Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Environmentalism’

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Up in Smoke

A.F. BRANCO | on September 28, 2023 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-up-in-smoke-2/

Biden speaks to Auto Unions but fails to talk about his Green Agenda killing their jobs. Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2023.

03 Auto Joe DT 1080

DONATE to A.F.Branco Cartoons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.

The Lifestyle Of Climate Radicals Tells You All You Need To Know About Their Sincerity


BY: B.L. HAHN | JULY 17, 2023

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2023/07/17/the-lefts-climate-playbook-is-replete-with-hollow-morals/

climate activists marching with sign

Author B.L. Hahn profile

B.L. HAHN

MORE ARTICLES

A panel of scientists recently claimed that humans’ effect on the planet is so significant it should be memorialized through the creation of a new geological epoch that began sometime in the middle of the 20th century. As we speak, climate activists are preparing to do what any well-adjusted, functioning adult would do on the heels of such news: glue themselves to a building or throw tomato soup at great works of art. 

The latest breaking climate story always provides new opportunities for the left to sermonize, identify heretics, and reassert their moral and intellectual superiority while making no changes to their own lifestyles that would demonstrate even a modicum of sincerity. The oft-discussed hypocrisy of elites who charter private jets to attend climate summits is no secret, but less discussed is the day-to-day hypocrisy of the rank-and-file voters who comprise the broader Democratic Party.  

Democrats describe global warming as an existential threat with only X number of years to act before the planet is on an irreversible course to becoming uninhabitable. It stands to reason that anyone who genuinely believes this would take dramatic steps to prevent our imminent annihilation. These measures would include self-imposed lifestyle changes far beyond driving an electric vehicle, yet when it comes to climate alarmists, so often we cannot pick their lifestyle out of a lineup. 

The lifestyle of voters who believe humans are destroying the planet is often indistinguishable from that of those who believe manmade climate change is a hoax. This suggests one of two things: Either climate alarmists don’t actually believe the planet is doomed (or at the very least they aren’t nearly as confident in that belief as they claim to be), or they truly believe the planet is doomed but aren’t willing to inconvenience themselves in any meaningful way. 

Neither explanation presents climate hysterics in a positive light. Living in a manner consistent with one’s proclamations requires sacrifice, and who needs that when you can sport beliefs like fashion accessories and enjoy the perks of trendy moralism without the hefty price tag? This window-dressing approach to morality offers Gucci fashion at Goodwill prices.  

Activists will suggest that voting for the Democratic party is more than enough to demonstrate a genuine belief in the claim that we are on the brink of permanently destroying human civilization, but this fails to stand up to scrutiny. Anyone convinced that our extinction is imminent would certainly take it upon himself to enact radical change in his own life, even in the absence of laws requiring him to do so. Abdicating one’s duty by virtue of voting for politicians who claim to care about the planet is not an acceptable stand-in for personal responsibility — not when the stakes are that high.

Similarly, activists supposedly on a mission to thwart the destruction of the planet would not spend their time gluing themselves to artwork but instead would launch aggressive sabotage campaigns up to and including domestic terrorism. Unfortunately, given the increasingly violent nature of the left’s activism and their tendency to use just about anything as an excuse to tear down the society they despise, this is one area where their actions might eventually match their hysteria.

At this stage, it would be beneficial to properly characterize the left’s position on climate change, which is like a Jenga tower. It starts off relatively stable, but as things progress it begins to teeter: 

  1. The earth is warming.
  2. Humans are contributing to this warming effect. 
  3. Humans are significantly contributing to this warming effect. 
  4. Humans are the primary cause of this warming effect.  
  5. The data and modeling used to arrive at this conclusion are immune to human error and bias. 
  6. This warming effect is mostly preventable. 
  7. It is preventable only by implementing a centrally planned economy. 
  8. Other countries will join our efforts, including our enemies, even though it would benefit them not to do so.  
  9. There will be no unintended consequences to our plan.  
  10. Anyone unwilling to accept this list from top to bottom is a “climate denier.” 

    It is not difficult to understand why Republicans are skeptical. Democrats present their argument with the credibility and trustworthiness of a flea market fortune teller, not only because their palm reading has proven to be wildly inaccurate in the past, but because their solutions have a striking resemblance to the agenda they’ve been trying to implement long before climate change was a thing. As if incrementally destroying the economy by transforming it into a centrally planned bureaucratic hellscape is not enough, the left has managed to work race into this issue — because of course they have.    

    Regular Americans are mocked for offering opinions on climate change because they are not experts, but one need not be a climate scientist to understand the fatal flaw in the left’s strategy. If we are to collectively address any problem, whatever the cause might be, solutions and teamwork become impossible when the left’s approach is nothing more than the shoddy work of rigid ideologues. Republicans have suggested that perhaps there are ways to address the effects of a changing climate without destroying the U.S. economy and compromising national security, but because their ideas do not exponentially grow the federal government and usher in a socialist utopia, they are ignored by the Democratic Party.

    It would be disingenuous to claim there are zero climate alarmists living a lifestyle consistent with their beliefs. They do exist, I’m quite certain. I’ve just never met one. There is another explanation — perhaps every climate alarmist I’ve met has cleverly disguised himself as a “climate denier” to gain access to the seedy world of repugnant moral lepers who drive SUVs and eat meat — a secret mission to convert heretics from the inside. That must be it. 

    The parties will probably never agree on an approach, but I eagerly await the day when every climate alarmist practices what he preaches. If the leftists next door have one of those yard signs proudly staked on their front lawn that lists a variety of hollow political slogans including “we believe science is real,at the very least they should downsize, get rid of their air conditioning, and use valuable lawn space not for bragging about the supposed moral character of their household, but for growing all their own food.


    B.L Hahn is a freelance writer covering topics including culture, politics and economics.

    SEC Fakes Approval for New Climate Regulations from Activists, Foreign Investors While Ignoring American Companies’ Mass Opposition


    BY: TRISTAN JUSTICE | DECEMBER 28, 2022

    Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/12/28/sec-fakes-approval-for-new-climate-regulations-from-activists-foreign-investors-while-ignoring-american-companies-mass-opposition/

    SEC
    The SEC is relying on foreign investors to present an illusion of broad support for the agency’s proposed climate disclosure rules.

    Author Tristan Justice profile

    TRISTAN JUSTICE

    VISIT ON TWITTER@JUSTICETRISTAN

    MORE ARTICLES

    The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is relying on a network of foreign investors to present an illusion of broad support for the agency’s proposed climate disclosure rule, which threatens to increase structural risks to the American economy.

    In March, the trade agency outlined new regulations requiring firms to report their estimated energy emissions. While the SEC technically only has jurisdiction over publicly traded companies, the broad nature of the agency’s proposal aims to coerce private businesses into carbon calculations that track the behavior of their customers. Firms that fail to comply with government standards are subject to fines and lawsuits.

    The new rules are “a disingenuous power grab by the SEC,” Will Hild, the executive director of Consumers’ Research, said in an interview.

    “By requiring the corporations the SEC regulates to make scope 2 emissions disclosures, those corporations will be forced to require the businesses they source from to calculate and disclose their emissions or stop doing business with them,” Hild told The Federalist. “So even if a business is private (not publicly traded) but their customers are public companies, then the SEC will have effectively forced them to participate in the disclosures scheme.”

    According to an analysis of the SEC’s proposal from the Western Energy Alliance, a coalition of predominantly small independent oil and gas producers, more than 80 percent of asset managers cited by the agency as supportive of the new regulations are foreign. Just 7 percent of American asset managers support the disclosure rules.

    The white paper from the Alliance published in June outlines how activist investors are masquerading as representative of majority sentiment on Wall Street despite just a handful of firms forming multiple coalitions. According to the report, seven major climate change advocacy organizations cited by SEC as behind the agency on mandated disclosure include the same investor coalition groups working in close collaboration. It’s as if the same 50 members of Congress formed 100 different caucuses that pledged support to particular legislation to show proof of consensus.

    “These groups are so intertwined that it is not at all clear they represent anything other than a minority of investors advancing a particular policy agenda,” the Alliance report reads. “Across those seven climate initiatives and the global network of non-profit organizations that support them, only 19 percent are American. More than half are European.”

    Among the groups behind the SEC climate disclosure is Climate Action 100+, a coalition of investors pushing to eliminate highly efficient fossil fuels through public and private policy. Earlier this month, House Republicans on Capitol Hill launched an antitrust probe into the group, where they described Climate Action 100+ as a “cartel” to “ensure the world’s largest corporate greenhouse gas emitters take… action on climate change.’”

    The Alliance white paper also highlights Russian influence at the center of the SEC’s proposed rule via an endorsement from the Sea Change Foundation. In 2015, the Environmental Policy Alliance described the Sea Change Foundation as “a conduit for funneling Russian government money to U.S. environmental groups in order to undermine American natural gas and oil production to Russia’s benefit.”

    Kremlin oligarchs stand to profit by Washington’s elimination of fossil fuels because that would force global markets to rely on Moscow for their energy needs.

    In March, 20 House lawmakers sent a letter to Oversight Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., that raised the alarm on Russian interference in the American environmental lobby sabotaging energy security.

    “Given the impact that Russia’s control of the European energy market has had in the lead up and prosecution of the war in Ukraine, it is critical that Congress gains a better understanding of the role that Russian financing has had in shaping American environmental policy and sentiment,” lawmakers wrote.

    Maloney, however, continued to preside over hearings that targeted oil and gas producers as Democrats demand that reliable power from fossil fuels be replaced by less-reliable wind and solar.


    Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

    Energy Inflation Isn’t An Accident, It’s A Planned Demolition


    BY: RUPERT DARWALL | OCTOBER 10, 2022

    Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/10/10/energy-inflation-isnt-an-accident-its-a-planned-demolition/

    geothermal power plant

    Author Rupert Darwall profile

    RUPERT DARWALL

    MORE ARTICLES

    The West is experiencing its third energy crisis. The first, in 1973, was caused by the near-quintupling of the price of crude oil by Gulf oil producers in response to America’s support for Israel in the Yom Kippur war. Their action brought an end to what the French call the trente glorieuses — the unprecedented post–World War II economic expansion.

    The second occurred at the end of the 1970s, when Iran’s Islamic revolution led to a more than doubling of oil prices. This again inflicted great economic hardship, but the policy response was far better. Inflation was purged at the cost of deep recession. Energy markets were permitted to function. High oil prices induced substitution effects, particularly in the power sector, and stimulated increased supply.

    In the space of nine months, the oil price cratered from $30 a barrel in November 1985 to $10 a barrel in July 1986. It’s no wonder that the economic expansion that started under Ronald Reagan had such long legs.

    This time is different. The third energy crisis was not sparked by Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies or by Iranian ayatollahs. It was self-inflicted, a foreseeable outcome of policy choices made by the West: Germany’s disastrous Energiewende that empowered Vladimir Putin to launch an energy war against Europe; Britain’s self-regarding and self-destructive policy of “powering past coal” and its decision to ban fracking; and, as Joseph Toomey shows in a recent powerful essay, President Biden’s war on the American oil and gas industry.

    Hostilities were declared during Joe Biden’s campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. “I guarantee you. We’re going to end fossil fuel,” candidate Biden told a climate activist in September 2019, words that the White House surely hopes get lost down a memory hole. Toomey’s paper has all the receipts, so there’s no danger of that.

    As he observes, Biden’s position in 2022 resembles Barack Obama’s in 2012, when rising gas prices threatened to sink his reelection. Obama responded with a ruthlessness that his erstwhile running mate lacks. He simply stopped talking about climate and switched to an all-of-the-above energy policy, shamelessly claiming credit for the fracking revolution that his own Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tried to strangle at birth.

    Passage of the comically mistitled Inflation Reduction Act places this option beyond Biden’s reach, even if he were so inclined. Democrats are hardly going to take a vow of climate omertà when they’ve achieved a political triumph of pushing through Congress what they regard as the most significant climate legislation to date.

    Although the price of oil has slipped back from recent highs, the factors behind high gasoline prices remain in place. Foremost among these is the steep decline in U.S. oil refinery capacity triggered when Covid lockdowns crushed demand but continued after the economy reopened. There has never been such a large fall in operable refinery capacity. Moreover, Gulf Coast refineries were operating at 97 percent of their operating capacity in June 2022. As Toomey remarks, “There isn’t any more blood to be squeezed out of this turnip.”

    Toomey identifies five factors driving this decline in refinery capacity. EPA biofuel blending mandates impose crippling costs on smaller refineries. When conventional refineries are converted to processing biofuels, up to 90 percent of their capacity is lost.

    Biofuel mandates cost consumers far more than federal excise taxes. Toomey demonstrates that the Biden administration’s claim that biofuel mandates protect consumers from oil-price volatility is totally false; biofuel prices, he writes, “are essentially indexed to the price of crude oil.”

    Biden could order the reversal of the EPA’s retroactive biofuel threshold rules. That he has not done so demonstrates that the administration isn’t serious about making energy affordable again. High prices for fossil fuel energy are an intended part of the plan.

    Corporate and Wall Street ESG policies are another factor driving refinery closures, especially of facilities owned by European oil companies to meet punishing decarbonization targets that will effectively end up sunsetting them as oil companies. If finalized as proposed, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s proposed climate disclosure rules, with the strong support of the Biden administration, will heighten the vulnerability of U.S. oil and gas companies to climate activists and woke investors to force them to progressively divest their carbon-intensive activities, such as refining crude oil, and eventually out of the oil and gas sector altogether.

    To these should be added aggressive federal policies aimed at phasing out gasoline-powered vehicles in favor of electric vehicles (EVs); an administration staffed from top to bottom by militants who believe that climate is the only thing that matters in politics; and an increasingly hostile political climate (“You know the deal,” Biden said of oil executives when campaigning for the presidency. “When they don’t deliver, put them in jail”). 

    These policies, argues Toomey, will see China become the world’s leading oil refiner for years to come. Will Biden find himself asking China for supplies of refined gasoline? He might well find himself being saved from such an unfortunate position, made more so by Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s recent trip to Taiwan, by help from the other side of the southern border.

    Mexico is constructing a $12 billion refinery, due to start producing gasoline next year. Perhaps President Biden’s next foreign trip should be to Mexico City.

    This article is republished from RealClearEnergy, with permission.

    COMMENTARY: Man Plugs $80k+ Electric Truck Into His House, Finds Out It Will Take Over 4 Days to Charge


     By C. Douglas Golden | October 1, 2022

    Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/man-plugs-80k-electric-truck-house-finds-will-take-4-days-charge/

    An electric Hummer is seen at General Motors Factory Zero in Detroit, Michigan, in a file photo from November 2021. (Mandel Ngan – AFP / Getty Images)

    Congratulations. You’ve just purchased one of the most expensive high-performance electric trucks on the market. You’ve gone green and you’ve done it in style with the GMC Hummer, starting at $86,645. That’s right — the Hummer’s now a green vehicle! What was once the biggest villain in the left’s war on fossil fuels is now the poster child for responsible off-roading. That’s a hefty chunk of change, but at least you’ll be able to save a bit with government incentives. Most importantly, you can charge the car at home just like it was any other appliance. Easy, convenient and cheap, right?

    Well, if you have a day or four to spare, sure.

    In a viral video from a YouTube channel that specializes in electric vehicles, a man who tries to plug the Hummer into his home to charge finds it will take, at best, one day to charge — and that’s with special equipment installed. Without it, you could be there for four days.

    The video begins with standard 120V charging — or Level 1 charging, to use official jargon. This is the standard current your home already offers.

    “Right now it’s about 6 p.m. on Tuesday,” the man says. “And it says it will be full by Saturday at 10:55 [p.m.], which is four-plus days of charging. Wow.”

    To be fair, however, this won’t be how most Hummer owners will be charging their vehicle. Level 2 chargers are upgraded home stations which deliver a significantly higher amount of electricity than your regular home circuit would be able to deliver — but they require special equipment and installation.

    According to Compare.com, the cost of a Level 2 charger is about $500 without installation, which must be done by a professional electrician. However, our intrepid Hummer owner had one of those — the JuiceBox, a 240v charger, installed in his garage. How much difference did that make? Not as much as you might think.

    “Now it says it will be done tomorrow by 6:30 [p.m.],” the video narrator says. “So, about 24 hours of charging from four percent to 100 percent.”

    Of course, you don’t have to go to full charge; the vehicle’s screen says the Level 2 charger was adding 14 miles of range per hour. However, when you can fill a gas-powered truck in five minutes and not have to worry about installing a fast charger or leaving your truck plugged in every night, that’s not exactly easy or convenient.

    And by the way, it’s not entirely cheap, either — especially if you decide you don’t want to charge your Hummer at home but at fast-charging stations that can get the job done in two hours. Car and Driver went to an Electrify America charging station, where it cost over $100 to “fill up” the Hummer at 43 cents per kilowatt hour.

    This is roughly consistent with how much it would cost to fill up a gas-powered Hummer made in the final production year — although Electrify America does provide a membership program that reduces the cost by roughly one-quarter. If you charge it at home, you’ll only be spending about $35 to fill it up — but you’ll be waiting quite a while.

    And, by the by, don’t expect to use your electric truck to do truck-like things quite as well as gas-powered trucks do. Automotive YouTuber Tyler “Hoovie” Hoover put Ford’s F-150 Lightning — another electric truck, although somewhat more modestly priced than the Hummer — to the test by towing an empty aluminum trailer 32 miles, and then assessing how well it handled its maximum towing capacity by then ferrying a recently purchased 1930 Ford Model A pickup truck back to home base.

    Hoovie called the experience a “complete and total disaster from beginning to end.” He started with a 200-mile charge but lost 68 miles of range in the 32 miles he was towing just the aluminum trailer. Once the Model A was aboard, he lost “almost 90 miles of range in 30 miles.”

    Cheer up, Hoovie. Plug that baby into a Level 1 charger and you’ll be ready to make a return trip in another few days.

    Now, I don’t pretend that most — in fact, almost any — Hummer owners are going to be using Level 1. If you can drop a cool $86k on a retro-styled EV pickup truck, you can also get a Level 2 charger installed in your garage without your bank account incurring too much of a scrape. That still means 24 hours of charging, though, something that could be critical in an emergency.

    Say you live in the state of California, which plans to outlaw the sale of new gas vehicles by 2035. Let’s also say your residence is suddenly threatened by a wildfire — I know, a very unusual thing in California, but we’re just spitballing hypotheticals here. If you only have 10 percent charge and you have to load everything you can into your vehicle, you don’t have a day to get a full tank. Good luck getting far and good luck finding an open fast-charging station on the highway, particularly in times of natural disaster.

    Look, this isn’t to say electric vehicles don’t have their time and place. If you don’t mind the charging times and high price, the Hummer is actually a pretty sweet ride; it can go from 0-60 mph in 3.3 seconds, something the original Hummer might not have been able to do in 3.3 hours. It’s a high-tech, versatile vehicle that, from all appearances, is a blast. But let’s be clear: The Hummer and its electric brethren aren’t at the point where they can replace gas-powered trucks, the same way EVs across the spectrum aren’t at the point where they can replace equivalent internal-combustion vehicles. Why are we on the precipice, then, of forcing new-car buyers to pay more for a vehicle that’s less convenient and often can’t do the work they need it to do?

    EV technology won’t be ready to replace gas-powered cars anytime soon, and ignoring reality doesn’t make it go away — no matter how many pro-EV laws the Democrats pass.

    C. Douglas Golden

    Contributor, Commentary

    C. Douglas Golden is a writer who splits his time between the United States and Southeast Asia. Specializing in political commentary and world affairs, he’s written for Conservative Tribune and The Western Journal since 2014.

    @CillianZeal

    Facebook

    Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


    A.F. Branco Cartoon – Ancient Profession

    Doomsday alarmists are as old as human history, so AOC’s end-of-the-world environmentalist wacko-ism is in her DNA.

    Ancient EnvironmentalistPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020
    Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

    A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.

    Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


    A.F. Branco Cartoon – The New Anti-Smites

    The Radical right joins forces with the Islamo-Leftist alliance to promote antisemitism and the BDS movement against Israel.
    The New Anti-SmitesPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.

    Nolte: Climate ‘Experts’ Are 0-41 with Their Doomsday Predictions


    Written by John Nolte | 

    URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/09/20/nolte-climate-experts-are-0-41-with-their-doomsday-predictions/

    EDINBURGH, SCOTLAND – SEPTEMBER 20: Protesters march and hold placards as they attend the Global Climate Strike on September 20, 2019 in Edinburgh, Scotland. Millions of people are taking to the streets around the world to take part in protests inspired by the teenage Swedish activist Greta Thunberg. Students are … Jeff J Mitchell/Getty 

    For more than 50 years Climate Alarmists in the scientific community and environmental movement have not gotten even one prediction correct, but they do have a perfect record of getting 41 predictions wrong.

    In other words, on at least 41 occasions, these so-called experts have predicted some terrible environmental catastrophe was imminent … and it never happened.

    And not once — not even once! — have these alarmists had one of their predictions come true.

    Think about that… the so-called experts are 0-41 with their predictions, but those of us who are skeptical of “expert” prediction number 42, the one that says that if we don’t immediately convert to socialism and allow Alexandria Ocasio-Crazy to control and organize our lives, the planet will become uninhabitable.

    Why would any sane person listen to someone with a 0-41 record?

    Why would we completely restructure our economy and sacrifice our personal freedom for “experts” who are 0-41, who have never once gotten it right?

    If you had an investment counselor who steered you wrong 41times, would you hang in there for number 42?

    Of course not. You’d fire him after failed prediction two or three.

    And if that’s not crazy enough, the latest ploy is to trot out a 16-year-old girl to spread prediction number 42, because it is so much more credible that way.

    Sometimes you just have to sit back and laugh.

    Anyway, I want you to have the data, so go ahead and print this out in advance of Thanksgiving dinner with your obnoxious Millennial nephew.

    LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT RIGHT

    NONE.

    ZIP.

    ZERO.

    NADA.

    BLANK

    DONUT HOLE

    NIL.

    NOTHING.

    VOID.

    ZILCH.

    LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS THE CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT WRONG

    Here is the source for numbers 1-27. As you will see, the individual sources are not crackpots, but scientific studies and media reports on “expert” predictions. The sources for numbers 28-41 are linked individually.

        1. 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
        2. 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
        3. 1970: Ice Age By 2000
        4. 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
        5. 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
        6. 1972: New Ice Age By 2070
        7. 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
        8. 1974: Another Ice Age?
        9. 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life
        10. 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
        11. 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes
        12. 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend
        13. 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s
        14. 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
        15. 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)
        16. 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
        17. 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)
        18. 2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is
        19. 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
        20. 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
        21. 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018
        22. 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013
        23. 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World
        24. 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’
        25. 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014
        26. 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015
        27. 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’
        28. 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
        29. 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources
        30. 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years
        31. 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
        32. 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s
        33. 1980: Peak Oil In 2000
        34. 1996: Peak Oil in 2020
        35. 2002: Peak Oil in 2010
        36. 2006: Super Hurricanes!
        37. 2005 : Manhattan Underwater by 2015
        38. 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
        39. 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
        40. 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
        41. 1970s: Killer Bees!

    Sorry, Experts… Sorry, Scientific Consensus… Only a fool comes running for the 42nd cry of wolf.

    Don’t litter, be kind to animals, recycling’s for suckers (it’s all going to end up in the ground eventually), so stop feeling guilty… Go out there and embrace all the bounty that comes with being a 21st century American — you know, like Obama, who says he believes in Global Warming with his mouth but proves he doesn’t with the $15 million he just spent on oceanfront that we’re told is doomed to flooding.

    This piece has been updated to correct a duplicate posting and add another hoax prediction.  

    Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

    Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


    A.F. Branco Cartoon – Green is the New Red

    The “Green New Deal” is nothing more than a trojan horse tactic of the extreme left to undermine freedom in America and the constitution.

    The Green New DealPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
    More A.F. Branco Cartoons at The Daily Torch.

    A.F. Branco 2019 13-Month Calendar <—- Order

    take our poll – story continues below
    • When should abortion be legal?

    Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

    A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

    Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


    A.F. Branco Cartoon – Preventative Medicine

    Governor Jerry Brown and the left are trying to blame the fires in California on climate change when it’s their very own environmental policies to blame.

    Forest Fires Blamed on Left-wing Environmental PoliciesPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
    See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

    A.F.Branco’s New Coffee Table Book <—- Order.

    A.F. Branco 2019 13-Month Calendar <—- Order Here

    Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

    A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

    Two New Politically INCORRECT Cartoons from A.F. Branco


    A.F. Branco Cartoon – Fuel for Thought

    Governor Jerry Brown would like to shift blame from faulty looney left-wing forest management policies to blaming global warming.

    California Fires Caused By Leftist PoliciesPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
    More A.F. Branco cartoons at Constitution.com here.

    A.F.Branco’s New Coffee Table Book <—- Order

    take our poll – story continues below
    • Will the Democrats try to impeach President Trump now that they control the House?

    Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

    A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News” and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

    A. Branco Cartoon – The Good Hands People

    When Democrats fall behind in the vote count they seem to count on their insurance policy Elections Supervisor Brenda Snipes.

    Brenda Snipes Supervisor of ElectionsPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
    See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

    Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


    Not A Real Scientist Guy

    Bill Nye, who by the way is NOT a real scientist, suggest we start taxing cow farts as a solution to the worlds environmental problems.

    Bill Nye Taxing Cow Farts

    Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.

    More A.F. Branco Cartoons at The Daily Torch.

    A.F.Branco Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here!
    Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

    A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

    From My Email INBOX


    Sent to my from John Smith (his real actual name)

    Hunting


    Anyone who has bought and then tried to use a hunting license will appreciate this amusing story as well as a perfect reply to an over-reaching bureaucracy that seldom sees itself on the other end of it’s ridiculous regulations...

    STORY:
    The State of Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife sent a letter to a home/landowner asking for permission to access a creek on his property to document the decline in a certain species of unheard of frogs. 

    The property owners’ response in the second letter is EPIC.

    Original Letter from Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wildlife:

    Dear Landowner:

    ODFW Staff will be conducting surveys for foothill yellow-legged frogs & other amphibians over the next few months. As part of this research we would like to survey the creek on your property. I am writing this letter to request your permission to access your property. 

    Recent research indicates that foothill yellow-legged frogs have declined significantly in recent years and are no longer found at half their historic sites. Your cooperation will be greatly appreciated and will help contribute to the conservation of this important species.  

    Please fill out the attached postage-paid postcard and let us know if you are willing to let us cross your property or not.  If you have any concerns about this project please give us a call. We would love to talk with you about our research.

    Sincerely,
    Steve Niemela
    Conservation Strategy Implementation Biologist

    RESPONSE FROM LANDOWNERS:

    Dear Mr. Niemela:

         
    Thank you for your inquiry regarding accessing our property to survey for the yellow-legged frog. We may be able to help you out with this matter.

    We have divided our 2.26 acres into 75 equal survey units with a draw tag for each unit. Application fees are only $8.00 per unit after you purchase the “Frog Survey License” ($120.00 resident / $180.00 Non-Resident). You will also need to obtain a “Frog Habitat” parking permit ($10.00 per vehicle).

    You will also need an “Invasive Species” stamp ($15.00 for the first vehicle and $5.00 for each add’l vehicle) You will also want to register at the Check Station to have your vehicle inspected for non-native plant life prior to entering our property. There is also a Day Use fee, $5.00 per vehicle.

    If you are successful in the Draw you will be notified two weeks in advance so you can make necessary plans and purchase your “Creek Habitat” stamp. ($18.00 Resident / $140.00 Non-Resident.)

    Survey units open between 8 am and 3 pm but you cannot commence survey until 9 am and must cease all survey activity by 1 pm.    Survey Gear can only include a net with a 2″ diameter made of 100% organic cotton netting with no longer than an 18-ft handle, non-weighted and no deeper than 6′ from net frame to bottom of net. Handles can only be made of BPA-free plastics or wood.

    After 1 pm. you can use a net with a 3″ diameter if you purchase the “Frog Net Endorsement” ($75.00 Resident / $250 Non-Resident).  Any frogs captured that are released will need to be released with an approved release device back into the environment unharmed.

    As of June 1, we are offering draw tags for our “Premium Survey” units and application is again only $8.00 per application.  However, all fees can be waived if you can verify “Native Indian Tribal rights and status.”

    You will also need to provide evidence of successful completion of “Frog Surveys and You” comprehensive course on frog identification, safe handling practices, and self-defense strategies for frog attacks.  This course is offered on-line through an accredited program for a nominal fee of $750.00.

    Please let us know if we can be of assistance to you. Otherwise, we decline your access to our property but appreciate your inquiry.

    Sincerely,

    Larry & Amanda Anderson.

    This Week’s Ann Coulter Letter: Your Choice: A Green America Or A Brown America


    Commentary by  Ann Coulter 

    URL of the original posting site: http://humanevents.com/2017/04/19/your-choice-a-green-america-or-a-brown-america/

    In celebration of Earth Day this Saturday, let’s review how the Sierra Club sold its soul and screwed the Earth for a $100 million donation. They must hate themselves for it, so why shouldn’t we hate them, too?

    After Teddy Kennedy’s 1965 immigration act began dumping millions of Third-Worlders on the country, the Sierra Club talked of little else besides reducing immigration. In 1970, the club adopted a resolution complaining that the country’s growing population was polluting the “air, water and land” — to the point that “our very survival (is) threatened.”

    In 1978, the Sierra Club adopted a resolution urging Congress to “conduct a thorough examination of U.S. immigration laws,” noting that the United States, Canada and Australia were the only countries admitting “more than a handful of permanent immigrants.”

    In 1980, the club dropped its promotion of birth control, in order to focus on immigration. “It is obvious,” the club said, “that the numbers of immigrants the United States accepts affects our population size and growth rate,” even more than “the number of children per family.”

    In 1989, the club’s Population Report expressly called for reducing the number of immigrants.

    In 1990, the club’s grassroots leaders voted overwhelmingly to launch a major national campaign on the immigration problem.

    Even people who don’t live in yurts can’t help but notice the environmental damage being done by hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans clamoring across the border every year, setting fires, dumping litter, spray-painting gang signs in our parks and defacing ancient Indian petroglyphs.

    The problem isn’t just the number of people traipsing through our wilderness areas; it’s that primitive societies have no concept of “litter.” That’s a quirk of prosperous societies. The damage to our parks shows these cultural differences.

    Writing in an environmental journal at New York University, Rosa P. Oakes described the “reprehensible” damage being done to “towering cactus, Joshua trees, flowering cactus varieties, colorful wildflowers and rock formations” by illegals. With accompanying photos, she noted that the immigrants’ litter included “abandoned vehicles … used needles, drug paraphernalia, plastic grocery bags, paper products, empty water containers, blankets, clothing, used disposable diapers, among other things.”

    The Mexican cultural trait of littering is apparently well known to everyone — except American journalists.

    As usual, when it comes to anything that reflects negatively on Third World immigrants, you have to be Agatha Christie to get at the truth. If the media can hide Hispanic child rape, it’s child’s play for them to ignore the Hispanic littering problem.

    The best way to find out about garbage being dumped all over by our vibrant recent immigrants is to look at local news stories from any town that contains a Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

    Here are three from last year:

    Local politicians in heavily Hispanic Allentown, Pennsylvania, wanted to suck up to their constituents by renaming Seventh Street “Calle Siete.” Then it turned out that the Hispanic merchants on “Calle Siete” had no interest in this idea. Their No. 1 issue? Litter.

    Dorcas Derivera, an immigrant from Guatemala, said in perfect English that if politicians wanted to do something useful, they would deal with the litter problem on Seventh Street, which she said she must pick up from the sidewalk before clients arrive.

    “It’s embarrassing,” she told a local newspaper. “How am I going to do business?”

    Also last year, in a classic MSM Hide-the-Mexican story, there were media reports of “racist” graffiti targeting “Hispanics and African-Americans” in San Leandro, California’s Marina Park. Obviously, graffiti directed at “Hispanics and African-Americans” could only have been left by one of those white supremacist gangs so prevalent on “Law and Order”!

    Nope. It was Mexicans, again: The Nortenos, a Mexican gang. By “Hispanics,” the media meant “Hispanics other than the ones doing the graffiti.”

    Then last October, the parks and recreation department in Decatur, Alabama, was again forced to remove goals from the soccer field because of the mountains of garbage routinely left behind. In the past decade, the soccer games had become “an increasingly popular social event among the Hispanic community.”

    Would any of this be of interest to an alleged environmental group? It used to be — until the early 2000s. That was when the Sierra Club was given $100 million by hedge fund billionaire David Gelbaum in exchange for never opposing immigration again. The club said, How dare you ask us to abandon our principles for filthy lucre!

    Just kidding! It said, SURE! Did you bring the check?

    Mass Third World immigration is a triple whammy for the environment because:

    1) Millions more people are tromping through our country;

    2) The new people do not share Americans’ love of nature and cleanliness; and

    3) We’re not allowed to criticize them.

    One big advantage of taking white Western European immigrants is that we’re permitted to complain about their grating cultural habits without being accused of “racism.” (Also, there aren’t that many of them.)

    The Sierra Club didn’t anticipate the PC reasons for preferring non-Third World immigrants, but simply wanted to stop so many people pouring into our country and stepping on the flowers. Which is why the club used to be nearly monomaniacally focused on reducing immigration.

    By now, it’s been a quarter-century since the Sierra Club cared about the environment. As is the fate of most groups that stick around long enough, today it’s just another left-wing, hate-America interest group. Unfortunately, among the things the Sierra Club hates about America are its rivers, mountains, hiking trails, parks and wildlife.

    Give me your tired, your poor, your empties and pizza boxes, your Cheetos bags, your soiled diapers and abandoned couches …

    Maryland County To Churches: Preach Environmentalism And Get A Tax Break


    Posted by Derek Hunter, Contributor 11/19/2014

    Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley made national news last year when he fought to pass and signed a tax bill that levied a tax on Marylanders, businesses and churches for the amount of “impervious surface” they have on their property.

    Roofs, driveways, sidewalks, and parking lots qualify for the “rainwater remediation fee” to “protect the Chesapeake Bay.”

    Though the O’Malley administration calls it a “fee,” it is commonly called the “rain tax” throughout the state. It is wildly unpopular and the promise to fight to repeal the tax was a large factor in Maryland electing Republican Larry Hogan governor this month.Liberalism a mental disorderNow Prince George’s Country is offering a way for churches to avoid paying the tax, which is estimated to be an average of $744 per year for them — preach “green” to their parishioners.

    So far 30 pastors have agreed to begin “‘green’ ministries to maintain the improvements at their churches, and to preach environmentally focused sermons to educate their congregations” to avoid being hit with the tax, The Washington Post reports.com 02

    Prince George’s County’s Department of Environment director Adam Ortiz told WBAL Radio churches “don’t have to preach, per se,” that they could avoid the tax if they “provide educational programs to teach them (parishioners) about how to be more sustainable. And to help them engage in grant programs and other way that they can control the runoff from their property.” Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

    Asked about the concern of government telling churches what to preach to their members, Ortiz said he had no concern over that. “It’s an opt-in. It’s up to them, if they want to help participate and help clean up the bay, they can opt-in to this program and we can all work together to clean up the bay.”

    “All of us are part of the problem,” Ortiz said, “and we can also be part of the solution.”com 03

    Between 30 and 40 additional churches have filed applications to avoid the tax and participate in the program, according to Ortiz. “It’s completely voluntary,” he said, “and paying this fee is state law.”

    Asked if businesses and private property owners could avail themselves of this program to avoid paying the tax, Ortiz said, “For businesses and private property owners the most important thing is the help control the pollution (rain water), keep it from going into the storm drain, cuz that goes directly into the rivers. So we have a series of grant programs that we’re happy to work with private owners on.”

    Ortiz said those programs, particularly for businesses, do not involve talking to employees like churches are required to talk to congregants.

    Tag Cloud