In
the headline I call the climate change industry a hoax. That’s because, on any objective
level it is. I don’t mean that all the scientists and businesses and
politicians promoting it are abject liars — just most of them, even
if it means that in order to keep earning their living they have to be
dishonest with themselves about something they know in their hearts not to be
true.
Alex
Epstein, author of the Moral Case For
Fossil Fuels, sets out the fundamental problem with the climate change
industry:
..Increasing
the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from 0.03 per cent to 0.04 per cent has not
caused and is not causing catastrophic runaway global warming. Dishonest
references to “97 per cent of scientists” equate a mild warming influence,
which most scientists agree with and more importantly can demonstrate, with a
catastrophic warming influence – which most don’t agree with and none can
demonstrate.
That’s
it. If you accept the validity of that statement — and how can you not: it
is unimpeachably accurate and verifiable — then it follows that the $1.5
trillion global warming industry represents the most grotesque misuse of
manpower and scarce resources in the history of the world.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/08/climate -change-the-hoax-that-costs-us-4-billion-a-day/
No comments:
Post a Comment