Tag Archives: Climate Change

Oh no, that’s all we need.

.

From The STRAITSTIMES

Published Jul 30, 2025, 03:58 AM

Updated Jul 30, 2025, 03:58 AM

World Court climate opinion turns up the legal heat on governments

“The International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court, last Wednesday laid out the duty of states to limit harm from greenhouse gases and to regulate private industry. 

It said failure to reduce emissions could be an internationally wrongful act and, found that treaties such as the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change should be considered legally binding.

                                     ****

What wonderful news for those who make money of the hoax of man-made climate change. Those who for some reason think that CO2 is going to burn up the planet well they can celebrate too.

But for me it is another sign that the law has turned into a gigantic ASS.  Just one hundred years ago the planet was hotter than it is today, and that is in spite of the huge tracts of earth that have been turned into concrete or asphalt, where cities create heat with huge buildings and masses of people, and yet we are still cooler than even 100 years ago. 

What about I million years or maybe 10 million years ago? Were there voices at this so-called court to talk about that and if there were did the court simply ignore them?

But I decided to dig a bit, and this is what I found,

Opinion or ruling?

In July 2025, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an “advisory opinion” stating that countries have a legal obligation to protect the climate and prevent harm to it. The court emphasized that climate change poses an “urgent and existential threat”. “This ruling” clarifies that countries must uphold international climate laws, including the Paris Agreement‘s goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C. “The ICJ’s opinion” also suggests that countries harmed by climate change could potentially seek reparations. 

Here’s a more detailed breakdown:

  • Obligation to protect the climate:

The “ICJ affirmed” that countries have a legal duty to protect the climate system and prevent climate change-related harm. 

  • 1.5°C target is legally binding:

The “court clarified” that the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C is a legally binding benchmark. 

  • Stringent climate plans required:

The “ICJ stated” that national climate plans must be “stringent” and aligned with the 1.5°C target. 

  • Potential for reparations:

“The opinion” suggests that countries harmed by climate change may be entitled to reparations or compensation. 

  • Increased legal pressure on governments:

The “ICJ’s ruling” strengthens legal arguments for climate action and may increase the success rate of domestic climate litigation. 

  • Fossil fuel phaseout:

“The ruling” is expected to increase pressure on governments to phase out fossil fuels and end subsidies. 

  • Landmark legal precedent:

“The ICJ’s opinion” is a landmark decision, providing a stronger legal foundation for climate action and holding countries accountable for their climate obligations. 

The ICJ determined that the 1.5°C temperature target is legally binding under the Paris Agreement and that all states, in particular the largest emitters, must take ambitious mitigation measures in line with the best available science. “The opinion” arrives 6 years after a group of 27 students from the University of the South Pacific began campaigning on this issue, and more than 2 years since the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) adopted a resolution requesting the “advisory opinion”.

While the “ICJ’s opinion” itself is not binding—neither on itself nor on domestic courts—it carries considerable legal weight and political legitimacy.

The ICJ has now “authoritatively interpreted international law” in a way that strengthens the legal foundation for ambitious, science-based climate action

(I highlighted the obvious contradictions.)

That may be but it has not stated or given an opinion of those who claim that this whole thing is a hoax based on Al Gore and his “Inconvenient Truth”.  They did not give an opinion on the concept that the planet has gone through more climate changes over the last few million years than any one of these brilliant manmade climate change advocates can or even will imagine.

What is regrettable to me is that those who sought to get justification or applause for their mania will claim that this “Opinion” or “Ruling” will claim victory for them and say that they now have a world court’s opinion that their hoax is real.   

Well yes, the hoax is real but the sad thing is that if they actually manage to do away with CO2 they too will perish, and probably claim to the end that they were right and the plants and sea let them down.

As an addition I read an article in Macleans titled Canada in 2060

Canada in the Year 2060

Summers lost to fire and smoke. Biblical floods. Dying forests. Retreating coasts. Economic turmoil and political unrest. It’s going to be a weird century. Here’s what it will look like—and how Canada can get through it.

BY ANNE SHIBATA CASSELMAN

And I confess I was laughing quite hard because by 2050 there will be no CO2, so there will be no oxygen so there will be no people to witness what they were predicting.  Oh, there might be a bit of oxygen floating over from China or even the USA, but not enough to sustain Canadians, who will have nothing to eat anyway.  But I realized that this will never happen in time because my grandchildren and great grandchildren and their generations will put a stop to this absolute crazy foolishness.

Yes, it’s time to re-read my copy of 1066 and all that.

Elections are democratic here in Canada?

So, the people of Canada think we are having a democratic moment.

We, the people of Canada, have let what little democracy we may have had at one time slip and now we are letting it slip even more. 

Let’s look for a moment at democracy and what it is supposed to be because it seems that Canadians no longer have any idea about it.  It is just a word we use pushed by our politicians and their propaganda media to make us think it exists here in Canada. 

It does not.

A Canadian parliament is elected person by person until every available seat is filled. We are theoretically electing someone to represent us to the eventual government, but how often do we check to see if they are doing that?   Yes, they nearly all belong a political party which has a particular bent on how things should be done and these parties are now used as a voting block with perhaps little regard for the constituents. and that voting block or platform may be what draws some to vote. Then the party which forms a majority of support in parliament forms a government based on the party’s bent, and the leader of that party is declared the new Prime Minister.

OK that’s basically how it is supposed to work but in actuality it does not work that way.

Right from the start of a Canadian election it is all about who will be the next Prime Minister.  How many times have you had a canvassing call asking if you are going to vote for this leader or that for Prime Minister when they may not even live or stand for election in your province? Polls are conducted on that subject, and talking heads on our propaganda media discuss it all the time when it is all false.

Your vote is for your local MP to be and so the question should not be about their party leader but how much do you know about them? 

Where I live there is party leader running and so the question of which leader might be valid to some, but I do not judge her by her party or leadership of it (I am against the 3 major platforms of her party) but instead by what she has done for her constituents or indeed the number of private member’s bill she has managed to get into law for all Canadians. These are important to me as they should be to anyone who is even vaguely interested in democracy, not the automatic bending of the knee to a party whip. Who is actually important to the elected member – the party whip or the constituent?

I actually stood for election in 2008, and fought the local media to get any time or space as they claimed my “party” did not have a candidate in every seat when in fact the only party that year that did was the conservative party. I actually had fun interacting with voters, asking them what they wanted or not, and making some fairly outrageous but true statements about my opposition. I was also lucky to have a videographer who came with me (Paul Stein) to record meetings I could attend.

One thing I did was ask about 1oo hundred people if they would belong to an email list of constituents I would email every week with the votes I was due to make on their behalf (complete with precis of my pros and cons) and for them to email me back “yea” or “nay”. I even had people come up to me and ask if they could be on the list and I said yes as soon as I get elected.  

They showed interest you see in how things should be done and wanted to participate. Today we are lucky if we ever hear back from our MPs. 

I heard one candidate saying that it was difficult to get the necessary signatures from locals giving permission to run and I wonder why as my daughter and I collected 300 + signatures of people willing to give me permission to run (not necessarily to vote for me) on Beacon Avenue in just over 2.5  hours. Most of them were happy to sign and be asked to participate in the process.

So, where am I going with this?

What do you know about your candidates and their positions on matters of real concern to you?

What are the matters that really concern you?

We all know the party platforms that they represent and the promises that are made during the election period with no legal intention of fulfilling those promises, but what are their own opinions and desires to serve you?

Which is more important to them – their party or their constituents?  (Today it is all about reelection to what can become a very cushy job in many respects. Travel from the west coast is a bit of a bear but just do what the party wants and they will sign your papers for the next time).

Being a member of the Canadian parliament also means that there is a responsibility to Canadian affairs.  Does your candidate support their party in three subjects that all parties support? Or do they have the strength of their own convictions and those of the majority of their constituents that they are willing to support if you ask them.

All major parties support:

Unending support for the Nazis in Ukraine giving them dollars that would be much better spent here at home and denying the prospect of a just peace? Combined with an unwillingness to understand what it is really all about.

Unending support for arming the Zionist genocide in Palestine under the pretext that Israel has the right to defend itself !  

(How can any real person sleep at night while this slaughter of women and children is getting more egregious every day. It sickens me that almost our entire parliament is ok with this).

Supporting the hoax that CO2 is responsible for climate change.

Those are my three for Canada, what are yours?

Now of course there is support for the imposition of retaliatory tariffs on American products thereby giving us a “much needed” extra tax. Does your candidate support that extra tax? Do you and have you made that clear? Do you remember how the USA started?  With a tax of 5% on tea. Now it is about to be destroyed with 100% tariffs on some things.   Taxes, taxes and more taxes, and these moronic current Canadian politicians are doing the same thing – raising taxes by instigating tariffs.   They claim to be Canadians fighting for Canada when in fact all they are doing is being a new tax man.  Great!

There is a terror of foreign interference in our elections and business and yet there is no complaint against the Americans interfering with their barrage of slurs and tariffs. When we interfere with our own elections (by nonstop lying propaganda) why would we blame others for doing the same?

Support the increased spending on our military against enemies in the Artic when our major enemy is south of us. For that matter why are we still in NATO? (I still wonder who will attack us militarily anyway)

Are your candidates afraid of the Zionist Lobby which is very strong here in Canada? It is vitriolic, demonic and prejudiced against all non-Zionists and quick to condemn all opposition as anti-semantic and through fear controls all major parties through such threats and contributions under the table. That’s the Zionist way as the Jews have practiced for hundreds of years.

Will they (your candidates) support the cancelling of one engine planes to patrol our north? Planes which the Americans can take over and control any time they want (through installed software) and get instead two engined planes – much safer for the pilots – and within our own control and not subject to any tariffs. We are a sovereign nation and we are not obligated to buy an American plane that does not fit our needs.

For my local candidates are they even aware of the restoration projects in this riding? Both here on the main island and on the Gulf Islands which require time, effort and CO2.

Are they willing to co-ordinate with local MLAs and provincial agencies to get things done re health, education, housing, infrastructure and crime?

**

Just some of the things we should all know about our candidates; these of course are my pet peeves but the question is what are yours and how does your candidate fit with them?

It is our country and our election in which to make a difference or we can just do the same thing over and over again and expect the impossible to happen.

Democracy is a myth in Canada and will be as long as we deny it as a possibility.  We can make a difference if we choose to and this would be a good time to choose..

Peace.

April Election in Canada 2025

March 2025.

The options we have in front of us are to say the least meager.

The Bank of Canada act in the 1930s created a people owned bank to finance our needs.  The idea was that the BOC would finance the federal, provincial and municipal governments needs at a very low rate using our natural resources as collateral. Upon repayment the working costs for the BOC were deducted and the remainer sent to the federal finance minister for use on Canadians needs.  This carried us through the ww2 with a massive merchant fleet transporting to Europe, and after we emerged with very little debt we build hospitals, schools road’s etc., and financed the Canada Pension Plan and Health care and in the 70s our national debt (owed to ourselves) was a mere $70 million.  Then, in the mid-70s Gerald Bouey without the peoples’ permission signed the BOC onto Basil 1, 11 and 111 with the bank of international settlements thereby opening Canada up to loans from international banks and investors and turning the BOC into an inflation watchdog and interest setter.   Now our national debt is tripping over $3 trillion and servicing that debt is now our largest national expenditure by far.   M Carney was a mover and shaker in the transformation of the BOC and did the same with the Bank of England, and now we are being asked to allow him to turn Canada over to Claus Schwab and his WEF one world order with Claus as king?

At this point I should mention that The State of North Dakota copied what we had done and created the Bank of Nort Dakota, owned by the people of North Dakota and to this day they have a very small debt for operating expenses owed to themselves.  Unlike us however they are not using international loaners and they have no need to. 

Why is this important? because we in Canada need to be taxed almost into the poverty line to pay for this debt while the people of North Dakota do not have such a problem.   We cannot reduce taxes without increasing our indebtedness.

I find myself realising that all leaders and parties support the Nazis in Ukraine (how odd), the Zionists in their pursuit of genocide in Gaza and the West Bank, and the hoax called Climate Change due to CO2.  For millions of years the climate on this planet has changed from hot to cold and back again without any help from arrogant humans, especially those who want to kill all plant life with zero CO2.

My local MP believes all three of these horrors, but she has worked for her constituents and for Canadians introducing and passing private members bills of some importance.  So, she will get my vote on that basis alone.

REGENERATING FARMING

The Honourable Jonathan Wilkinson Minister of Energy and Natural Resources.

The Honourable Steven Guilbeault Minster of Environment and Climate Change

The Honourable Lawrence MacAuley Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Foods

The Honourable Francois-Philippe Champagne Minister of Innovation. Science and Industry

29 April 2024

Gentlemen,

I trust your week away from Ottawa has been fruitful even if only for your families.

It has bothered me for some time now that Bill Gates has been buying up farmland as farmers go broke, and I think I might have found the answer.

It lies in your insane efforts to make carbon net zero.  

There are farms that are really nothing more than dust bowls and produce only ‘PLASTIC’ food grown with the use of plowing and deep seeding of GM seeds (all of which destroy the soil), fertilizers, pesticides, agent orange (roundup) and on and on, and basically these farms are barren acres of dirt, that require huge amounts of water, which tends to cause a run off of these toxic chemicals as the dirt cannot completely absorb the water. When the skies open up and produce lots of rain, real soil absorbs it and uses it to grow things. However, the dustbowls cannot absorb the rain which simply runs off and floods occur.  This dustbowl farming is not only unsustainable financially but also just what Gates wants.

But there are still farms where the soil is important not only as a growing living thing, producing both healthy animals and plants – but also a huge carbon sequestrating system.  The difference between dirt and soil is that one is alive and serving the natural cycle as it was intended to do, and the other is the result of chemical agents and planned malpractice.

The basis of all life is carbon, and you are trying to rid the earth of it.  Yet the grasslands and good practice (regeneration) farming is the major sequestration of carbon we have, and you want to destroy that necessary “food of all life”.

Why?

Is it ignorance?

Is it complete lack of knowledge?

Is it because the big chemical company lobbyists tell you to? 

Is it because you are under the complete control of the WHO, WEF, Bill Gates etc.,?

Do you really understand what will happen when you get close to the “Net Zero Carbon” you seek?

For millions of years this ecosystem you are trying so hard to destroy has developed to include humans.  Humans on the other hand have developed to the point where they think that they know better than nature, where the urge for money and power is more important than life itself, and you are part of that urge.

Luckily farmers are looking for ways to survive in spite of your draconian and misguided approach (taxes and fake seeds), and they are using grass feeding animals the way they were supposed to be used, producing good health protein without toxic feedlots, and to fertilize and regenerate the soil.  They are using nondestructive methods to plant natural crops that are full of nutrients and do not harm the soil and the multitude of creatures that flourish – worms, insects, birds and even rodents have a place in this cycle. I recommend you watch a documentary called “Kiss the Ground”.  It will help you to do your jobs, and stop you from wasting so much of your time for which Canadians are paying you way above the average salary.

Instead of blaming “climate change” for everything, you could be showing us how to survive a natural cycle over which we have no control. You could be preparing us for food shortages while farmers switch to regenerative methods. 

You could be working on ways to clean up the real pollution (not just plastic) in Canada and show the world that we mean business instead of following the dictates of unelected international busybodies like the WEF, WHO, UN, IMF etc., all of which want to enslave us to their way of thinking.

Maybe this particular section of this government could change its stripes and become human again…I doubt it but it is worth your while to try for the sake of your children as well as my great grandchildren.

Ps

Supporting two genocidal maniacs on the other side of the Atlantic does nothing for our farmers, our food production or our local climate and pollution.  Canadians understand this so why do you not?

Yet another tax?

The Honourable Jonathan Wilkinson Minister for Energy and Natural; Resources Devotee of WEF

MP for North Vancouver

Minister,

“You can’t wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. Navajo saying 

It has become very apparent in your answers to questions about the “carbon tax” during Oral Questions in our House of Ill Repute, that there is a new tax to which you are referring.

You mentioned the “pollution tax” many times and as far as I know there is no such a thing.  The current fad is that of attacking the carbon emissions from vehicles pollution, but it does absolutely nothing for any other kind of pollution by either industry or the public.

What really bothers me is not the sleight of mouth you’re using because we are very used to that from this current government, we have been subjected to it since 2015 so we should be by now.  No, what bothers me is that the upcoming budget is going to introduce yet another fund-raising scheme and call it a pollution tax, but it will not include such things as industrial waste, toxic pesticides on food crops, mining effluent toxic ponds, fracking damage to aquafers and lakes, plastic in streams, rivers, lakes and the oceans surround our country. It will not include the pollution coming from the fish farms right here in BC. It will not include the dust in the air of Vancouver nor the smoke from industries along the Fraser River, but it will almost certainly affect the way people live, heat their homes (if they are lucky enough to have one), get to and from work if they have a job, nor will it relate to the pollution from the 4G and 5G towers spreading throughout out country like a plague of phallic symbols.   It will however be paid for by the people of Canada as usual.

Pollution is not simply “exhaust” fumes, so a real pollution measure would be good, but this concept that the Climate Change hoax is instilling in all the sheep of this world leading to the elimination of carbon – net zero – is to destroy the major building block of life on the planet.

Perhaps you had better check with Klaus Schwab because even though he is old I am not sure he wants to die now as he hasn’t been crowned yet.

Jeremy

Is pollution not more pressing than Climate Change ?

The Honourable Stephen Guilbeault

Canadian Minister of Environment and Climate Change

MP for Laurier-Saint Marie

25th March 2024

The Environment definitions:

Canadian Oxford Dictionary.

The physical surrounding conditions, circumstances, in which a person lives.

Or

The natural world in which people and animals live.

“You can’t wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.” … Navajo saying 

Quite a few million years ago this place we call Earth was going through climate changes that continue to this day.  You blame carbon for the so-called climate change while ignoring the fact that for those millions of years this little rock has been going though those climate changes is still here and still using carbon as the building block of life on earth. These changes do not happen overnight or even over a few years and instead of panicking about that over which you have no control, perhaps you should be thinking of ways to adapt to the inevitable instead of trying to kill everything.

Why do you deliberately equate carbon and climate change?  You of all people should be aware that carbon is the major building block of almost all life on the planet, and yet clearly you are not aware of that as it is your desire to reach zero carbon.   What this intention of yours amounts to is the end of the human species and I am inclined to agree with you that would be the very best thing that could happen to this planet if people like you keep spreading false information.

You have a habit of erroneously blaming everything on “Climate Change” while ignoring the more glaring reasons.  Forest fires, for example, have increased in direct proportion to the way we look after our forests compared with how they were looked after say 300 years ago. Our first Nations who have lived here for thousands of years know how to manage forests, but they are just ignorant savages right?  But we, advanced people that we think we are, have created forest floors loaded with tinder dry dead kindling and are surprised when lightning (or careless man) strikes a match. We have loaded the forests and trees with slivers of aluminium (chemtrails more pollution you have ignored) which burns at a higher temperature than wood thereby creating higher winds to fan the flames among the trees. 

Where is your indignation about this aluminium chaff (along with soo much other junk) being dropped from the sky?

Pollution, the first priority on your portfolio, is mostly ignored (I suspect because it is a very real problem but not as propaganda and therefore fear worthy as climate change) because it is a much larger problem than figuring out how to adapt to something over which we/you have absolutely no control.   Aquafers, rivers, lakes, lands and our oceans are all very sick with toxic chemicals, rubbish, all sorts of metal, plastic and of course toxic industrial waste, not to mention mining or fracking retaining ponds spills.  None of this seems to matter or mean a damn thing to you because you are fixated on something you cannot prevent.

Where is your indignation about the 5G towers and their effect upon the birds and pollenating insects? I suppose you want to ignore it because with no carbon there will be no flowers to be pollenated will there?  When the world is like Gaza of today will you wake up? I doubt it. When you cannot breathe due to lack of natural oxygen will you wake up to what you have done?  I doubt it.

I would recommend two books to you, both still available – “Silent Spring” by Rachel Carson and “Sea Sick” by Alanna Mitchell both of which will help you to understand the other part of your portfolio – pollution. 

Have you even thought about making Imperial Mines clean up – or try to – the now toxic Quesnel Lake in BC after the Mount Polley mine tailings pond damn break?  Are you even thinking about the aquafers being destroyed in northern BC by the fracking going on there and what the ramifications of their destruction will mean? 

Have you given a thought to the wind farms of the east coast? The winds will need to be very, very strong to turn the turbines – strong enough to bring down trees and hydro poles thus causing electric outages, so where will the wind turbine product go? I have had the answer to this for years but governments would rather clean up the mess than avoiding it in the first place.  Why in such a climate are the hydro wires etc., above the ground?  Why should the people on the east coast go cold at least once -for maybe weeks – each year? 

Have you thought about the site C dam and how far the water will flow when it breaks and takes out the other two dams on the Peace River?  Will the water get to the Red River? How long will it take to clean up that mess; on the other hand, of course, there will not be such a huge need for rain to grow the crops…oh no wait a minute there will not be any because there will be no birds or insects to pollinate what crops survive the sludge.

Have you figured out how to recycle the batteries from electric cars, buses, trucks, trains and bicycles?   How to build and maintain enough charging stations?  Even how to generate enough electricity to supply the demand?  How many charging stations will be required along the railroad tracks and how long will it take to charge up the locomotives? Or will depleted locos simply be replaced with re charged ones?  Who will pay for these extra locos or the extra tracks for those locos to use to get recharged?

At truck stops there will be bottle necks where maybe hours are need to “fuel up” as opposed to 15 minutes today for a diesel top up for passing through trucks. Will there be really quick charging stations for eating truckers to connect their trucks into? and will there be charging stations at all sleeping spots as well? 

I do not hear you talk about these problems and I have to wonder why.  There will of course be multiple problems and I suspect that you along with the PM really don’t care because that will be some one else’s problem to deal with in 2025.

Maybe your exploits in the past have affected your mind, but I suggest you stop and think what your responsibilities are not only now, but also to future generations of Canadians, if there are to be any. Will you go down in history as the modern-day don Quixote whose windmills were centuries old unstoppable climate cycles?

I do not approve of your absurd and pathetic and unresponsible actions on climate change nor your non actions on pollution.

From Slay News:

“Additionally,

Slay News recently reported globalist lawmakers in Canada are pushing a disturbing new piece of legislation that seeks to jail members of the public who question the “Net Zero” agenda of the unelected WEF.”

Well, here I am, come and get me because I think you have got it totally backwards and just like with covid you are pushing a false narrative to create panic.

“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children” …… Navajo saying

Jeremy

Thinking anyone?

When I was a young fellow, that is back in the 40s and 50s of last century we were taught to think for ourselves.  The concept of blindly accepting the opinions of others was not encouraged.  We understood that science for example was not black and white, that there were arguments on both side of any concept, that the most basic dictate was still open to discussion.  As abilities expanded even the most dogmatic ideas could be improved upon without violence, without excommunication, without hatred and fear being levied against one. 

This also included the arts – what writers were trying to say, what painters were trying to depict etc., and the ability to actually listen to and hear others’ opinions. For example, what was Shakespeare trying to tell us about the Shylocks of the world?

Yes, there have been times when I have accepted ideas because they seemed logical and I temporarily forgot my education:

                THINK FOR YOURSELF.

A lot of my younger friends think I am crazy, and they are welcome to that opinion of me. I try to get them to think it out, to listen to their inner voice (instinct) and question why that inner voice is trying to talk to them. Regretfully most of them turn to their hands and check the latest propaganda on their “smart” telephones. Maybe the phones are smart in what they can do, but their use for everything takes away from thinking things through.  How many people use their phones to confirm what they want to know and do not check the other side?  Instinct is being drowned out by propaganda.

I listen to my instinct because I believe it is telling me to think it out.  The recent flu plandemic was a perfect example of that. It simply did not make sense to me and all my self-preservation reactions told me to stay as far away from the nonsensical dogma as possible.  I was ostracized by my so-called peers and family.  I am “unjabbed”, did not get the flu and my immune system works very well thank you. 

So, today the increasing panic of “climate change” is another example of my not believing a word of the propaganda being spouted from all and sundry.  Well, maybe not quite as I think the climate may be slowly changing again as it has for millions of years.  Arrogant men and women tell us that we can change that mostly by stopping the use of fossil fuels. I am not religious in any way, in fact if anything I believe in mother nature and she is a very black woman with massive maternal instincts, and I have to wonder why fossil fuels exist and why we “found” them. If we use them is one question but the major one is why are they there and why did we find them?

“If the bee disappears off the face of the earth, man would only have four years left to live.
  Albert Einstein

The idea that removing the major building block to life on earth to obtain “Zero Carbon” is so ridiculous that I am amazed those who promote it haven’t been laughed at publicly.

Here in Canada, we have a gaggle of some 338 politicians at the federal level who we pay to think, and lobbyists pay them to not think and we the people of Canada lost the battle for their minds. The use of fossil fuels must stop is the cry, and yet physical destruction of the earth in the form of industrial pollution – mining effluent, toxic herbicides etc. running into our lakes, rivers and aquafers, and the pollution of the very electrical nature of life by 4G and 5G  is absolutely acceptable.

“A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it.”      —G.K. Chesterton

I hear that we are the only species that can think, and I do not believe that.  I grew up with horses and dogs in my life and I know that they can and do think, that they are aware of human emotions, can understand them and try to make us feel better. Once a dog or horse has established a bond with a human that bond is very powerful.  What I also know is that humans have been taught not to think, but to simply go along with the crowd.

I always like it when I find people who think for themselves and can acknowledge that they may have been wrong. For example, Judy Curry:

JUDITH CURRY, PhD.: IN THE EYE OF THE ‘CLIMATE CHANGE’ STORM

Do I like her simple because she has some of the same ideas that I do about climate change? No, I like her because she accepted that thinking things through, and examining all available data is what a scientist should do. In her case it changed her thinking.

Science is a non-static concept.  There will be ideas come up in the future that will maybe send us in a completely different direction, and perhaps the only real question should be: “Who benefits”?  Hopefully even those new ideas will be challenged as they should be, not silenced by powerful morons whose profits could be depleted by non acceptance/compliance.

Maybe one day real debate will come back, specially in the field of science.  Until then we must rely on those courageous people who say:

“I disagree”

Jeremy

“You can’t wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.”

Navajo saying