From Climate Scepticism
I don’t usually post about a tweet, but this one was particularly striking.
A poster called Camus quotes from and links to a 3-minute video by Professor Bret Weinstein, who links climate activism to the sexual revolution, itself propelled by the availability of birth control & abortion. (Click on “Show more” for Camus’s excellent summary of Bret Weinstein’s thesis):
For those who (like me) are allergic to videos, I transcribe the relevant part of Weinstein’s thesis:
What I think has happened is […] the sexual revolution creates the opportunity to get one off the most profound rewards, in fact the most profound reward that the universe has ever produced as far as we know, without having to invest very much work at all. By making sex common, it totally altered the way people viewed the number of years they had to live. They could afford to put off child-rearing. It could be distant in the future, which left all of these young people with all of this energy, who might well not have been involved in movements if they were struggling to raise a family… What people do is that they take the energy, the seriousness of purpose that they would ordinarily be directed into managing a marriage and the role of being a parent and they put it into something.
And Heather has pointed out that this is especially powerful with young women, who seem to take on causes, and they defend them like a mother defending her child. That’s a very powerful force. And the point is, if the idea is, well, climate change is a threat, and your role here on earth is to make sure that that threat is addressed, and you put the mama bear energy into climate change work, well, you know, that’s pretty frightening, especially if climate change isn’t the threat that it’s been made out to be. You have a large number of mama bears doing this ferocious work, and there’s a question about what it even is..
I had to look up Heather Heying, who made this observation. She is the wife of Bret, like him an evolutionary biologist, and author of “The evolutionary ecology and sexual selection of a Madagascan poison frog” and, with her husband, ” A Hunter-Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century: Evolution and the Challenges of Modern Life .”
Wikipedia notes that she & her husband took their university to court and won damages for failing to “protect its employees from repeated provocative and corrosive verbal and written hostility based on race, as well as threats of physical violence,” and that they refused to be vaccinated against Covid and took Ivermectin – obvious crimes against humanity to all right (Wiki) minded people.
Wiki also points out bad reviews of her book (in the Guardian and elsewhere) which claim that the book “faltered when the authors claim expertise beyond their own fields such as in matters related to politics.”
There is no acknowledged academic field which studies the origins of the madness of climate hysteria. We’re all amateurs, so we can all join in the discussion. But, as you’ll know from Andy West’s book “The Grip of Culture – the Social Psychology of Climate Change Catastrophism,”
(which I hope you’ve all read) evolutionary biology has a lot to tell us on the subject.
Share this:
Discover more from Climate- Science.press
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
You must be logged in to post a comment.