Stephen King short story and movie
We have ridiculed the global warming nut-cases, the eco-fascists and fellow traveler politicians, the flim-flam industries bilking the nation but we hope the last few days that everyone understands that the children are being manipulated and that is a tragedy. There is no excuse for what adults are doing to them and the impact of eco-fascist policies on future generations – one-world government, high costs, less economic growth, more economic disparity not less, loss of freedom, scarcity, misery, poverty all in the name of a sort of ecology that is anti-human at its core.
Excerpts from article by John Nolte writing at Breitbart followed by commentaries by respondents to that article about the science of CO2, and others of note: (bold our emphasis)
Only a Monster Would Afflict Children with ‘Eco-Anxiety’
What kind of monster afflicts children with eco-anxiety by telling them they will be dead in 12 years? I’ll tell you who: the child abusers in the establishment media, the environmental movement, and the Democrat Party — that’s who.
What’s especially disturbing is that children are being taught the opposite of empathy. Empathy is the most important value an adult can impart to a child. But what these kids are being encouraged to become is nothing less than wild-eyed, religious fanatics where non-believers are fingered as the enemy, as heretics looking to destroy the world and kill everyone. And this is always the result of such things, of the moral certainty of a zealot mixed with intolerance.
Even if Climate Change were not a hoax, even if Global Warming were real (it’s not), burdening children with eco-anxiety would still be indefensible.
You don’t do this to children. You don’t shit all over their childhood… Even if this massive hoax were not a hoax, it is not the child’s responsibility to fix it. That responsibility falls on the adults, and another responsibility that falls on adults is to not only protect children, but to protect their innocence, protect them from the horrors of real life, protect the magic of those wonder years.
Sadly, once you realize Climate Change is a hoax wrapped in a left-wing political movement, this deliberate act of terrorizing children with lies, a lie every bit as audacious as saying a meteor will hit the earth in 12 years, is revealed as something truly insidious.
Unfortunately, though, and we see this in our public schools and popular culture, the happiest place in the world for a leftist is that spot between parent and child, and that influential spot is mercilessly abused to destroy the most precious gift of childhood — innocence.
These wicked people relentlessly abuse their power to sexualize our children, lie to them about the biology of gender, radicalize them politically, and now, they are so desperate to push the Climate Change Hoax, there’s a full-blown propaganda campaign to scare the living hell out of them.
Hopefully, most of the kids who went on Friday’s climate strike were doing exactly what kids should be doing — leading the stupid adults on so they can cut class to smoke a few Newports . . .
Unfortunately, though, an awful lot of these kids are not rebelling. Instead, in the exact same way fascists and tyrants have abused children in the past, we are seeing our own kids twisted into a movement filled with ignorant and angry fanatics, Children of the Corn clones embracing climate lies because to do so allows them to embrace the warm feeling of superiority and authoritarianism — worse, trying to turn them against their own parents, which is an age-old tactic right out of the dictator handbook. . . .
Even if I knew for a fact the world would end in ten years or five years, even tomorrow, I would never burden children with this knowledge. No decent person would. My God, childhood ends in a wink; let them enjoy it. Only a villain would rob kids of these precious years.
My school years fell between 1970 and 1984, and as you can probably tell from my grammar, I’m a product of public schools. My generation — the duck and cover generation — wasn’t completely immune to this…
There were the Cold War and the accompanying threat of nuclear annihilation, and like today’s Climate Change hoax, we had our own enviro-hoaxes: the coming Ice Age, overpopulation, no more oil, killer bees, etc. Our school’s Weekly Reader regularly fretted over pollution (which was a real problem back then).
Yeah, I remember all that, but we were never terrorized over it, we were never told it was our responsibility to fix it, and we certainly were never told Doomsday was imminent so we had to take it to the street.
We were kids, for crying out loud!
You don’t do that to children.
At least we used to not do that to children.
Ed Note: Apropos Children of the Corn link here. The following are from the comment section to the Nolte article above. There were many hundreds of comments. We selected a few for your analysis. The first one rebuts the CO2 alarmists. We included the links the author included and checked that the links are to legitimate sites. The one marked * is a PDF download and not a link so extra caution is in order.
DiogenesDespairs — helenriley776
Remedial reading for the kids, once they’re at high-school level
The fact is, there has been global warming, but the contribution of human-generated carbon dioxide is necessarily so small as to be all but undetectable. Here’s why:
Carbon dioxide, considered the main vector for human-caused global warming, is some 0.04% of the atmosphere by volume, or some 400 parts per million (ppm)[1]. Water vapor varies from 0% to 4% by volume[2], and so should easily average above 1%[3] near the Earth’s surface, where the greenhouse effect would be most important, and is about three times more effective[4] a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. So water vapor is some 25 times more prevalent and three times more effective; that makes it some 75 times more important to the greenhouse effect than carbon dioxide[5]. The TOTAL contribution of carbon dioxide to the greenhouse effect is therefore 0.013 or less.
Since the start of the industrial revolution, carbon dioxide is estimated to have risen from 280 ppm to the current approximately 400 ppm. Even if the entire increase were the result of human emissions – which is by no means certain, given uncertainty about how much CO2 is produced by natural sources such as decomposition of biomass and carbonate rock, volcanism and the little-understood ocean-atmosphere exchange – the total human contribution to atmospheric carbon dioxide would be about 0.3 of the total. Therefore human carbon dioxide adds at most only 0.0039 of the greenhouse effect, and may well be less.
Total warming of the Earth by the greenhouse effect is widely accepted as about 33 degrees Centigrade (which is equal to 59 degrees Fahrenheit), raising average temperature to 15 degrees Centigrade, or 59 degrees above zero Fahrenheit. So the contribution of anthropogenic carbon dioxide is at most 0.23 degrees Fahrenheit, or at most 0.13 degree Centigrade, and perhaps considerably less. Global warming since the beginning of the industrial revolution is thought by many to be perhaps 0.8 to1.0 degree Centigrade.
But that’s only the beginning. We’ve had global warming for more than 10,000 years, since the end of the last Ice Age, and there is evidence temperatures were actually somewhat warmer 9,000 years ago and again 4,500 to 8,000 years ago than they are today[6]. Whatever caused that, it was not human activity. It was not all those power plants and factories and SUVs being operated by Stone Age cavemen while chipping arrowheads out of bits of flint. Whatever the cause was, it melted the glaciers that in North America once extended south to Long Island and parts of New York City[7] into virtually complete disappearance (except for a few mountain remnants). That’s one big greenhouse effect! If we are still having global warming – and I suppose we could presume we are, given this more than 10,000 year history – it seems highly likely that it is still the overwhelmingly primary cause of continued warming, rather than our piddling 0.0039 contribution to the greenhouse effect.
Yet even that trend-continuation today needs to be proved. Evidence is that the Medieval Warm Period centered on the 1200s was somewhat warmer than we are now[8], and the climate was clearly colder in the Little Ice Age in the 1600s than it is now[9]. (Whether the earlier Roman Warm Period around the time of Christ was as warm or was warmer than present is less clear.) So we are within the geologically recent range of normal up-and-down fluctuations without human greenhouse contributions that could be significant, or even measurable.
Principal scientists arguing for human-caused global warming have been demonstrably disingenuous[10], and now you can see why. They have proved they should not be trusted.
The idea that we should be spending trillions of dollars and hamstringing the economy of the entire world to reduce carbon dioxide emissions is beyond ludicrous in light of the facts above; it is insane. Furthermore, it sucks attention and resources from seeking the other sources of warming and from coping with climate change and its effects in realistic ways. The true motivation underlying the global warming movement is almost certainly ideological and political in nature, and I predict that Anthropogenic Global Warming, as currently presented, will go down as the greatest fraud of all time. It makes Ponzi and Madoff look like pikers by comparison.
[1] Mauna Loa Observatory https://www.co2.earth/daily…
[2] Fundamentals of Physical Geography, 2nd Edition
by Micheal Pidwirney Concentration varies slightly with the growing season in the northern hemisphere. HYPERLINK http://www.physicalgeograph…
[3] The Earth’s tropics, the so-called “Torrid Zone,” where temperatures and therefore the capacity of the atmosphere to hold water vapor are at their highest, and where the 4% maximum is found, comprise a far greater portion of the Earth’s surface – 40% – than do the areas where water vapor content is at its lowest, the polar areas (8%), and the world’s deserts (10%). Moreover, the troposphere, which contains 99% of the world’s water vapor, is far deeper at the equator (10-12 miles) than near the poles (4 to 6 miles), enabling substantially more water vapor retention in the tropics even if other factors were equal rather than favoring more water retention rather than less. I have chosen an arbitrarily low working figure of 1% to give the AGW argument the benefit of any doubt. The higher the actual figure is above that, the lower must be the actual contribution of carbon dioxide, and therefore of anthropogenic carbon dioxide. If the true figure is 2%, the contribution of human-generated carbon dioxide is half that shown.
[4 NIST Chemistry Webbook, Please compare the IR absorption spectra of water and carbon dioxide. ] HYPERLINK “http://webbook.nist.gov/” http://webbook.nist.gov/
[5] Three quarters of the atmosphere and virtually all water vapor are in the troposphere. Including all the atmosphere would change the ratios to about 20 times more prevalent and 60 times more effective. However, the greenhouse effect of high-altitude carbon dioxide on lower-altitude weather and the earth’s surface seems likely to be extremely small if not nil, given that heat rises and high-altitude gases would also intercept relevant frequencies of solar radiation before they reach the earth.
[6] Encyclopedia Britannica – Holocene Environment and Biota, et al. https://www.britannica.com/… for early holocene. See also History of Earth’s Climate, Ch. 7, Brett Hansen http://www.dandebat.dk/eng-… The citation here is of the English translation, which contains minor grammatical errors that do not materially affect content.
[7]The Narrows Flood – Post-Woodfordian Meltwater Breach of the Narrows Channel, NYC Charles Merguerian https://www.geo.sunysb.edu/… p. 2, et al. *
[8] Britannica, same section https://www.britannica.com/… for historical period: Roman and Medieval Warm Periods also History of Earth’s Climate, Ch. 7, Brett Hansen http://www.dandebat.dk/eng-…
[9] Encyclopedia Britannica – Little Ice Age
https://www.britannica.com/…
[10] Wikileaks: Climatic Research Unit emails, data, models, 1996-2009 HYPERLINK “http://wikileaks.org/wiki/C…” http://wikileaks.org/wiki/C….
See also HYPERLINK “http://www.dailymail.co.uk/…” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/… and
HYPERLINK “http://online.wsj.com/artic…” http://online.wsj.com/artic… and, more diplomatically: HYPERLINK “http://www.nytimes.com/2009…” http://www.nytimes.com/2009…. Et al.
ADDENDUM (by DiogenesDespairs)
What initially troubled me, years ago, was the aberrant behavior of the climate research unit at East Anglia University, which had been the main data source for AGW arguments. They initially refused(!) to reveal their algorithms and data on the grounds that they were proprietary(!!). They responded to critics with ad hominem attacks and efforts to block their publication in scientific journals. Now, as I am sure you know, this is not how one does honest science, in which you PUBLISH your data and methodology and invite critical comment to ferret out error or oversights. It took the now-famous Wikileaks “Climategate” to pry loose the data and expose their machinations. Yet despite the devastating blow these revelations should have to their credibility, the AGW “cause” has taken on a life of its own.
Fundamentally, the argument seems to rest on a logical fallacy, post hoc ergo propter hoc – after this, therefore because of this. We see a rise in temperature and a rise in (principally) carbon dioxide, and therefore conclude one must have caused the other. It does not necessarily follow at all. There can be other causes entirely behind both phenomena, and as you see above, almost certainly there are. Beyond that, I have encountered numerous assertions of fact that cannot add up given the physical properties of water vapor and carbon dioxide that go unchallenged. One-sided arguments proliferate and people arguing the other side are frequently denounced as being employed by business interests rather than rebutted on the merits.
In sum, I have not come lightly to the conclusion that the AGW argument as it applies to carbon dioxide is largely untrue and certainly does not account for more than a very small, nearly negligible part of the phenomena we are seeing. The implications of widespread assertions of and belief in such an untruth are staggering, and potentially enormously destructive. It is unwise indeed to let oneself be stampeded in this matter, and stampede is clearly what many have been and are trying to induce.
I can understand politicians behaving this way; a carbon tax or carbon trading regime would allow enormous revenues to fall into their hands. I can understand “Progressive” ideologues; it logically leads to enormous expansion of government power over industry, the economy, and the daily life of individuals, which they regard as a good thing. I understand the environmentalists; they want to shrink the size and impact on the environment of modern civilization. But responsible citizens need to put aside such considerations when drawing conclusions.
Please feel free to copy this essay and post it wherever you think it may do some good. The more people who understand this the better.
Replies to Nolte or DiogenesDespairs
johnfored — DiogenesDespairs
I agree with you completely that CO2 is not the cause of global temperature increases. There are those that argue we are in a CO2 drought (Dr. William Happer) and more CO2 would be a good thing for crop growth as when more CO2 is available plants need less water to grow. Recently the infamous ‘Hockey Stick’ graph was proven to be a fraud and a hoax according to the Canadian Courts who recently ruled on it!
Bottom line no one has proven definitively that CO2 is causing the Global temperature increases and I doubt if any of these children know this!
Pithy add-ons or responses to Nolte on the “child abuse” aspect to the climate scare mongering. Selection not necessarily in any order.
Susan
The biggest bullies our kids will ever face in their school career are the teachers and the school staff that enable the bullying and emotional terrorism on our kids. Putting these kids into a daily and semi permanent state of anxiety is the equivalent of what molesters do to kids.
The Oatmeal Savage
Sound familiar?
“For the Nazis, the group had other benefits. Not only did it allow the Third Reich to indoctrinate children at their most impressionable, but it let the Nazis remove them from the influence of their parents, some of whom opposed the regime. The Nazi Party knew that families—private, cohesive groups not usually under political sway—were an obstacle to their goals. The Hitler Youth was a way to get Hitler’s ideology into the family unit, and some members of the Hitler Youth even denounced their parents when they behaved in ways not approved of by the Reich.”
https://www.history.com/news/how-the-hitler-youth-turned-a-generation-of-kids-into-nazis
JrTx
Climate change has become cult.
George
There is no way these kids have the intellectual capacity, experience nor education to have a rational thought or idea about climate change.
They are being brainwashed by liberals who likewise don’t have the intellectual capacity, experience nor education to have a rational conclusion about climate change.
Brainwashing children is child abuse
The Oatmeal Savage
“The rank and file Khmer Rouge were no more than children. The average age of the Khmer Rouge troops who entered Phnom Penh in 1975 was 17. Like the children in Lord of the Flies, they carried out their tasks with a rapacious brutality.”
They only killed one third of the country’s population and completely destroyed the economy.
SlimShady
Between drag queen story hour, climate change reducing kids to bacteria, gender identity classes beginning in kindergarten, confusing restrooms, liberal progressive socialist marxist curriculum, and on and on, I don’t foresee any issues with our children in the next generation.
DoubIenaughtspy
The same people who murder babies and side with pedos. Like everything else Democrats use children.
Alex Ocrazy-Cortex
Offer a child a day off school to join their friends in a big parade, and I think they’d snap at the chance.
Tango57 HamChuc
Seriously, my generation grew up with Duck and Cover drills at school. An air raid sirens in our neighborhoods.
jane tanner — Tango57
yes but we weren’t indoctrinated every day that it was going to happen no matter what in 12 yrs. It was a precaution, just like planning for natural disasters and fire drills. This is fanaticism.
The Oatmeal Savage
“The Soviet Cult of Childhood
“…We need that generation of young people who began to reach political maturity in the midst of a disciplined and desperate struggle against the bourgeoisie. In this struggle that generation is training genuine Communists; it must subordinate to this struggle, and link up with it, each step in its studies, education, and training.”
-V.I. Lenin, Tasks of the Youth Leagues (Bourgeois and Communist Morality)
The Soviet Cult of Childhood
Deck
If a kid can claim victimhood, he deserves more ice cream and toys to make him feel better
JrTx
Exactly on the mark. it’s totally disgusting what leftists are doing to children, and it is child abuse.
April Rose
It’s not just Global warming the left lie about. They tell kids they have no gender or identity, culture or history. We are just blobs born to do what their sick depraved minds say.
vutsrq
“We cannot rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We gotta have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.”
dave1964b vutsrq
And wearing bright green uniforms led by Greta!
Rimbaud
The left has made a pact with the devil and therefore everything is legitimate for them in order to satisfy their thirst for power. Once you legitimize dismembering a living child as he/she is moving down the birth canal to welcome life, you are on a slippery path where all evil acts are ok. That is where the left is. May the Almighty have mercy on us!
will2win
The history of Leftist politics is one of monstrous people and deeds. Only the ignorant and easily fooled follow the ruthless criminals who inevitably lead such schemes. There are plenty of both right here in the USA at present.
CommanderDave
The skyrocketing national debt is more of a threat to young people’s future than climate change….but they ain’t smart enough to figure that out.
Trump Whistleblower Saga Threatens to Blow Up 2020 Campaign*
OMG! Does Greta Thunberg know this? Does the Editorial Board of the QC Times? It seems all so reGretable, err a sign of the Times, or something.
Readers will certainly agree that whether or not “blame” is ascribed there is an opportunity to efficiently harvest a resource that would otherwise be wasted. We propose locating more wind farms adjacent to solar farms. Then, open fresh fricassee restaurants nearby to take advantage of the convenient resource. They would of course 
be government owned or licensed, gluten free, no smoking facilities EXCLUSIVELY USING PAPER STRAWS.
As regards what they call “climate science” never mind that at this age these kids can only know what they have been told.
