 |
| Image credit |
German summary below / deutsche Zusammenfassung unten
Nothing reveals as quickly and indubitably the fact-denying religious fanaticism behind green faith in crazily expensive efforts at reducing human induced CO2 emissions than McCarthy's reply below: not only is she so dumb as to accept the cited fact — with a large population of fellow green-worshippers, it is a powerful strategy simply to deny the real evidence and insist on the "facts" made up to fit one's narrative — facts do not matter to the zealot. Her reply also relies on a set of implications which betray her mendacious attitude. Notably, she implies either that the activity of her agency is apt to increase the reduction of global warming significantly beyond the cited "one one hundredths of a degree celsius" (0,01 C°) in some unspecified roundabout, indeed unknown, way — which certainly isn't good enough —, or she implies that the actions embarked upon by her agency are worthwhile even in the absence of further reductions in tempearture (the very objective in question), which latter preposterous admission makes a lot more sense to me, as it simply means: the likes of McCarthy intend to spend money to spread and cement the green faith in the public mind.
Nothing reveals as quickly and indubitably the fact-denying religious fanaticism behind green faith in crazily expensive efforts at reducing human induced CO2 emissions than McCarthy's reply below: not only is she so dumb as to accept the cited fact — with a large population of fellow green-worshippers, it is a powerful strategy simply to deny the real evidence and insist on the "facts" made up to fit one's narrative — facts do not matter to the zealot. Her reply also relies on a set of implications which betray her mendacious attitude. Notably, she implies either that the activity of her agency is apt to increase the reduction of global warming significantly beyond the cited "one one hundredths of a degree celsius" (0,01 C°) in some unspecified roundabout, indeed unknown, way — which certainly isn't good enough —, or she implies that the actions embarked upon by her agency are worthwhile even in the absence of further reductions in tempearture (the very objective in question), which latter preposterous admission makes a lot more sense to me, as it simply means: the likes of McCarthy intend to spend money to spread and cement the green faith in the public mind.
She says that the immensely expensive actions initiated or taken by her agency are not measured against the targeted reduction, which in itself is astonishing, to say the least, but are intended to bring about "strong domestic action that can trigger global action". That wishy-washy phrasing is only good to cover and support arbitrary, incommensurable and unaccounted political moves to further reenforce green mythology and machinations in the green political swamp.
Clearly, what she insinuates is not in line with the kind of "global action" that the US government used to pursue under Obama, before the nonsense, was stopped by the Trump administration. Obama was happy to spend large amounts of US-money in return for no binding and enforceable committments at all by the other players, including the most important ones such as India and China, who are expressly granted their plans to increase CO2 emissions massively.
Deutsche Zusammenfassung
Clearly, what she insinuates is not in line with the kind of "global action" that the US government used to pursue under Obama, before the nonsense, was stopped by the Trump administration. Obama was happy to spend large amounts of US-money in return for no binding and enforceable committments at all by the other players, including the most important ones such as India and China, who are expressly granted their plans to increase CO2 emissions massively.
Deutsche Zusammenfassung
Die Verlogenheit der Energiewende wird im kurzen Video unten auf den Punkt gebracht: man schert sich nicht um das alles entscheidende K.O.-Kriterium: Unsere unwahrscheinlich teure Energiewende-Manie bewirkt nichts im Kampf um eine niedrigere Welttemperatur. Diese entscheidende Erkenntnis wird einfach nicht zur Kenntnis genommen. So sicher sitzt man (noch) im Sattel. Das ganze Öko-Weltrettungstheater hat sich vollkommen verselbstständigt und lässt sich durch Tatsachen und vernünftige Argumente nicht aufhalten.
Um den Kreuzzug fortzuführen, beginnt man sich in ein Gewirr an Zusatzargumenten zu verstricken, die schwer fassbar sind in ihrer definitiven Bedeutung, und bei denen darauf geachtet wird, dass sie nicht messbar sind und die betreffenden Stellen und Aktivisten jeglicher Rechenschaftspflicht entzogen sind.
Unterm Strich sagt die Dame: Wir brauchen noch viel mehr Geld, nicht um greifbare Klimaziele zu verwirklichen (das können wir nicht, gibt sie unklugerweise offen zu – geschickter wäre sie verfahren, wenn sie einfach falsche Zahlen angegeben hätte, das kann man sich ohne weiteres leisten, wenn große Teile der Bevölkerung den gleichen Glauben teilen) – also die Dame sagt, wir brauchen, noch viel mehr Geld, um „bei uns im Lande Maßnahmen zu ermöglichen, die [zielführende] internationale Maßnahmen auslösen ...“.
Nun, die internationalen Maßnahmen, die von Obama eingeleitet und gottlob von Trump annulliert worden sind, bestanden darin, sich dazu zu verpflichten, viel Geld zur Verfügung zu stellen,
- ohne verbindliche zielführende Klimamaßnahmen von anderen Ländern zu verlangen und
- den größten CO2-Emittenten ihre geplanten massiven CO2-Erhöhungen ausdrücklich zu gestatten.
Wozu man das Geld wirklich braucht, ist doch klar: Es geht darum, die grüne Maschinerie kräftig zu schmieren, damit der „ökologisch“-industriellen Komplex weiterhin floriert, die politischen Ziele der Grünen durchgesetzt werden und die Bevölkerung auch künftig kräftig beschallt wird mit pseudo-ökologischer Propaganda, dem heutigen Opium für das Volk.
No comments:
Post a Comment