No image better summarizes the preposterous hersteria (there is no misspelling) and fatuous The Science around global warming, now called “climate change”, than this one:
A deranged man in thrall to the idea he is ackshually a woman, a man in charge of the nation’s health, announcing that the world is ending because “climate change”, women and minorities hardest hit.
As you look at this, and, if you have any sanity left, if you have even the barest memory of Reality, you think to yourself, How can anybody take this seriously?
I’ll tell you: incessant blaring idiot panicked propaganda.
Don’t think so? Then gaze at this headline: “Hollywood movies rarely reflect climate change crisis. These researchers want to change that.”
Propagandists are good at their job. They get good because they don’t just push out preposterousities for people to believe and leave it at that. They test whether their efforts stick or stank. They refine.
For instance, take this commissioned survey to gauge how well their panic propaganda is faring. Which gives them the feedback needed to fine-tune their efforts. But they don’t leave it at that. What separates the kiddies from the men, is that they released the results of the survey to multiply the effects of their propaganda. Brilliant. No wasted effort.
The headline is: “Half of Americans think climate change will destroy planet in their lifetime: poll.”
Right off, it doesn’t matter whether it is true that half of Americans really do believe “climate change” will destroy—destroy! what a word!—the planet in the next twenty or thirty years. How many people really believe that is irrelevant to the propaganda. What counts is whether they can get you to believe that half believe this monumentally achingly childishly stupid idea.
There are really only two possibilities.
The first is that the weak-minded, which form the great bulk of any population, will look to the headline and say to themselves, “If that many people believe the world is ending soon, there must be something here which I should probably believe, too. Let me stock up on toilet paper.”
Incidentally, why in every “emergency” do people flock to the toilet paper aisles? Are they thinking they’ll be scared crapless?
Anyway, the second possibility is to attempt to instill despair in the stronger-minded. “If people are that far gone that they really believe something so simplistically moronic like the planet will be destroyed by ‘climate change’,” these good people think in moments of weakness, “Then there is no hope for any restoration of normalcy. Honey, crack open the ammunition.”
Since you, dear readers, are in the second camp, the word attempt will not have escaped your notice. Nor will have moments of weakness. For none of us when sober or distracted would fall for any of this claptrap. Constant pummeling can take its toll—even famous boxer John L., the Boston Strong Boy, once took the L. Once. Most of us shake off the punches and swat our enemies aside.
A man in a dress put in charge of the nation’s health, installed by a regime that dares you to call him a man, a regime that busily butchers children in service to the satanic ideology that one’s sex can be changed by surgery and drugs, and punishes you if you take that dare. That is despair-worthy. But no thinking person can hear the words climate change will destroy the planet and take them seriously.
No thinking person.
Half of Americans believe climate change will devastate the earth during their lifetime, according to new research.
The survey of 5,000 Americans, split evenly by state, revealed that 48% of all respondents believe they’ll live to see climate change destroy the planet.
One minute of arduous searching failed to turn up a post I wrote years ago showing that we’d need a square hole something like a mile or so on every side in which we could fit all people. There just aren’t that many of us: we are not that important to “the planet”.
Population has increased since then, so I have to redo the math. But there is no way this puny mass of biologics (us) can destroy the planet. Even if we blew off every nuke everywhere all at once, we could not destroy the planet. It would kill most of us, sure. But it would not destroy the planet. The only consequence would that everywhere in ten years would look like Detroit.
One last word on propaganda, more proof of its worth, if you needed it. The survey we’re discussing was commissioned by—try not to laugh—Avocado Green Mattress. They flog beds which, they boast, are “Certified organic” and “certified for low emission”.
That’s a lot of certification.
Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card click here. Or use the paid subscription at Substack. Cash App: $WilliamMBriggs. For Zelle, use my email: matt@wmbriggs.com, and please include yours so I know who to thank.
In a world of Chicken Littles, your thoughts (particularly the sarcastic) are a welcome and refreshing wind.
Meanwhile Washington and the Pentagon are working very hard to bring about real climate change by instigating nuclear armageddon. Last night they ordered Ukraine for the second time since 25th of may to attack a russian ICBM radar early warning system with drones. Last time they put a big hole into a building. Foto on Larry Johnsons blog https://sonar21.com/friday-update-icj-rules-against-israel-as-ukraine-crosses-a-major-red-line/ From a military point of view, this makes no sense at all for Ukraine.
Ridiculing climate change propaganda is certainly fun, this is not.
Your cubic mile is pretty close. Alternatively, we could fit everyone standing up in the state of Delaware, which would surely tip over into the Atlantic thus solving climate change and other problems.
Proving once again that polls are simply a tool of propagandists.
The real problem is normies and their compliance to obvious fraud and lies.
— Incidentally, why in every “emergency” do people flock to the toilet paper aisles? Are they thinking they’ll be scared crapless? —
Logically, that would incline them in the opposite direction. But on the larger point, the demand for skilled propagandists seems to have outstripped the supply, recently at least. That’s my inference from the evidence: the flood of highly inept propaganda, which appears mainly in outlets that already pander to the excessively credulous. But the numbers of the credulous appear to be on the increase, which does not bode well.
Briggs, you Fool! Everywhere you go, you always take the weather with you! Everywhere you go, you always take the weather! Every human action counts! And every human is affected by human actions, especially minorities and colors! Raindrops keep falling on their heads, but that doesn’t mean the regime will soon be turning red, because the sunshine, lollipops, and rainbows and everything that’s scientific and queer and fake and gaaaayyyyy, means they are casting a wide net, and therefore the propaganda needs to be all inclusive! One form of propaganda affects another form of propaganda! Women and minorities and pieces of color MUST be most included! That is what you are seeing in the Gen. Leviathan! The sum of all fears! They are afraid Briggs! They have tried to scare you into believing, but they themselves have scared themselves into believing harder! Because the more we disbelieve, the harder they have to act like they are terrified! We didn’t start the fire! It was always burning since we weren’t learning; so forget about the models and the trends, they are fated to pretend! And so they have to win the propaganda war, because if we’re right, then their entire lives are lies, and it’s all on record, and it’s spinning far-right round, baby, right round, so they double down that it all starts with rising tides and earthquakes, hurricanes and Boeing airplanes bouncing in increasing turbulence, because it’s the end of their world as they know it, but we’ll be fine… and they cannot allow that Briggs, it suggests that the world will be better off without them specifically! They need to make themselves useful, which means your business is their business, and you must be controlled and grateful for it, that is why alongside their Big Tech allies and the entire entertainment and sex industry and mattress and banana fruit company and electric vehicle and fancy phone manufacturer and social media dating A.I. app at their disposal, every breath you take, every move you make, every meme you fake, every claim you stake, they’ll be watching you!
“Half of Americans believe climate change will devastate the earth during their lifetime, according to new research.” This gave me a chuckle. Imagine if they also asked a validating question, such as “Would you donate a month’s pay to permanently solve climate change? A week’s pay? A day’s pay?” Or even better, ask for an actual donation, a dollar or two. The worst way to find out what people think is to ask them. Consequence-free surveys can only elicit valueless responses.
In engineering systems designs, there is this notion of operating point stability. Envision a device that is switched on and doing it’s thing, sitting at some desired operating point. Then a perturbing force comes along and pushes the device away from the operating point. The device can respond in a number of ways, such as gracefully returning to the operating point. Or it could aggressively return to the operating point, overshoot in the other direction, aggressively correct for the overshoot, overshoot again, etc, only slowly returning to the operating point in a damped oscillation sort of path. Or it could go completely unstable and smack against the equivalent of a wall and damage itself. For a specific example, imagine you are driving on the freeway and your passenger grabs the steering wheel, and either a) tugs it gently for a moment and lets go, b) rapidly jerks it a few inches and let’s go, or c) jerks it a quarter-turn and pulls the emergency brake.
Consider an analogy where the system under test is society, and the perturbing force is CAGW. Whether CAGW is real or imagined or something in-between, in the short term, society will respond to the perturbing force in some manner. The wet-dreaming greenies envision society quickly yet gracefully transitioning to a new stable operating point without fossil fuels (i.e., they are not even remotely reality-based).
Luckily, on Planet Earth, the system under test consists of a large number of largely independent self-governing units (i.e., the United Nations is an impotent organization). If the world were a single society subject to one all-powerful ruling authority, it would be highly susceptible to going unstable and smacking against a wall of self-destruction.
The societies of Planet Earth, as currently constituted, will prove highly resilient to the CAGW agenda. As we have already seen, aggressively implemented CAGW “solutions” have caused great damage to local governing authorities that implemented them. Interestingly, many local governing authorities are still in denial, in the face of this steaming pile of evidence growing under their noses, and are still rushing in headlong.
This doesn’t mean that the United States, or any particular country, will individually survive the CAGW agenda (although our system of government, at least as originally designed, gives us a better chance than most countries). And in a thousand years, the world’s stable operating point may well indeed look like the greenie’s current vision. For the foreseeable future, the CAGW agenda, as bad as it is, and as much harm as it will cause, is a self-correcting problem, because those that implement it locally will, as a direct consequence, quickly lose the needed power and influence to implement is more globally, and the countries that resist will be rewarded by inheriting the earth.
In other words, the CAGW agenda is a self-correcting problem. That’s little comfort if your country gets destroyed in the process, but know that the rest of the world thanks you for your service.
The human footprint is far larger than we could ever fit into a mile cube or give everyone an acre in Texas or whatever foolishness is proposed to demonstrate that the world is somehow short of humans. This is especially true if we tried to use only “renewable” energy and organic food production. In fact, we are probably far beyond the carrying capacity of Earth in this scenario. The per-acre food production is probably 3 times or more what the organic food production methods would produce. Even stuff that says it is organic usually isn’t. The amount of land that we would have to dedicate to energy production would be ridiculous.
The toilet paper thing is interesting, because it is a self perpetuating fear. Even if you realize that the situation in the abstract is ridiculous, your only rational course of action at the specific moment might very well be to join in on the scramble for toilet paper.
What I mean is this: it is a well established meme that in disasters people hoard toilet paper. Therefore when disaster strikes one of the first things people think about is getting enough toilet paper, which means that the toilet paper WILL run out. Now suppose that you are low on toilet paper and you know that people are going to freak out about it. Well, you might say “there’s enough toilet paper for everyone if no one panics” but even so people WILL panic, and the toilet paper WILL be gone, so unless you join in you will be left with none.
To make matters worse when the next shipment comes in, it will be gone almost immediately, even if the original cause for panic is gone. This is because of all the people who weren’t able to get any the first time around scrambling to get in on this supply, causing few rolls to be left and causing everyone else to scramble to get the remainder before it runs out. If this goes on long enough you will also have people hoping to scalp rolls, leading to an even greater demand which outstrips any reasonable supply chain. This only ends when people have been instantly buying toilet paper for so long that everyone has plenty, at which point there is no reason to panic even if supplies look low and scalpers can’t make a profit. But it can take a month for this to happen, which further stresses why it is rational to get involved in the panic early. If you have less than a month’s supply and you miss out, you could run out even if there is no good reason for the shortage to continue. (Incidentally, the real winning move is to always have at least a three month supply.)
There was an interesting case here where the local news manufactured a toilet paper shortage out of thin air. They started running stories reminiscing on previous toilet paper shortages, then asked “experts” if it was possible if there could be another one, then started doing stories where they asked people on the street if they were worried about toilet paper running out. This caused people to panic, and even the people who knew what was going on were forced to buy more toilet paper in anticipation of the panic, so of course toilet paper was in short supply for weeks. To top things off after the whole thing was done the local news did stories on how bizarre it was that people panicked, since there was no natural cause for increased demand and no dip in the actual supply.
“If that many people believe the world is ending soon, there must be something here which I should probably believe, too. Let me stock up on toilet paper.”
…Briggs
“The purpose of propaganda isn’t to persuade you, it’s to convince you that everyone else is already persuaded.”
…Anonymous Internet