By: Chris Warren.
So the climate change strikers had their big day on September 20. I’m not sure exactly what they were “striking” against, but that’s not the direction I want to go. I have come up with a plan –a plan that can be easily implemented with no government or industry involvement– that will make a real difference in reducing carbon emissions and by extension reverse climate change, assuming you believe in such things.
My climate change challenge is intended mostly for teenagers, but any climate acolyte can do this.
The challenge is is very clear & straightforward: Close all your social media accounts, and I do mean all of them. Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, and all the rest inhale a lot of electrical power that generates carbon emissions. I do not have exact numbers, but I’ll bet Twitter alone is responsible for millions of kilowatt-hours every year. It takes a lot of juice to push those routers and servers and data centers.
Every time you click “post” a little more carbon is released into the precious world you are tying to save from climate change. If social media use goes down, so too will the demand for the resources and energy required to run them. This is not a big ask. After all, Snapchat is not oxygen. So for the love of Mother Earth, I call on all climate change strikers to close their social media accounts and promise to use them nevermore.
Of course I do not expect even one single climate striker to accept my challenge even though it is a very modest sacrifice. The climate strikers spent the entire day shrieking about how the government, industry, and everyone else must “do something” to reverse climate change, and I’ll bet very few of them ever considered what they should be personally doing themselves.
That is the cult of climate change: They “fight” for their cause without any expectation of paying even a small individual cost. I wonder how many tons of discarded protest signs and latté cups the strikers left behind. I wonder how many of them stopped for fast food before or after the protest. I wonder how many of them actually made meaningful changes in their lifestyle before demanding the rest of us change ours. My intuition says they gave up nothing, except maybe a day at school.
While hypocrisy is bad all by itself, it’s much worse when an entire belief system cannot exist without it.
Through mystical nebulous logic, climate change strikers do not call out the celebrities who live in 10,000 square foot mansions and fly around on private jets to make speeches telling me my pickup truck is the reason young people have no future. For their part, the celebrities claim absolution because they bought carbon offsets.
In woke culture, carbon offsets is the ridiculous doctrine that belching carbon doesn’t count if you pay someone to plant trees in Brazil on your behalf, or some similar penance. It’s the equivalent of throwing trash all over the neighborhood and saying it’s ok because you “offset” it by donating to the local park beautification fund.
While hypocrisy is bad all by itself, it’s much worse when an entire belief system cannot exist without it. The climate change disciples still want Starbucks and Uber rides and a house full of electronics and will go to amusing extremes to explain why they can continue to have these things while someone else is on the hook to do anything hard. They want the world to change, but not their world. Justified hypocrisy is the delusional glue that keeps the useful idiots in line. Without it, the entire cult of climate change collapses under the weight of reality.
For the record, I’ve been a vegetarian for 33 years, have solar panels on my house, and recycle. Is that enough to offset my pickup truck (a truck, by the way, that is driven less than fifty miles per week!)? If there’s a “Pope” of climate change (Al Gore?), I hereby petition him or her to grant me the indulgence.
I’ll start taking the climate change strikers seriously when they start living their lives like it’s a serious issue.
3 thoughts on “A Modest Climate Change Challenge.”
Well done Mike! I’m so sick of the hypocrisy. My contribution will be to turn off the tv so I can avoid being lectured to by an angry 16 year Swedish girl with obvious mental health problems.
Amen, Chris! In northern Minnesota and Canada the glaciers melted about 10,000 years ago — thousands of years before the industrial revolution and large-scale use of fossil fuels began. And, believe me -it took some warming to melt all those glaciers!
Before that there were volcanos and the earth spread wide creating a rift that ran from the Great Lakes area SW into mid-America. When the glaciers melted they filled the rift, creating the Great Lakes. Global warming is not something new, nor is it caused solely by man.
What will things look like a thousand years from now? Who knows? Perhaps seas will rise a few hundred feet, or more, and people will be living in arcs, or in the remaining higher lands –recharging their electric devices with electricity from large offshore wind generators, or a new generation of nucs. But then,perhaps we’ll be fighting an increasingly cold environment and lower water levels. Me, I’ll take the warming scenario -it’s tough snowshoeing in deep snow or walking on glaciers, trying to avoid those dam glacial crevasses. But it might just be a long journey according to the laws of entropy.
Praise the Lord, and pass the ammo -who knows what’s to be encountered along the way! Good luck to all!
Thanks for your comments, Mike. I’m not against a clean environment, and there probably is something to climate change, but protesting for protesting’s sake gets nothing done. I can’t take them seriously when they say do something! when they’re not willing to do anything themselves.
Comments are closed.