Bad science pays, obviously bad science does not
Governments specialize in Stupid. If you want to make a situation worse just get government involved. Just look what happened with COVID. The virus was circulating for months without producing a substantial number of deaths and then along came government. What would have been an ordinary cold and flu season suddenly became a deadly pandemic.
Unfortunately COVID was not an aberration. Now that it has become difficult to kill and impoverish people over cold and flu season government has pivoted back to killing and impoverishing people over plant food.
I was struck by some numbers in Robert Lyman’s column in FP Comment yesterday on the costs of net-zero climate policies. The costs he talked about were impressive enough: the units they come in are years’ worth of GDP. But what impressed me almost even more was that, according to a compilation by Navius Research for the Canadian Climate Institute, there are, as Lyman wrote, no fewer than 112 federal and 364 provincial and territorial programs addressed at various aspects of climate change. That’s almost 500 in total.
Did you know that it takes 500 different government agencies to implement net zero? What exactly is net zero anyway? How do you become net Zero in CO2 emissions without reaching zero emissions? The only way is to take as much CO2 out of the atmosphere as you put in. Trees do that for free but for some reason trees don’t count. If they did Canada would already be net zero and there would be no need for 500 government departments.
No, we need 500 government departments to accurately determine and implement the most expensive ways to deprive plants of plant food. Taken to the extreme this will of course lead to mass starvation and death, which incidentally is part of the plan anyway.
McGuire, a Professor of Geophysical & Climate Hazards at University College London (UCL), said the quiet part out loud in a post on X on Sunday.
“If I am brutally honest, the only realistic way I see emissions falling as fast as they need to, to avoid catastrophic #climate breakdown, is the culling of the human population by a pandemic with a very high fatality rate,” he wrote.
Alarmingly, McGuire was a member of a British government body that advised politicians on the COVID-19 response.
He definitely said the quiet part out loud and it is not surprising that it came from a university professor. Western governments have been financing fraudulent climate science for decades. Canadian Universities are full of people paid to conclude that the only good CO2 is the CO2 released by the yachts and private jets of the political elite. CO2 released by ordinary people is very bad. But, the good news is we have way more ordinary people than we need to build and service private jets and yachts. As soon as we get rid of those useless eaters not needed to cater to the elite the planet will be saved.
There is a bit of a problem, however, with broadcasting such a harsh truth; it makes the lies too obvious. That is why this professor is warning his colleagues that they must tone down the rhetoric and make the lies less obvious.
I see potential conflicts when scholars use information selectively or over-attribute problems to anthropogenic warming, and thus politicise climate and environmental change.
“I’m afraid that now scientists and activists are becoming all the same. And that is not good for science. In the mid to long term, if we lose our standards then the climate deniers and sceptics, they all have us. You have to be very careful.”
It is a very simple message. Become more skillful liars or the gravy train halts. Do not give the public a reason to question the science because when it comes to climate science the scientific cupboard is bare. I fear it might already be too late for these grifters. People are in the mood to ask questions. It only took 4 years but now people on their 4th booster and 5th COVID infection are wondering why the jab and standing 6 feet away did not work. How could “the science” have gotten things so horribly wrong? Or an even better question is why did we pay for such bad advice and poor science?
The virologists got COVID wrong because they were paid to get it wrong. The climate scientists are still getting it wrong because they are still paid to get it wrong. There is profit in lies. Big lies like COVID have a lifespan though, people figure it out quickly. Subtle lies work better. They can be milked for decades as long as you don’t overreach. Climate scientists have been milking climate alarmism for 3 decades but it is coming to an end. The lies are just too obvious now.
