From iGeek
Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about the Environment and Environmental issues.... and since I'm a but of a skeptic and counter-culture person, many (most) of the articles are going to have a spin about things that people think they are doing that's good, but isn't, or things that pretend to help but actually harm the environment, or the frauds that foist this bullshit on their base.

Issue Lie Truth

I'm pro-environment myself,
I'm just anti-environmental-scarism

Republicans would destroy the planet or let Corporations do it. The Democrats just care more about the future. Look at all the examples of the end of the world: 2019.02.07 Green New Deal, Baizuo, Biggest Polluters are exempted from Climate treaties, Bike Lanes increase pollution, California Coastal Commission, California Water Crisis, Earth Day, Fracking, Gaylord Nelson, Green Energy, Hurricanes, Nuclear Energy, Paris Climate Accord, Patrick Moore, Paul R. Ehrlich, Recycling, Solar Power, Tragedy of the commons, Volkswagen emissions scandal, just to name a few. Republicans and conservatives care about the future, that's part of why they study the mistakes and exaggerations in the past. The left's "change" often has Unintended Consequences, as well as direct impacts. Most of the left's cause of the past have been wrong or overstated. So it's our responsibility to not only help one imaginary group(s) in the future, but to think through the broader economic impacts to the entire economy/groups, not just view everything through the straw of social justice, or that all solutions must look like centralized socialist tyranny.


Examples: Environment : 19 items

2019.02.07 Green New Deal - 🍉 The Green New Deal was a program championed by AOC, endorsed by the left, that confirms everything conservatives have been warning about the Watermelon Environmental Movement: their goal is not to save the planet, but use that to enact communism/socialism in the U.S. This $93 Trillion boondoggle admits wanting to destroy the coal, oil, airline industry, and replace planes to Hawaii with trains, and replace every building in the U.S. force everyone to go vegetarian (and eliminate cow-farts), within 10 years. Oh and complete wealth redistribution, 70%+ taxes, and so on. Politifact is of course flagging people as false for pointing this out, because they meant it, "perhaps in jest", even though there was not a scintilla of evidence of that.

Baizuo -
Chinese slur "Baizuo" (白左) sprung up in 2015, and literally means "White lefty", but there's some undertones in the characters that imply "privileged" or "stupid" with the first character, and "extreme" with the second. When Chinese Socialists think the western left is too bat-shit crazy and left-extreme for them, that says something.

Biggest Polluters are exempted from Climate treaties - Facts:
  • The biggest polluter is China, by over double the U.S.
  • India is still below us but been growing while the U.S. has been flat or declining since 1970's
  • Others combined (not top 10 polluters) are over double the U.S.'s emissions, and been growing.

So naturally, the climate treaties ignore China and the rest of the world (4x the U.S. and growing) and focuses on destroying the U.S. economy or demanding that we redistribute wealth to them? Do you really think it's about the climate?

Bike Lanes increase pollution -

I ride to work most days. Still, whenever I see a bike lane, I remember the following: bike lanes both increase traffic, pollution, fatalities, and costs to society. Which is why Californian's love them: they are anti-progress, anti-tolerance, and hurt more people than they help. What's not to like?

California Coastal Commission - The CCC is what happens when community organizers run development planning: they "To protect, conserve, restore, and enhance the environment of the California coastline" by obstructing development and improvement of one of our countries great resources, saving it from humanity and the usefulness it might have to individuals or our country. Good for the locals who don't want to share. Bad for everyone who isn't already there. It's what tolerance looks like in California.

California Water Crisis - Understanding California's fake water drought. It had nothing to do with rain, and everything to do with the failure of government. California captures 1% of the water, then since 2007 flushes 46% of that into the ocean for "environmental purposes" (a baitfish the delta smelt), 43% goes to farming, 11% goes to urban areas. Whenever there's a problem they raise the cost of water and punish the 11%: because that's where the money is.

Earth Day.png
Earth Day - In honor of an invented fake-Holiday (Earth Day/Week), my office celebrated voluntary meatless Monday. I'm not sure what one has to do with the other.... what I'm sure of is that celebrating a Holiday invented by watermelon's (green on the outside, red on the inside), loons and kooks, to celebrate peace and balance by taking away people's choices (to get meat), is something so hypocritical, and so the new normal in California.

While I don't really care what causes people support (even stupid ones), I do like people to be informed the on the stupid causes they support, and who is behind them. Detractors of Earth Day claiming it's an green wrapping around Marxist agendas, while the proponents claim, "No. It's all moderate folks just trying to protect our planet and peace". When you research the history of Earth Day, it becomes obvious which side is informed, and which isn't.

Fracking - The left played upon a scare tactic that Fracking cause your water to become flammable and polluted and other myths like that. To quote a geologist, "It defies the laws of physics for fracks to propagate vertically back up through miles of rock and enter the water table". E.g. those that claim is is a source of ground water pollution, don't understand physics or geology. Minor earthquakes are possible, but this is relieving pressure that could have caused much bigger earthquakes -- so is a net win.

Gaylord Nelson.jpg
Gaylord Nelson - Earth Day/Week's Marxist activist and Co-Founder Senator Gaylord Nelson (D), a Pi Kappa Phi frat-boy, was another anti-war activist, environmentalist, population control advocate, and he later was one of only 3 (all Democrats) to vote to oppose Gerald Ford to be Vice President. He was an avid supporter of the violence by radical leftists of the time: cars being burned or buried in filth, activists dumping garbage in corporate lobbies, and various anti-capitalist (pro-environementalism) hippie-protests that were happening in the 1960's and 1970's.

Green Energy - The left believes in Green Energy: that it exists, it's cheaper, and could provide all our power needs, if we just embraced it. The facts (Science) says that Solar and Wind is unreliable, space inefficient and highly expensive if you remember to add in the costs of over-capacity, backup plants, and storage (for when they aren't working). The cheap and reliable forms of Green Energy are: Nuclear, Hydroelectric and Geothermal: but the left hates those and has resisted the adoption of real green energy solutions.

Hurricanes - The Climate scarists want to fear people into believe every natural disaster is not an act of God or chance, but because of plastic straws or mankind. The science doesn't back that up. Hurricanes (or Cyclones/Typhoons) have been trending down in size and intensity, and aren't caused by Global Warming anyways. They take a lot of conditions together to happen, and their size and intensity is based more on trade winds and things well beyond Climate Change's ability to control. So anyone that ties a Hurricane to Global Warming is either a retard or a polemic: they immediately set the bozo bit.

Nuclear Energy - Nuclear power is one of the safest and greenest form of energy on the planet: and the environmentalist left has always opposed it. The left got over 120 reactors blocked or cancelled in the U.S. so we stayed on fossil fuels and coal for that power instead. That was not about the environment, and it was anti-Science.

Paris Climate Accord -
Trump withdrew from Obama's non-binding agreement (either that unconstitutional treaty). And agreed to consider future ones, if there's a better deal. This was because anyone that glanced at it, knew it wasn't a good deal or about climate but wealth redistribution (from America and American businesses/jobs). And of course the left/media that disliked it under Obama, suddenly loves it, lies to its base about what it means, and their followers are in hysterics about something that did no good, a lot of bad, and since they can't argue on the merits, they use fallacies and lies to tell each other about what a big deal this is. This article covers the details.

Patrick Moore - A Co-founder of Greenpeace and a very vocal participant in the early environmental movement. Patrick is a scientist (Ph.D. in Forrestry) that has a clue, so he left Greenpeace and became a lobbyist/consultant on things that would actually help the environment, like Nuclear Power, responsible logging, and so on. To quote him, he left Greenpeace when the environmental movement became about scare tactics and disinformation, and "abandoned science and logic in favor of emotion and sensationalism".

Paul R. Ehrlich -
Professor Paul R. Ehrlich did a shallow plagiaristic pessimistic derivative of Hardin and Malthus, entitled "The Population Bomb". Basically saying that if you didn’t give government all your money and rights now so they could enact compulsory population control. there would be mass starvations and war in the 1970’s and 1980’s that would wreck civilization. He is credited with being one of the founders or at least inspirations behind Earth Day/Week. Despite the opposite of all his predictions coming true, he claims to this day that his book was, "way too optimistic”. Showing this old dog can’t learn from his mistakes. And because his ideas were so wrong, and derivative, he’s won every award the left can throw at him: Sierra Club, World Wildlife Fund, MacArthur Prize, UN, American Institute of Biological Sciences — it’s like the whose who of those that don’t know what’s what.

Recycling - Recycling is not the panacea that some think it is, it is about teaching the gullible to follow without question, while increasing pollution, waste, taxes, and government control over our lives. That's not conspiracy, these are just facts. But still the gullible trained proles follow out of ignorance or virtue signaling as a demonstration of symbolism over substance -- they put their agenda above science.

Solar Power -
There centralized (big plant) or distributed (residential) solar power, with goals of targets or residential use. They all have different issues. While I like the idea of residential Solar Power and people not being dependent on government regulated grids, and having the ability to survive in case of natural or man made disasters, and I plan on adding it to my next home, what I don't like is lies (flim-flam), about how much Solar Power costs, or the bullshit about how "green" it is. It is not as green as the proponents pretend, and if it was cheaper, how come places that implement it at scale have higher energy costs and less reliability? Someday, it might be ready (and that may be coming in a few short years or decades), but the point is that means they've been lying for the last 30 that it had already reached cross-over. Here's some of the lies.

Tragedy of the commons -
We often get dire warnings about Malthusian Catastrophes, Ehrlich's population bombs and how individuals can't be trusted to manage shared interests. We need government to protect us from ourselves. History shows the opposite: individuals form small governments for common interests better than big governments, unless big government stops them.

Volkswagen emissions scandal -
The first episode of Dirty Money was fascinating. It interviews the key people involved, talks about the issue, how it happened, how the government stumbled on the truth, and in only 7 years, got around to doing their jobs (partly because of VW's stonewalling and distractions). It even accidentally mumbles that the other auto-makers were doing the same thing. The only thing it left out is "why?" Why would VW take this risk?

You're spoon-fed the ideas that it was just greed and arrogance that caused the callous disregard for the planet. And I'm sure greed and arrogance were part of it. But it forgets to hint at the truth: the regulations were unmitigated bullshit. The truth was it was because CARB and the EPA set unreasonable and unattainable standard, and so VW had a choice of surrender a market, or cheat. You might not agree with VW's decision, but if you don't know why they did it, then you don't understand what happened. This documentary (and most of the media) leaves you ignorant of why, while feeling like you know more than you do. It turns people into progressives: arrogant, ignorant and sanctimonious (or worse: willing to lie for their cause).


📚 References