By Jo Nova
Finally, the Green-left activists are starting to ask if Big Money is distorting their own environmental efforts
Twenty years too late, a few on the green patsy environmental side are starting to feel “uneasy” about the billions of dollars gifted into their accounts by the nice caring bankers and oligarchs. The money thrown at believers is so obscenely big even they are raising eyebrows.
After smearing skeptics as shills for Big Oil, a few on the left are wondering if funds 300 times larger just from one man might be a bit concentrated. The Bezos Earth Fund has $10,000 million dollars in total to give away but in the last three decades of climate debate the evil Exxon only gave skeptics a grand total of $30 million dollars. Now they worry?
They wonder if Jeff Bezos is controlling too much of the environmental charity funding, and that he really wants to set up carbon offset schemes which greens fear will be “greenwashed” corrupted and a waste of time. This is quite a rare hint that a few in the environmental circles are just starting to be suspicious that they are being used to support other money making agendas.
But this is a crack in the door for skeptics to wedge:
The Bezos Earth fund has pumped billions into climate and nature projects. So why are experts uneasy?
By Patrick Greenfield, The Guardian
Launched with a skeleton team in February 2020, the Bezos Earth Fund aims to give away $10bn (£7.9bn) of the Amazon founder’s $200bn personal fortune to combat the climate crisis and biodiversity loss by the end of the decade. So far, it has issued more than 230 grants worth $2bn, funding initiatives from AI environmental solutions to clean energy for disadvantaged communities.
In the process, the Bezos Earth Fund has become one of the most influential voices in the climate and biodiversity sector, with its fellows, advisers and directors a high-profile presence at international negotiations.
Now they worry about the conflict of interest?
But privately in the climate and biodiversity sector, the mood around the Bezos Earth Fund has turned to one of growing unease. Researchers, climate policy advisers and NGO staff voiced concerns about the level of influence the organisation holds over critical environmental institutions for halting climate change and biodiversity loss, many of which now count Bezos Earth Fund among their biggest funders. Some did not want to be named due to concerns about the consequences for their own funding.
“We have seen millions of dollars paid to conservation and climate organisations. So many have taken money from the Bezos Earth Fund and I find it really worrying. There is obviously a risk of a conflict of interest,” says Holger Hoffmann-Riem from the Swiss NGO Go for Impact. “The credibility of the system relies on independence.”
The system needs independence indeed, but where were they when science needed independence? They were in bed with the bankers and bureaucrats, demanding carbon credits to save the world.
The aim of the Big Banker class was always to establish a carbon fiat currency brokered by them. It was potentially a $7 Trillion dollar money making venture (for bankers). Wouldn’t you love to be paid to profit from an invisible product where no one needed delivery of anything, yet you could claim to be saving the world? The only “commodity” in this market are paper certificates issued by third world bureaucrats, and checked by people who want jobs with the UN or HSBC? (We all know what HSBC is looking for in an employee, and it isn’t “independence”. (Remember Stuart Kirk’s story?)
More signs that the Green left are starting to fragment
Does Jeff Bezos really want to save the world? Green gravy train troughers are afraid to ask out loud:
One climate policy expert, speaking on the condition of anonymity, says: “In the few years since it started distributing enormous amounts of money for climate change and conservation, Bezos Earth Fund has established influence over many major initiatives and their board members.
“At this point, Bezos Earth Fund’s enormous presence in the climate and conservation space starts to look less philanthropical, and more like an attempt to take over the corporate governance system for its own interests and agenda.”
Things are cracking up in the Carbonista cabal because the impossible Net Zero targets can only be met by buying carbon credits from countries who have a massive dirty emissions industry they can clean up cheaply or who can fake it. The true (delusional but more honest) Greens sense that there is something wrong with this international money market idea. After all, people close to home won’t have to give up their air conditioners and cars if they can just pay some slave in Malawi to do it for them. Hence there was a big dummy-spit when Bezos group was seen supporting “carbon offsets”:
Many in the conservation and climate world say their concerns crystallised this year, when a bitter internal row erupted at the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), one of the world’s most important climate certification organisations. The SBTi, which received an $18m grant from Bezos in 2021, is the organisation responsible for assessing whether some of the world’s leading companies are decarbonising in line with the Paris agreement.
In April, the SBTi board unexpectedly announced plans to allow companies to meet their climate targets with carbon offsets from the unregulated voluntary carbon market for indirect emissions. The move provoked internal fury. Staff and technical advisers said they were not consulted about the announcement and warned it could open the door to greenwashing.
They expressed fears that the science-based process was being sidelined in favour of more company-friendly policies with weaker standards, with large polluters allowed to buy offsets instead of cutting emissions. Dozens of SBTi staff called for the resignation of the CEO, Luiz Fernando do Amaral, and board members, including the Bezos fellow Iván Duque, in an internal letter.
But ponder this –a lot of the green-left-industrial complex don’t want a real free market in carbon either. The renewables industry wants a half-baked one to support them, but doesn’t want want a full open free market in carbon because the sell products that are expensively stupid ways to reduce CO2. So if there is anything resembling a free market in carbon credits, they might lose market share to all the cheaper options. When Australia had a carbon auction system small tree farms used to win the bidding at $14 a ton of carbon “saved”. While wind and solar power were costing hundreds of dollars a ton. And electric vehicles are even worse.
So other big money guys who are using the greens have an interest in making sure the carbon market isn’t too free and only certain “low emissions” schemes can be accepted.
From the Bezos Fund site — obviously they don’t want a real free market, they want a rigged one, as long as they get to do the rigging, eh?
“The market economy can play a valuable role in shifting to a green future, but free markets alone can simply perpetuate past pollution and depletion. The Bezos Earth Fund is working to accelerate changes in goods and financial markets to create a virtuous cycle of investment, prosperity, jobs, innovation, emission reductions and ecosystem protection.”
But when you have $10 billion dollars to give away and Big Bankers for friends, what’s to say you can’t rig the market?
Related stories on Bankers in Climate Change
- Central banks drive booms and busts, and force everyone to be a high risk speculator
- Banks *really* want to save the world. Citigroup commits $100 billion to “climate change”. Media loves it.
- Giant Spanish Bank spends €100 b on Earth’s weather, cos they are nice people
- How Green is Your Bankster? Bank of America spends $50 billion to save the world.
- Global Carbon Market Hits $176 Billion in 2011
- The Ground Zero of Global Corruption – it starts with The Currency
- When is a free market solution *not* the answer? When it isn’t free.
- UN Green Climate Fund: good for bankers, bureaucrats, but not so much the poor
- Deutsche Bank — A Wunch of Bankers
- Sub-prime carbon is coming
- Six words to expose the scam: Bankers want us to trade carbon
- Climate money: Bigger money moves in
- Massive climate funding exposed
- Carbon credits: another corrupt currency?
If there really is a “green-left-industrial complex” it’s much smaller than vested fossil fuel interests.
Reducing net greenhouse gas emissions has to happen, that is universally agreed by everybody. This argument is about whether and how much carbon offsetting should occur. Offsetting gives the temporary opportunity to maintain business as usual. It’s only kicking the can down the road if material emission reductions do not also occur. Does Jeff really want to change the business model that has made him billions of dollars?
388
As an outside observer I find your comment insofar senseless, as the numbers have been given and its 10000 against 30 Mill, but also nobody said that Mr. Bezos wants to change his business model. Its kinda written, that there is sensible caring people that have woken up to the green scam.
340
Dear Simon, if only you read my site instead of posting advertising for your pet cause.
The Green Left Industrial Complex is a $130 trillion dollar Cabal. That’s Trillion with a T. Obviously fossil fuels is nothing in comparison to the worlds financial, superannuation and insurance cartels. Plus there is the EV industry, and China and Russia pushing the scam too. Even more pointedly, fossil fuels don’t need us to believe they slay demons in order to make their money. But the renewables-industrial-complex would cease to exist if everyone realized CO2 was fertilizer, did barely any warming, and warming saves millions of lives in any case.
See Antitrust laws slow down the climate plans of $130T monster cartel of UN and global bankers
Speaking of vested interests, would you like to declare your own interests in the carbon religion?
860
>”Speaking of vested interests, would you [Simon] like to declare your own interests in the carbon religion?”
Perhaps he could start with his NZ ETS forestry involvement, but I’m guessing he’d rather not.
190
Looks like Bezos has taken a leaf out of Bill Gates book and learnt how to leverage his billions into more billions through “philanthropy” at the same time attempting to greenwash his image and get to speak at TED conferences to great acclaim! Not to mention attend Davos and rule the world with Klaus.
280
That’s right. Fossil fuels don’t need no scam. Hydrocarbons are simply still going about their usual business of overwhelmingly supplying energy to the world. And will continue to do so as the Bezos’s of the world come…and go.
231
Jo,
We’re still waiting for you to declare your financial contributors. I suspect there aren’t many now after frequent descents down conspiracy theory rabbit-holes.
In the old days, you used to challenge with scientific argument, but that has gone by the wayside as the reality of anthropogenic climate change kicked in.
It’s time to acknowledge the science for what it is and to be constructive in finding ways to adapt and mitigate.
261
That’s hysterical.
300
I’ve no conflicts of interest to declare. No corporate. No fossils. Funded by mum and dads. I would have got rich parroting the sabotage-science at the ABC or CSIRO.
You are not answering the question anonymous Simon. Do you have a financial interest in this debate?
290
‘ … the reality of anthropogenic climate change kicked in.’
The recent spike in temperature is down to Hunga Tonga Hunga, a negative feedback.
Nice of you to drop in, I always give you a thumbs up.
133
I’m a financial contributor to Jo. I think I donated $50 worth of chocolates to her earlier this year. She must be raking in the millions Simon.
240
I made the same contribution as you at Easter. Has Simon not seen the Tip Jar and the statement below it in the top right hand corner of the blog?!
190
Simon >”as the reality of anthropogenic climate change kicked in”
When did it “kick in” ?
ERA5 from 1942 – 1978 has slope of +0.0248 C/decade.
Nothing “kicked in” for nearly 30 years even though anthropogenic “attribution” began 1951 (supposedly).
That was pre satellite. Post satellite with 12 month smoothing reveals a spike 1990/1991 which skews the trend 1979 – 1993 to +0.341 C/decade, 12 month smoothing +0.125 C/decade.
Big fluctuations (spikes) 1995, 1998, 2002. Trend 1994 – 2003 +0.792 C/decade but 12 mth smoothed +0.303 C/decade.
Big fluctuations again (spikes) 2016, 2020. Trend 2012 – 2022 +0.767 C/decade.
Wow! Did “the reality of anthropogenic climate change actually kick in post 1994?
That’s +7.9 and +7.7 C/century for 29 years BTW.
That’s problematic because NOAA states – “The rate of warming since 1982 is … 0.20° C per decade.” using anomaly terms.
0.20° C/decade is only +2.0 C/century – why the wild discrepancy? Could it be anomaly terms and an extra 14 years does not tell the real story?
Source (using absolute terms):
Web-based Reanalysis Intercomparison Tool: Monthly/Seasonal Time-Series
https://psl.noaa.gov/data/atmoswrit/timeseries/
Yes Simon, we can do “climate science” at home.
160
Dang. Missed out 2004 – 2011 previous.
Spikes 2007 and 2010 using 12 month smoothing: beginning middle and end of period much the same.
2004 Jan 288.532 K
2007 Dec 288.486 K
2011 Dec 288.583 K
Trend +0.818 C/decade (+8.2 C/century) and +0.0375 C/decade with 12 month smoothing. But the monthly data above only changed 0.05 C in 8 years.
Anthropogenic climate change took time out apparently.
80
Climate Reanalyzer enables monthly timeseries of regions and narrow latitudinal bands on an annual basis:
Monthly Reanalysis Time Series
https://climatereanalyzer.org/research_tools/monthly_tseries/
South Mid Latitudes removes Tropics and Antarctic from SH (using ERA5 default):
1979 Annual: 10.502 C
2008 Annual: 10.452 C
2009 Annual: 10.525 C
So for those 30 years there was no change whatsoever between 30S and 65S – where many of us live in NZ and Australia.
Same for Australia sans Tasmania:
1979 Annual: 21.911 C
2012 Annual: 21.931 C
That’s not even climate change, let alone anthropogenic climate change.
30
Haha, I’m now convinced Simon is some bottom-tier AI bot. There’s no way someone that deluded walks on this earth.
120
Simon, Jo’s financial contributors are people like me, $50 a time when I can afford it out my monthly superannuation payments. I would be very doubtful if she has any significant contributions from any organisation connected to fossil fuels, which seem to be your concern.
Just to support your regular contribution to the comments I trust that you too click on the “tip jar” every so often, but perhaps that would go against your principles.
140
I bought $200 USD in chocolates last week.
Yummy!
40
I don’t buy newspapers much these days so it put that little bit towards chockies.
https://joannenova.com.au/2024/05/monday-54/#comment-2766126
Sometimes I can hear the cash register go.
20
With NO Climate Emergency existing what is there to mitigate but waste the money on projects to nowhere.
Why do you hate CO2 so much, Simon?
30
That is simply not true Simon.
If you bothered to read the comments on these esteemed pages you would realise most people do not agree with that, especially as only 3-4% of all atmospheric CO2 is of anthropogenic origin.
In any case, like most Leftists you don’t understand the scientific method. Scuentific facts are not established by “consensus” or majority opinion.
Referring to Einstein:
And even more so, your comrades the Chicomms who build two coal fired power stations every week and are by far the world’s largest CO2 emitters with emissions more than twice the next biggest emitter, the US, absolutely don’t care (not that it matters). Indeed, Chicomm emissions are increasing exponentially while those of the US and the rest of the West are flat or decreasing.
SEE graph at https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1850-_Annual_emissions_of_carbon_dioxide,_by_country.svg
What do you notice about that graph, Simon?
Your Chicomm comrades are not stupid. They understand that wind and solar are only for the 鬼佬 gwáilóu fools of the West and are ideal weapons to destroy Western countries, their political and economic competitors.
640
Simon
What do you suggest we use for cheap reliable base power?
As a supplementary question if it is ‘ Green’ should we ignore child labour in the Congo to dig out rare earths or the coerced Uighurs to build the batteries, or the fact that much of the worlds rare earths have been commandeered by china, impoverishing the host countries with unaffordable loans, enormous environmental devastation by the mining of the rare earths, impossibility of recycling the waste green products cost effectively.
Is that alright as we transition from 24/7 power to ‘when the weather gods smile’ intermittency.?
420
Why and who has “universally agreed”?
We are close to hitting the “Green Wall” now.
Since the first COP in Berlin in 1995 global CO2 emissions from energy have increased by over 50%.
Since 2005 and the Paris Agreement global CO2 emissions have increased by over 20%
Clearly most of the people on this planet have not “univerally agreed” to go along with the Climate Cultists and their economy destroying scams.
You may be a follower of Pol Pot and his rebadged “Year Zero” but you are a small minority.
441
Since 2005 and the Paris Agreement
Less loving and more date checking, please!
51
Global CO2 emissions from energy in 2005 = 28203.2 million tonnes
Global CO2 emissions from energy in 2022 = 34374.1 million tonnes
121
>2005 and the Paris Agreement
2015. Typo I’m guessing.
80
Yup
10
You no doubt have regular conversations with your friends on Mars as well as the fairies at the bottom of your garden.
However, your friends on Mars will not be able to assist you with your argument.
Yes, Mars is a little further from the Sun than Earth, however its atmosphere is 96% CO2 compared to 0.04% on planet Earth and so Mars should be a sauna compared to Earth with all that “Greehouse Gas”.
Instead the surface temperature of Mars is -65°C.
280
Simon >”Reducing net greenhouse gas emissions has to happen”
Not sure why, SH anomaly is just now bouncing on 0 anomaly from the 1981-2010 baseline:
GFS 2mT Anomaly
http://www.karstenhaustein.com/reanalysis/gfs0p5/GFS_anomaly_timeseries_global.html
Mid baseline is 1996 but 28 years later zero SH change with still some time to run down from the highs.
There’s an inexorable move down from all the aberrant natural variation lately but the Sky Dragon seems to have run out of puff.
130
ERA5 release lags GFS previous by about a week. GFS is advanced every 6 hrs so near real time.
Still worthwhile looking at ERA5 by latitudinal band:
ERA5 Daily Surface Air Temperature
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/t2_daily/?dm_id=arctic
Hide All then show 2024 and 1981-2010 baseline as for GFS previous for each band: NH, SH, Arctic, Antarctic, Tropics.
Arctic is on the baseline – no change.
Antarctic is fluctuating around the baseline – no change.
NH and SH are +0.9 and +0.7 above the baseline respectively – wild natural variation.
[Note that NH and SH are both influenced by 23.5 degrees latitude of Tropics i.e. overlaps]
Tropics is +0.9 above the baseline – wild natural variation.
So the Tropics is holding up the entire World average, and the NH average, and the SH average. But the Tropics is now on the way down from highs of +1.2 Jan, +1.3 Mar, +1.1 Apr.
There is no “well mixed greenhouse gasses” signiture in any of this – it is entirely naturally driven.
90
>”There is no “well mixed greenhouse gasses” signature in any of this – it is entirely naturally driven”
I’m referring to 21st Century there.
1980 emissions were 32.77 billion tonnes CO2e.
2000 emissions were 40.77 billion tonnes CO2e.
2010 emissions were 49.42 billion tonnes CO2e.
2022 emissions were 53.85 billion tonnes CO2e.
(2020 was covid dip)
Greenhouse gas emissions
https://ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions
The 9.65 bln tn increase 2000-2010 on top of 40.77 each year (2000 base) was during the 2000s “pause” i.e. the GHG increase made no difference to temperature.
There was only a 4.43 bln tn rise 2010-2022 on top of the 49.42 2010 base and yet temperatures went berserk.
Now temperatures are coming back down.
Clearly GHG emissions are NOT driving temperatures this century.
140
“greenhouse gas emissions has to happen, that is universally agreed by everybody”
Hey, I never realized that I was not a member of “everybody”.
I guess Simon’s “everybody” includes only the climate anointed,not the hoi polloi.
200
I don’t agree, and there’s nothing wrong with CO2, it’s good.
250
…wrong
180
The fossil fuel people have zero interest in stopping the Green monster. They are making record profits and cannot dig, pump, process fast enough. CO2 emissions are at an all time high and no one really cares.
The idea of reducing CO2 by reducing fossil fuels usage is a joke. No one actually believes it. And the core idea the human CO2 output makes any difference at all to world CO2 is proven wrong.
When examining the motives of billionaires, assume the worst.
140
It’s all smoke and mirrors, hey TdeF. Smoke from the self igniting lithium batteries and mirrors from all the useless solar panels carpeting some lovely countyside.
120
History will show that windmills and solar farms and their distribution networks and electric cars will be the greatest environmental disasters of the 21st century. And the ones breaking all the rules on pollution and mining and National Parks and water are the Greens.
150
Only the gullible woke Western world is destroying their base load electricity generation,while Jeffrey floats around in his mega yacht and flys in his lear jets, the rest are building coal fired power stations by the 1000s.How is tearing down millions of trees to cover in sun mirrors good for the environment? Or covering whale habitats in windmills good for the environment? So goodluck Simon when the lights go out. Oh, and its been proven but ignored by “scientists ” that CO2 plant food was much higher way before coal-fired power stations.
100
“Reducing net greenhouse gas emissions has to happen, that is universally agreed by everybody.”
Presumption much???
Simon, speaking for 8 billion people
10
Simon
Really? Please provide evidence.
And “everybody” is more than just members of the environmental movement.
90
This thread reminds of a scene from the movie Flying High. Simon is like the woman experiencing the panic attack and the rest of the readers are lining up to help quell his hysteria 😉
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i0GW0Vnr9Yc&pp=ygUWZmx5aW5nIGhpZ2ggc2xhcCBzY2VuZQ%3D%3D
60
A huge, gigantic, monstrous story that’s neatly summarised in the visual at the start. Cartoons are useful.
The underlying premise that atmospheric CO2, in some way, “heats the atmosphere ” is a bizarre piece of Non-Science that is used to enslave millions of workers and divert their tax dollars to more useful ends that are approved of by Mr. B.
340
It’s time we stopped bowing to the Gods of CO2 Induced Global Warming and death by incineration.
CO2 in the atmosphere does not hold, trap or imprison heat, it simply is “there” as a very ordinary component of the atmospheric system.
Certainly, CO2 is vital for all life on the planet, but is Irrelevant to the thermodynamics of the atmosphere.
Atmospheric temperature would be unaffected if CO2 was completely removed and replaced by something else, eg oxygen, nitrogen.
100
But all carbon-based life on earth would end, first the vegetation from lack of fuel (CO2) then the animals (including people) for lack of food. Then cannibals last of all.
40
Hi John,
You seem to have missed two key words and their context: vital and thermodynamics.
20
Just rubbing Simon’s nose in the reality that his heart’s desire would lead to his own extinction. He isn’t smart enough to work that out himself.
30
🙂
00
So Bezos has a 400 foot yacht that is followed by his 265 foot supply ship that has a helicopter pad to take Bezos to his private jet that meets him anywhere in the world he happens to be.
He most sincerely believes in Carbon Dioxide poisoning the planet and his lifestyle proves it so the $10 billion is only protection money so the Davos WEF crowd leaves him alone so he can emit 1,000,000 times as much CO2 in day that a normal human being put out in a lifetime.
460
This could be very good news for the ‘Jo Nova climate and Nature foundation’ strapline ‘striving to combat the climate catastrophe.’
I reckon that should be good for around $20 million.
140
Perhaps Bezos can help out Twiggy Forrest on this one
Why Gladstone? It is the world’s fourth largest coal exporting terminal – let’s export “Green” Hydrogen instead!
And a great place for a gazillion solar panels.
On 2 March 1949, a tropical cyclone made landfall over Gladstone and Rockhampton which resulted in widespread damage to 15 towns in the region. As a consequence there was severe flooding in central Queensland which left 300 people homeless and 1500 homes affected.
In 1972 Cyclone Emily also crossed the Queensland coast just south of Gladstone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdD_vm40frQ
170
Hardly a newsflash that we find ourselves stuck in the cycle of billionaire whims.
(That Pandemic billionaire crusade was painful.)
The New Feudal order.
At least we have Elon Wallace.
I should get an X account, paint my face blue, and tweet ‘Freedom!’.
Maybe Robert the Trump will restored to the throne.
Sounds like the Wallace might be captured and face a public termination in Oz.
180
I’m at the point where I now doubt everything. I look at past wars and wonder whether they were just organised to earn billions for arms billionaires. Other environmental crisis we have experienced over the decades which probably just minted money for companies/ elite with very well timed solutions. I look at COVID and wonder was it all just engineered to make pharmaceutical investors a pile of money? The climate crisis just appears now to be a war against all the successful capitalistic western countries who built their wealth based on economic acceptable energy pricing. (including Australia). I suppose the irony is that the people making money out of dismantling the western economies are capitalists themselves. However you describe it, we the common people are being screwed and those we elect in power to supposedly safeguard our way of life are the useful idiots screwing us the most.
210
Agree. It seems like we’re going rapidly back to the middle ages, when just a few owned the means of production and used private armies to grab more territory. The means of production have changed from land to tech, and private armies have changed from armed people to funded pressure groups and NGOs, but the end result is the same.
90
Check the graph at this link.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/20/twelve-billionaires-climate-emissions-jeff-bezos-bill-gates-elon-musk-carbon-divide
It shows the “carbon” (sic) footprint of the world’s top 12 richest billionaires.
It’s notable that two of the wokest and most Left wing, Gates and Bezos have two of the highest footprints while Elon Musk “right wing, pro-freedom, pro-free-speech conservative” has an incredibly low footprint.
Of course, none of this is surprising.
If it were not for the double standards of the Left they would have no standards whatsoever.
280
Don’t forget Al(show me the money) Gorithm.
50
A. No provable temperature increase worldwide.
2. No link between human action and temperature rise or drop
Thirdly, Mother nature spews Carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and a lot of other elements from volcanoes in far more quantity than puny humans do.
d. Its a damn scam, made up to separate people from money and move tax money to select groups of crooks and nitwits.
230
Temperatures in Antarctica have been falling since 1996, while annual CO2 emissions from energy have increased by over 50%.
A completely negative correlation. No melting of Antarctic ice as foretold by the Climate Cultists.
130
“No melting of Antarctic ice as foretold by the Climate Cultists.”
But – how can that be?
‘The Science is settled’.
Greta told us all so … and … she’s a Doctor now!
Of Divinity, no less, so plainly has a direct line to the Almighty.
Auto, a bit puzzled why I haven’t boiled here – it’s mid-May and I have three layers on, indoors, in London.
00
The people of Germany (by way of their Socialist/Green goverments) have “given” over half a Trillion Euros to stop climate change – all this has achieved is the destruction of the German economy with many industries competing on global markets relocating to China.
Bezos will need to give a lot more before Temo cuts his lunch.
170
“The people of Germany (by way of their Socialist/Green governments) have “given” over half a Trillion Euros to stop climate change – all this has achieved is the destruction of the German economy with many industries competing on global markets relocating to China.”
How many trillionths of a degree has it cooled Gaia.
120
Begs the question of why?
) If your rich enough it’s actually cheap virtue signaling by percentage.
) Said virtue signaling is good for business/PR, and probably buys access within the halls of power.
But most of all it indicates that it’s all a religious cult. The term crusade was used up thread. We are seeing the modern day version of the crusades.
92
Begging the question is part of Big Money’s PsyWar.
It expects us to accept it is virtue signalling when, for instance, it funds the Green Left to promote a Net Zero initiative. In fact, the real intent is to increase capital and income from its speculative investment in new technology platforms.
The Green Left are being played for PsyWar suckers.
50
Who would have thought that Bankers would be so deceitful? How appropriate are all the little asides in the list of Bank frauds being perpetuated in perpetuity? Mind you Federal Reserves and The World Bank have been leaders in financial manipulation and skulduggery for 200 years.
110
The whole carbon credits system is a creative use of enronomics the use of creative accounting to give value to something that is worthless. The Enron saga ended in tears hopefully so will those who try to explore these carbon markets for personal gain.
120
No doubt your assertions will prove correct but likely not before significant damage is done to an unsuspecting world!
70
“The Crooked E”, what a great description.
40
Well, finally some honesty from the green movement. It amazes me how they still think they’re the underdog, fighting the power. When the power and money is actually very much on their side.
The big difference being that the power still like to make money (for them). The true greens don’t understand reality at all, and want everyone to stand still, breath slowly, and do not pick that stick up in the forest, it could ruin everything.
50
I recall Ian Thorpe, pre button nose, when he was bleating about climate change online all the time, and flying all over the world attending parties. I asked him on Instagram how he justifies all this travel, and he actually replied, that he just buys the offset option on the ticket, which cost a few dollars if I recall correctly. Lol. Sums it all up really.
120
70
Nigeria to the rescue!
Nigeria is developing a plan to create a $2.5 billion carbon market. The purpose of this market is to encourage investments, reduce emissions, and promote sustainable growth in Nigeria. A special committee has been appointed to draft a comprehensive plan for activating the carbon market
https://www.environewsnigeria.com/nigerias-carbon-market-activation-blueprint-identifying-potential-drawbacks/#:
60
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
50
Does this mean that email accounts the world over will now be inundated with requests from Nigerian ‘princes’ for funds to save the planet?
30
In one of Sir Les Paterson’s wonderful presentations, he utters the line:
“That’s not a CONFLICT of interest, it’s a CONVERGENCE of interest”.
A VERY useful concept when observing life in general, and politics in particular.
80
A bit like Russ Hinze owning gravel quarries and being QLD minister for roads.
60
” Where’s the conflict, QLD needs roads, I’ve got gravel.” LOL
40
As I remember the parody. “Some say being minister for racing and minister for police as a conflict of interests. I see it as a congruence of interests.”
50
The ‘Colossus of Roads’.
30
I loved the publicly funded road which went to Russ Hinz’s son’s place and stopped. Queensland really needed that road. It was shameless.
60
The Minister for Everything our Russ…….
20
No one says it better than a Nobel prize winner. One being Dr John Clauser, 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics. According to Dr. Clauser, “The popular narrative about climate change reflects a dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world’s economy and the well-being of billions of people. Misguided climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience. In turn, the pseudoscience has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other unrelated ills. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies, and environmentalists. In my opinion, there is no real climate crisis. There is, however, a very real problem with providing a decent standard of living to the world’s large population and an associated energy crisis. The latter is being unnecessarily exacerbated by what, in my opinion, is incorrect climate science.” It’s a huge scam and a big club and we’re not in it.
170
Here’s the last 32 years of their fantasy and easily PROVES that the NON OECD have INCREASED co2 emissions by 14.3 billion tons per year in 2022 compared to 1990 and the OECD have declined slightly per year since 1990.
So can any of our blog donkeys tell us how to REDUCE the NON OECD co2 emissions? The data clearly proves that the NON OECD couldn’t care less.
So why can’t Bezos spend just 5 minutes to look up the data and why can’t the OECD countries also spend 5 minutes to check the data as well?
Very simple sums and yet nobody seems to understand the data?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-country?country=OECD+%28GCP%29~Non-OECD+%28GCP%29
80
So why have we seen record Human FLOURISHING since 1950 and since 1990?
In 1950 life expectancy was just 46 + years and today about 73 years.
Yet population was just 2.5 billion in 1950 and 8.1+ billion today.
In 1990 population was 5.3 billion and life expectancy about 64 years.
This is very easy to find and proves we’ve seen the greatest Human flourishing in history.
So where is their EXISTENTIAL THREAT or CRISIS or EMERGENCY? AGAIN it’s very easy to prove that we’ve just experienced the best climate EVER. Just do the simple sums and follow the DATA.
https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/WLD/world/population
60
Something we take for granted is a major contributor to this increase – the humble toilet and associated sewage treatment system.
The pumping of sewage and its treatment requires affordable and reliable electricity in the developing world.
Wind and solar power do not provide this.
100
How to get politicians to do somehing useful
The Great Stink was an event in Central London during July and August 1858 in which the hot weather exacerbated the smell of untreated human waste and industrial effluent that was present on the banks of the River Thames.
By June the stench from the river had become so bad that business in Parliament was affected, and the curtains on the river side of the building were soaked in lime chloride to overcome the smell. The measure was not successful, and discussions were held about possibly moving the business of government to Oxford or St Albans.
It was coal and steam power to the rescue.
And the magnificient Victorian Crossness Pumping Station is well worth a visit if visting Londonistan.
https://crossness.org.uk/visit/
60
That was the only reason they moved on the problem, if it doesn’t affect them, no action.
30
The greens say humans are the problem. Having more of them, living longer, is catastrophic.
20
Slime should lead by example, and remove themselves from the population right bloody now!
20
News this morning states that NSW and Vic to be blackout prone this summer because, wait for it, renewables have not progressed fast enough in bringing new energy sources to completion.
How about this, the delay in bringing unreliables to the market is the only reason they are NOT enduring blackouts NOW.
70
Albo the Commie is likely to call an early election before the peak of summer in February 2025 which may be a lot hotter than the last two mild summers
The next Australian federal election will be held on or before 27 September 2025
The forecast team continues to favor the dynamical model guidance, which suggests La Niña could form as early as June-August 2024, with higher confidence of La Niña during the following seasons.9 May 2024
An El Niño event can intensify heat waves, increase the severity of bushfires, and contribute to drought conditions. The influence of El Niño is primarily felt in eastern Australia, resulting in warmer-than-usual temperatures and reduced rainfall
https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_advisory/ensodisc.shtml#:
41
So what are we having? A La Nina, or El Nino?
40
If BOM say La Nina, then it’s to be El Nino.
30
I find it amazing that the computer models cannot predict this oscillation, admittedly the most significant event for climate in half the planet. And still buy faster computers to get it wrong? It boggles my mind that anyone thinks they are modelling causes and not random effects.
60
The start of any modelling process begins with the listing of all factors present in the system.
A sheet of paper and a bird will do.
Then, put a line through all factors that are constant or invariable in terms of the analysis and go to the leftovers that are the target.
This has not been done by the global Warming modellers and they have not created any models that link CO2 levels to atmospheric temperature.
It’s all just advertising bluster.
70
Biro
60
That spoiled it.
I thought it was going to end up lining the bird’s cage. About the only *honest* use for a supposed climate model.
60
🙂
Robert ,
Their models are locked up inside expensive computers where nobody can get at them.
If you have to use a bigger computer then you have failed because the aim of modelling is to made a complex system understandable through simplifying it.
00
BoM has ENSO on La Nina Watch, they’ll call it in early July.
What we don’t know, will it be moderate or severe?
01
There is no way Alabanese and Chalmers wants the expected widespread blackouts before the next election. This means an early election for the most unpopular government in Australian history.
80
Election just after ’24 Melbourne Cup day.
20
How anyone can give even a rahzoo to stop the climate changing is beyond true scientific reasoning. Psychosis on a grand scale. Sheer profligate money wasting madness. Bezos has a delusional disorder. He thinks he can buy the climate. Other climate zealots think they can buy the climate on the installment plan.
40
It is of course possible that Bezos is not delusional but knows how to run a scam for fun and profit.
30
Could he be doing something beneficial?
00
Man of La Mancha (1972) – The Impossible Dream Scene
Tilting at Windmills 😁️
40
oh my goodness, I could never watch musicals and they were always on tv.
P.S. But I did make 30 seconds into your clip, which was funny
00
Bezos is buying a profit for a pittance. What is 10 Billion compared to 10 Trillion?
Frighten the Sheep, corral the sheep, fleece the sheep, mutton for dinner.
What a hoax. Only Sheep would allow it.
70
For sure he’s buying something, not sure if it’s anything to do with climate.
40
I was in the Green party 20 years ago, and I could see the money was doing all the talking and the members were all delusional numpties just following what the money was telling them to believe. I left … because it was obvious they were being manipulated.
70