[Editor Note: Part I yesterday outlined the continuing problems of eco-imperialism at the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which uses taxpayer dollars to pursue Obama-era climate objectives. The post ended with the tension of such deep state eco-imperialism with humanitarian ends. Part II today examines the negative impacts of renewable energies from taxpayer subsidies, as well as USAID’s ignoring the true issue of infectious diseases.]
“The Climate Change Strategy is a green cancer that has spread throughout USAID. It is eco-imperialist, carbon colonialist and callously inhumane. It violates the most basic human right to have access to the modern energy, agricultural, disease control, and other technologies that create the jobs, living standards, leisure time, health, prosperity and longevity that we in developed nations almost take as our birthright.”
Problem 2: Ecological Problems of USAID Energy Subsidies
Obama era climate and sustainability policies also fail every ecological test.…
Continue Reading“Left elites fear that newly middle class families would want more stuff: real houses, cars, refrigerators, stoves, lights, and vacations to exotic locales now enjoyed mostly by climate conference attendees. All that would require taking more resources out of the ground, which would hurt Mother Earth.”
“Indeed, the best way to ensure ‘climate resilience’ is to have strong economies, modern technologies, early warning systems, and modern infrastructures that are built to withstand nature’s onslaughts.”
It’s obscene enough when the multilateral anti-development banks do it. But Trump agencies?!?
In a prime example of Deep State revanchism, despite the profound change in administrations, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) is still funding and advancing anti-energy Obama-era climate change dogmas and policies for developing countries. USAID handles tens of billions of dollars a year, roughly half of all US foreign aid, so this climate alarmism puts literally millions of lives at risk.…
Continue Reading“There is this mismatch between what the climate models are producing and what the observations are showing,” says lead author John Fyfe, a climate modeller at the Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis in Victoria, British Columbia. “We can’t ignore it.”
Susan Solomon, a climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, says that Fyfe’s framework helps to put twenty-first-century trends into perspective, and clearly indicates that the rate of warming slowed down at a time when greenhouse-gas emissions were rising dramatically.
– Jeff Tollefson, “Global Warming ‘Hiatus’ Debate Flares Up Again.” Nature, February 24, 2016.
It was officially noted in early 2016 with the above article in Nature, which was subtitled “Researchers now argue that slowdown in warming was real.”
I was reminded of this upon reading Pierre Gosselin’s recent post at NoTricksZone, “Global Temperature Rise Some 75% Lower Than Models Projected!…
Continue Reading