Global warming, climate change, all these things are just a dream come true for politicians. I deal with evidence and not with frightening computer models because the seeker after truth does not put his faith in any consensus. The road to the truth is long and hard, but this is the road we must follow.
poses a good question and provides some pithy answers. Thank you Diana. She also provides a link to something called the Great Reset – a link which I followed, since I thought it was about time I knew what it was all about.
[I have an allergy to new words and expressions like some people have to peanuts. Internet acronyms produce violent choking in me. Anything marked “may contain neologisms” I avoid. I became a climate denier years ago when idle curiosity sent me to a site called RealClimate where I kept reading about the Science being Robust. The image of science as something hale and hearty and ruddy-cheeked was a big turnoff to me, and when I first saw photos of Michael Mann and Gavin Schmidt my suspicions were confirmed. What could those stingy stringy fringy little beards be hiding?]
Where was I?
The WEF Great Reset page begins:
There is an urgent need for global stakeholders to cooperate in simultaneously managing the direct consequences of the COVID-19 crisis. To improve the state of the world, the World Economic Forum is starting The Great Reset initiative.
Aaaaargh! Stakeholder is one of those words. I’d always associated it with Tony Blair and killing vampires, which makes no sense because Tony is more vampire than vampire killer. It’s a cunning little word, suggesting that we’re all in this together. Only the size of our stakes distinguishes us. And no-one at the World Economic Forum would be so indelicate as to ask: “How big’s yours?”
This warm sense of inclusiveness is dissipated in the second paragraph though:
Leaders find themselves at a historic crossroads, managing short-term pressures against medium- and long-term uncertainties.
Right. Leaders are at the crossroads, but where are the rest of us? We come back into the picture at the end of paragraph three:
As we enter a unique window of opportunity to shape the recovery, this initiative will offer insights to help inform all those determining the future state of global relations, the direction of national economies, the priorities of societies, the nature of business models and the management of a global commons. Drawing from the vision and vast expertise of the leaders engaged across the Forum’s communities, the Great Reset initiative has a set of dimensions to build a new social contract that honours the dignity of every human being.
Yup. That’s us at the end there. It’s the directors, the prioritisers, the managers and the leaders, with their vision and vast expertise, who are entering the unique window of opportunity. And once through, they’ll be the ones “determining the priorities of societies” and “managing the global commons.” We’re the guys and gals in the last sentence who are going to have our dignity honoured.
For “dignity” read: “posteriors.” For “honoured” read: “handed to you on a plate.”
I know it’s just guff, but guff has meaning, even when it’s meaningless. Especially when it’s meaningless. Take the announcements for today, 9thof November:
First off is the Volvo group, which is launching a Green Finance Framework for the financing of investments and projects in the area of clean transportation. Martin Lundstedt, President and CEO of the Volvo Group says:
„Sustainability is a part of our DNA… We take a holistic view on sustainability and are very pleased to show that we are supporting this transition with every part of our organization.“
Then Ahmed Galal Ismail, Chief Executive of Majid Al Futtaim, announces the launch of the world’s first benchmark corporate Islamic green bonds
And finally (for today) there’s the Green Horizon Summitwhich kicked off this morning. Here are some highlights:
Mark Carney(remember him?) who is now Finance Adviser on the 26th Conference of the Parties (COP 26) to the Prime Minister, said:
„Transition plans will reveal the leaders and laggers on the road to Glasgow. We will not get to net zero in a niche, [???] it requires a whole economy transition”.
Christine Lagarde, President at [sic] European Central Bank called for a wholesale transformation of the economy. She says:
“Climate change information remains optional [???]– in part because the financial impact is still not well understood…We need common technical reporting standards and increased data collecting to enable a consistent way to classify green activities and a taxonomy of carbon intensive activities.“
There’s also the European Commissioner for Economy, the Head of the World Bank, and host of other Shovers and On-the-Makers. The CEO of Barclays says:
“What COVID-19 is showing is that we’re on this planet together.”
Well, not actually together, in the sense of “together.” More like far apart really, with them, the leaders, determining the future, directing the priorities of societies, and managing the global commons, on the far side of a video conference, while we stakeholders wait to have our dignity honoured.
Or we could sharpen our stakes and drive them into the heart of the vampire I suppose.
Or we could sharpen our stakes and drive them into the heart of the vampire I suppose.
Get ready to be told what the new rules of food consumption should be, according to climate-obsessed researchers. That seems to be the message being pushed here. All based on the assertion that minor trace gases in the atmosphere are going to dictate what happens to the weather, of course. – – – Reducing fossil fuel use is essential to stopping climate change, but that goal will remain out of reach unless global agriculture and eating habits are also transformed, according to new research from the University of Minnesota and University of Oxford.
A paper published Thursday in the journal Science reveals that emissions from global food production alone could lead to a global temperature increase of more than 1.5°C by mid-century and of nearly 2°C by the end of the century, even if emissions from fossil fuels were to end immediately, reports Phys.org.
The study also identifies the need for large and rapid improvements in farming practices, as well as changes in what we eat and in how much food we waste, to help achieve the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global temperature increases to 1.5°C or 2°C.
“Our work shows that food is a much greater contributor to climate change than is widely known. Fortunately, we can fix this problem by using fertilizer more efficiently, by eating less meat and more fruits, vegetables, whole grains and nuts and by making other important changes to our food system,” said Jason Hill, professor in the Department of Bioproducts and Biosystems Engineering in the University of Minnesota’s College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences and College of Science and Engineering.
The study determined that, if left unchanged, future greenhouse gas emissions from food production would alone lead to the world warming by 1.5°C by 2050 and by 2°C by the end of the century compared to pre-industrial levels.
The authors projected future emissions using expected trends in population growth, dietary changes and the additional amount of land required to feed the world.
“There are at least five different changes that would allow us to prevent this agriculturally-driven climate change” said David Tilman, Regents professor in the Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior in the College of Biological Sciences.
Steve Bannon headed up Trumps election team in 2016, he’s goes through the constitutional process which will kick in if there are too many problems deciding the legitimacy of votes: (This is about 20 – 30 minutes into the live three hour show).
We have no President Elect until the Electoral College chooses a President.
The Secretaries of each State have to certify the votes. If you can’t certify the votes, you can’t have electoral representatives. They need to be in place by December 6.
If no candidate gets 270 votes by December 8, the constitution has a solution. It goes to the House of Representatives for a “Contingent election“. But this is not a vote that Congressmen do. Instead, States send delegates to the House, and the House votes and decides the President.
Bannon: “The second campaign was a great awakening — the spontaneous Trump trains, the gatherings former communists in South Florida.”
This is a 3 hour broadcast and it’s running live now…. Imagine if this was screening on prime time TV?
Mind you, there are a lot of other paths, other than a “Contingent Election” and even if one happens, its state electors can vote silently as happened in 1825, and we all know how well that might not work if a few delegates can be bought…
” If Biden wanted to heal the nation he would endorse these legal campaigns to investigate voter fraud.”
Gorka: When people ask, “What can I do”?
” Get the red hat on and get out of the house and Protest”
What do we do if bad votes have been mixed with good votes?
If they can’t be verified, they’ve got to go. All of them. We don’t need a do-over.
We had an election. It was November 3. Donald Trump won.
Bannon on Lindsay Graham and others talking about fixing things for future elections:
“Don’t have hearings for future elections. We’re going to sort it out now. Anyone who says it’s “for the future” is just trying to get you to surrender.