Statistics

First There Was Vaccine Passports, Now They Want Carbon Passports

Experts creating the coronadoom may or may not have designed it as a weapon. They did, however, design it to kill. Maybe it got out accidentally—stupidity is always a likely explanation—or maybe it was leaked.

Either way, it worked. The gain-of-lethality experiments that led to the coronadoom can only be celebrated as a success. Nature herself never thought up anything quite like it. We can be sure the coronadoom’s designers will win at least the Noble Prize in Medicine.

But probably the Noble Peace Prize, too.

It’s a long shot, but they’re in the race. Being considered gives these scientists at least the political muscle to demand better offices, or at least better parking spaces at university. No small thing!

We know this because of this headline: U.N. says world likely to miss climate targets despite COVID pause in emissions.

Did you see the word? Despite.

Despite.

“The pace of climate change has not been slowed by the global COVID-19 pandemic and the world remains behind in its battle to cut carbon emissions, the United Nations said on Thursday.”

Should the Expert-created Covid pandemic and Expert-created panic have caused “carbon” emissions to fall?

No, I’m asking: should it have? Was it desired to have? Planned to have?

What do they say? “‘Throughout the pandemic we have heard that we must build back better to set humanity on a more sustainable path and to avoid the worst impacts of climate change on society and economies,’ said WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas.”

This doesn’t answer the crucial question on desire, but it does highlight Experts’ “Build Back Better.”

What is one way they’re doing this? Personal carbon allowances.

Incidentally, before we continue, let me insert a reminder that Experts are largely midwits. You cannot personally reduce your personal carbon unless you lose fat, which is composed chemically, in part, of carbon. Carbon makes up trees, grass, vegetables, and even Experts.

What these Experts mean to limit is carbon dioxide, which is not carbon. Any way that you can take carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is, presumably, good, as long as you believe in global warming of doom. So what they should really say is that people should increase their carbon, not limit it.

Experts, being midwits, cannot tell the difference between carbon and carbon dioxide.

But let this pass, just as we have to let “cases” when they mean infections in the coronadoom panic pass.

Anyway, the peer-reviewed paper is “Personal carbon allowances revisited” in Nature Sustainability by Nirini and some others. How will they limit your “carbon”?

We argue that recent advances in AI for sustainable development, together with the need for a low-carbon recovery from the COVID-19 crisis, open a new window of opportunity for PCAs. Furthermore, we present design principles based on the Sustainable Development Goals for the future adoption of PCAs. We conclude that PCAs could be trialled in selected climate-conscious technologically advanced countries, mindful of potential issues around integration into the current policy mix, privacy concerns and distributional impacts.

Now this level of idiot worship of AI—they might just as easily have said “computers”—couldn’t possibly exist in anything but an environmentalist, sociologist or some other midwit occupation, I thought. So I checked.

One author has a PhD in “Energy and Environmental Systems Analysis”. Another is a “member of UK Energy Research Centre’s demand reduction research team, doing research on personal carbon trading, the role of heat pumps in the UK, and energy use in the higher education sector.” A third is indeed a sociologist. And the fourth is an economist.

So not one of the four has any competency to understand any of the physics. They are nothing more than credentialed True Believers. Or For-Granted Grant Getters. They believe, and understand, at least strong enough to get in on the publishing and grant train.

They occupy leaching academic positions. They exist merely to push paper from one point to the next, adding no value except to their own bank accounts and to provide the Expertocracy a reason for its existence.

The basic idea of PCAs is—and see if this shocks you—very like vaccine passports. Some government agency, headed by academics like these, would decide if you are “fully carbonized”, or whatever.

They admit carbon passports are “radical” but they wave that aside given how strongly PCAs would boost their self-importance.

What about privacy? They have that figured out. “Some lessons from the loss of privacy associated with the use of tracking apps during the COVID-19 pandemic46 could provide initial insights into ethical and secure app design”.

Ah.

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card or PayPal click here

Categories: Statistics

34 replies »

  1. Later today I’m going to assess my carbon footprint by driving out to the shore and giving my favourite old slippers a traditional Viking funeral. The wood in the longship counts as biomass, so burning that is carbon-neutral, apparently. It’s only the slippers whose CO2 emissions I’m concerned with.

  2. Consumer’s energy sent us a letter recently, offering to take $500 off our electric bill if we hooked up a generator to our home meter. Why? So they could stop supplying us with power on ‘peak days’ and have us run the generator instead. Because they want the grant money/tax credit/whatever that comes from the company being below a certain level of emissions. They don’t care that the generators will be emitting more than their plants would be for the same amount of power. The whole thing is a racket.

  3. GP, Do you have to run the generator, or just get $500 for having it? I’d love it if they’d do that for me. Then, when power fails, I got my subsidized generator.

    WB, do you have any links to last years spate of “anyone who thinks we are going to mandate vaccine passports is a nutty conspiracy theorist”? Cause I know exactly what the response will be if I mention this to anyone.

    Had a chat a few months ago with a friend and the subject of vaccine hesitancy came up. He’s liberal but not frothing at the mouth and we rarely talk politics. I pointed out that President * and VPKH both denigrated a “Trump” vaccine and he pushed back with “No, I heard the President support it”. Of course I didn’t have at my fingertips the quotes from the President where he had done both, denigrate before the election and support after so was unable to make any headway on that front. I hate not having a great memory for small detail.

  4. Heresolong: Maybe this will help https://www.bizpacreview.com/2021/07/18/im-not-taking-it-joe-biden-kamala-harris-led-covid-vaccine-skepticism-parade-before-election-1105376/

    Briggs, you consider a disease that basically has the same fatality rate as the flu a “success” in gain-of-function???? The government wants you now to sell their failures for them. Call immediately.

    How do you know nature never thought up anything like Covid? Sars the first comes to mind and was MUCH MORE LETHAL. Politicians killed people, NOT the virus.

    The Ice Cream President is building a magical land where hurricanes do no damage and probably has no carbon emissions. Just like The First Black (well, HALF black)President cured cancer. LaLaLand and idiots live on.

    “Experts, being midwits, cannot tell the difference between carbon and carbon dioxide.” No kidding….Also IT SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED TO PASS. EVER.

    I have tried wasting more carbon dioxide, but being the world’s worst consumer, with a retired husband (no travel to work), I fail every time. The state is covered with those damn turbines, so more road trips. All the left has to do is put UGLY and USELESS everywhere and CO2 levels will drop precipitously.

  5. Not sure if Mr. trombone is just doing his normal “thinking means linking to experts” routine or if he is unaware that “nature” can refer to something other than the journal.

  6. Having made many spelling errors, I say this with all due humility, but it’s “Nobel” prize.

    I noticed the same error in a column a day or two ago as well.

  7. Heresolong
    From how they worded it the idea is they would turn it on remotely when the grid was being stressed. Of course, you could not fill the fuel tank or turn it off manually, but the result would be you having no power in your house because they won’t give you power during those times.

  8. Apologies, but I suspect a lot of people, even those who are highly trained in chemistry, believe their is a difference between Carbon Dioxide the food for plants and Carbon Dioxide the bringer of global warming. They struggle when they have to try and rationalize the “What level of CO2 do plants prosper the most at” and “What level of CO2 are we at now”.

    I listened to a ancient biology expert explain why stomata exist on leaves and why leaves from the ancient times didn’t have them. In the next segment he jumps on the “World has too much CO2” bandwagon. In that case, he may have just been keenly aware of the bandwagon.

  9. Swordfish meant to say:

    The EXPERTS are against you

    There is no WAY (say the experts) that this was created in the lab

  10. We will all still have to wear masks in the New Normal 0% Carbon World Order. Not to protect ourselves. Not to protect others. But to protect Mother Goddess Earth.

    Speaking of A.I., unfortunately for the experts, A.I. and machine learning tend to be very racist, islamaphobic and anti-fag. Hopefully the AI replaces our experts very soon.
    https://youtu.be/MYm9ktd9Gvg

    The evidence is against you.

    FACT FAIL!

    https://nypost.com/2021/09/07/wuhan-lab-documents-show-fauci-untruthful-about-research-critics/

    https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/10/08/the-smoking-gun-where-is-the-coronavirus-the-cdc-says-it-isnt-available/

    https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/10/09/covid-the-virus-that-isnt-there-the-root-fraud-exposed/

    Even trumpboner’s favorite checkas partially came through!
    https://www.factcheck.org/2021/05/the-wuhan-lab-and-the-gain-of-function-disagreement/

    I like how they use the word “disagreement”, considering there is a lot of uncooked egg pouring down the faces of many an expert and so-called intelligence person and also notably the same fact checkas who rely on them uncritically.

    Well by now we all know how dumbfish operates. And I suspect that he’s been lying about his identity as being an adult man with two children living in the UK, when his posts and level of diacourse and website browsing habits are more remniscient of being a average teenage high schooler. But maybe I’m wrong and he could very well be that stupid.

    Is it worth the time anymore to waste on him? I think from now on anytime he makes drive-by Shecky levels of posts without any median effort to explain himself or his own links, he should be ignored. He’s clearly not here for any rational discourse beyond lying that he knows what he’s talking about and that he doesn’t accept your rebuttal because you don’t receive funding from mega-corps and billionaire family foundations like his unqualified fact checkas do.

  11. I identify as carbon neutral and carbon footprint-free. How dare you to ask me to prove any of that to you! So, where is my free money? ?

  12. FYI, for those lurking and not aware of certain things said about ancient embodied life and Earth’s ancient atmosphere, is that said atmosphere has changed greatly over time. The normal chemical processes preferentially remove carbon dioxide from the air. At the most recent glaciations (we are still in a geological ice age) it is suggested that the background levels approached plant starvation levels, and they’re still too close to those now. We *should* be putting some of that sequestered carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere, for the plants (and thus all animal life) to be fruitful and multiply.

    On the other hand, carbon dioxide cannot and does not do what these people say from a chemical and physics point of view. What it does do is move the adiabatic lapse rate (change in temperature with height above the ground) from the dry rate (near -g/Cp) toward the moist one. That does not have to change surface/near surface temperatures at all. What does change that is actual insolation (and aerosols, which include water clouds, do affect this) and actual surface conditions. Less insolation means it gets colder. More insolation means it gets warmer, within the bounds of orbital mechanics.

  13. How dare you?

    As an Expert™ explained to all of us after the Blue Origin inaugural flight, these high-carbon events have to be stopped!

    (The Expert™ most righteously blocked me when I pointed out that a hydrogen-oxygen rocket engine produces no CO2 from combustion, being that there’s no carbon in the fuel to begin with. I guess when a degree in PoliSci is enough to become an Expert™ Energy Analyst for an online publication, these arcane points of chemistry are a bit… beyond their grasp.)

  14. Swordfishtrombone: Then explain SARS CoV and it’s higher death rate. IN DETAIL. (An article from Nature is NOT evidence.)

    Kenan Meyer: I have one credit card and it has a low enough credit limit to be virtually useless except for internet ordering. I don’t buy new stuff, I don’t buy new cars, etc. I buy only the essentials. Let them cut off people ordering soap and shampoo when they reach the limit. Heck, I can probably make both of those if need be. I make my clothes, even my slippers, we make our furniture when possible, and we can cook. So good luck with that one. I can see people having the card and then using a different one, so they can virtue signal while doing NOTHING for global warming. Seems stupid to me, which means it probably is.

  15. Expect Briggs meant “Noble” and not “Nobel” ……. in half humour reality …. maybe …..
    God bless, C-Marie

  16. One aspect of this new regime is the active censorship by corporations and governments of people exercising speech that contradicts state and corporate propaganda.

    This has now escalated to payment processors blocking payments and funds held by dissident journalists. PayPal recently blocked Ryan Cristian, of the Last American Vagabond, from accessing his account, apparently for his work in challenging Covid propaganda.

    We can boycott the products and services of corporations that suppress civil rights. There are always alternatives we can choose.

  17. One reason I lurk here is the links – I’ve found some great ones here in the past. swordfishtrombone lists a couple, so I took a quick look, to check if I missed something important. Hmmm, some fairly dense reading. Do I want to invest the time? Maybe look for some clues. The publishing dates are 17-Mar-2020 and 07-May-2020. That was pretty early on, and my memory was that there was a heck if a lot of tap-dancing going on concerning Covid origins back then. Reading those articles would mean following the trail of articles citing those articles all the way to some recent articles, or risk ending up with stale or superseded information. It would have been much more helpful to reference recent articles to make a point; surely more recent articles exist, as this is not a stagnate area of research by any means. So as the kids say, TLDR. The best argument in the world still needs a best effort presentation to make it convincing. (This is why marketing people have jobs.)

  18. Sometimes there is an underlying reality that makes all debate moot, like fleas arguing how to best manage the dog they live on. CAGW is one of those, and the underlying reality is summarized in this graph:

    https://gml.noaa.gov/webdata/ccgg/trends/co2_data_mlo.png

    Specifically, the trajectory of that graph into the future will do what it will do, but, in light of human nature, there is absolutely nothing humans can do to change it. Yes, an individual country can destroy itself trying, but there will never be a shortage of other countries in line to pick up the slack. Idealism is a yappy little chihuahua, human nature is an 800 pound gorilla.

  19. Mark of the Vexx working as intended in Italy.

    The Italian government has passed a decree applying to both the private and public sector ordering companies to withhold pay from workers who refuse to take the COVID-19 vaccine.

    The decree mandates that all employees get the vaccine ‘green pass’, which led to questions about what would happen to the millions of Italians who remain unvaccinated.

    The government is attempting to avoid potential legal action by directing companies not to fire the unvaccinated, but simply to not pay them while telling employees not to show up to work under threat of being fined if they do so.

    “Instead, they should be considered to be on an unjustified absence and have their wages or salaries withheld,” writes Ken Macon.

    “Those found to be working without a vaccine passport could be punished with fines of up to €1,500. Additionally, the government said it would not cater for the test costs for those who would prefer not to take the vaccine.”

    Even those who have had the virus, recovered and developed anti-bodies will still have to get at least one dose of the vaccine, presumably just as a performative show of compliance.

    Italy extended its vaccine passport scheme to schools and universities on September 1st.

    Teachers were told they faced being fired if they didn’t take it and students were mandated to take it to attend classes.

    The unvaccinated were also banned from using long distance public transport, meaning that holidays, travel for work and visiting relatives has become impossible for many.

    Venues such as museums, stadiums, theaters gyms, and indoor seating spaces at bars and restaurants all require vaccine identification and businesses can be fined thousands of euros for not enforcing the rules.

    The ‘green pass’ in Italy also tracks an individual’s location, once again emphasizing how it’s a digital ID card on steroids.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/italy-orders-companies-not-pay-unvaccinated-workers

    Ah, the age of the Beast and the surveillance state is here! Where are all those no-such-thing-as-conspiracies people now? Probably fully vexxed and tracked!

    But at least you can use the technology too!
    https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/personal-tracking-devices-moving-toward-dangerous-new-era

  20. Sheri,

    Swordfishtrombone: Then explain SARS CoV [1] and it’s higher death rate. IN DETAIL. (An article from Nature is NOT evidence.)

    First, scientific articles ARE evidence, and if you’re not going to accept them, what would you accept? (“Someone on the Internet said…”) Second, I’m not clear what you want me to explain? Viruses with higher death rates tend to spread less easily, for the simple reason that in general, dead people can’t cough or travel around. Is that what you meant?

  21. Johnno,

    And I suspect that he’s been lying about his identity as being an adult man with two children living in the UK, when his posts and level of diacourse and website browsing habits are more remniscient of being a average teenage high schooler.

    I take that as a compliment. Cheers! But also, it’s a bit pot-kettle-black – AFAICT, you only ever read MAGA cultist conspiracy sites. Surely you can’t be a real person?

    Anyway, ad-homs aside, like most people, when I heard about the Wuhan lab, it immediately seemed too much of a coincidence to dimiss the theory that SARS Cov-2 had accidentally escaped. I’m not saying that it’s impossible that that will not turn out to be the case. All I’m saying is exactly what I did in fact say: that the evidence is against this theory. (That is, real evidence, not just a single coincidence.)

  22. Passports ~ which (b.t.w.) have nothing at all to do with Passing through Ports ~ are actually Subject Identity Documents. What goes on an SID can be whatever “your government” decides. Personally, I oppose such Universal SIDs. One document – One official purpose – Only one.

  23. Mr. Noisy Fish asserts: “First, scientific articles ARE evidence, and if you’re not going to accept them, what would you accept?” This is of course ludicrous. Scientific articles may contain data. That data may be interpreted. What conclusions you draw from a data-set are subject to your own limited interpretive capability. An oceanic cesspool of “Scientific articles” exists (chock-full-of-schlock) which evidence only that the author’s claims have been published.

  24. Gp:
    Our illustrious Host, Best Briggs, has seen it rightly: the Noble Prizes—originally created by Nobel—are better labeled Noble, as they seek primarily to award Nobles (Experts). Proof: Obama’s Noble Peace Prize.

  25. Well, dang, Mx Gp. I beg your pardon! I shoulda addressed the illustrious N. S. Palmer!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *