“Apologies are in order from Bloomberg Green. In terms of social justice, why hurt the average person as consumer, ratepayer, and taxpayer?”

“Trump’s Green-Bashing and Europe’s Right Put Climate Goals at Risk,” write Laura Millan, Zahra Hirji, Olivia Rudgard, and Jonathan Gilbert (maybe it takes four writers to tip-toe around the climate vs. social justice issue).

The Bloomberg Green authors call it “the campaign against climate.” Realists would call it a long overdue populist campaign for energy justice and against alarmism and energy rationing. And expect a lot more such protest in the future as Net Zero fails–and an “energy transition” back to the real thing (dense, stock, affordable, plentiful, reliable energies) occurs.

Here is the Bloomberg Green Daily story:

Politicians are vowing to roll back green policies and downplaying climate change ahead of key elections on both sides of the Atlantic, casting doubt on whether countries can maintain momentum in the transition away from fossil fuels.…

“… there are plenty of climate science deniers here to vehemently argue for the defendants’ case [in Mann v. Steyn]…. It is profoundly saddening when you realize that the platform I am writing this on would most probably not remove these people’s posts in the form they were written had somebody reported them.” – Gunnar Schade

Readers at MasterResource already know about Andrew Dessler, chair professor in Texas A&M’s Department of Atmospheric Sciences, who morphs from scientist (his job) to biased, emotional advocacy. Lawyer-like, Dessler makes the best case for alarm rather than honestly considering other views and weaknesses in his argument. His emotional outbursts at his critics and utter distain at the general population (“assholes“) who reject his uber-Climate Alarmism marginalizes him outside of the Church of Climate.…

“I assume you think the earth is flat and dinosaurs never existed and the sun rotates around the earth and vaccines don’t work? I mean, since science isn’t real…” (Durand to Bradley)

“The ‘settled science’ is toward the benefits of CO2 fertilization. The middle-way science in the face of climate models and other uncertainties is global lukewarming, with positives as well as negatives.” (Bradley to Durand)

Patty Durand is a candidate for the Georgia Public Service Commission special election. She is rightly critical of Plant Vogtle #3 and #4 but falls off the cliff when it comes to climate alarmism and forced energy transformation. Patty is in the tank of the climate industrial complex, the sea of cronies not unlike her enemy, Georgia Power Company (Southern Company). [1]

Our exchange began with her post that began:

Do you care about climate change?

“By now, it’s some people’s job, if not personal vocation, to enact these rituals of denunciation simply because it helps prop up the green corporate welfare….” (Holman Jenkins, below)

Holman W. Jenkins, a columnist at the Wall Street Journal, is a straight-shooter on many things climate, including the blanks fired from alarmist science. Yes, he defends a CO2 tax, which is considered a “moderate” position within the climate-industrial complex. (Even Homer nods.) But his November 3rd column was powerful.

Jenkins latest column coincides with a new book by Javier Vinos, Climate Puzzle: The Sun’s Surprising Role, summarized at Judith Curry’s Climate Etc. [1] And the climate intelligentsia is upset with such upstream distractions when the downstream of their campaign, Net Zero, is on its last legs. Climate science? We are still stuck in 1980s, sorry to say, when it comes to climate sensitivity and the ecological impacts of anthropogenic warming.…