There Is No Climate Emergency

My concern about all this is it's getting out of hand. It's less about climate and more and more clear about system change. When a little girl tells you she wants you to panic you know things are a tad askew.

Greta says: I don't want you to be hopeful, I want you to panic. I want you to feel the fear I feel every day ..."

Selfish if not narcissistic of her, would you say? She's right out of Lovecraft.


When we're faced with a challenge or problem we always say 'don't panic'. Why? Because we don't want to over react to a perceived danger or issue. We want to remain calm and rational so as to not make a mistake or, in the case of politics, bad policy.

Yet here we are. Hysterically over reacting. For the love of God plastic straw bans are based on a kid's school project and not empirical science. Heck, the plastic ban as a whole is rooted in shoddy anti-science reasoning.

The scientific and economic illiteracy (led by illiberal minds like Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders who think if we don't have enough money to pay for NGD, you can just print more of it without consequence) on display threatens our ability to achieve true progress. What the neo-Marxist eco-terrorists are proposing isn't feasible and is rooted in anti-humanism.

When the Liberal party says it wants to achieve zero emissions by 2050 it's potentially condemning Canada to economic collapse or at least a low growth environment which results in less prosperity.. At our base, we're a fossil fuels economy and thinking we can just change this in 30 years is not only irresponsible but absurd. Canadians should ponder deeply what the Liberals are saying here. It's not a good thing particularly considering the fact the propaganda surrounding CO2 and fossil fuels is hopelessly political and laced with manipulations and deception.

Do we really want to change based on a lie?

This is alarmism. Don't be a useful idiot.

Don't panic. Stay calm. And....

Listen to the real science.


What The Hell Is Going On At The New York Times?

The old legacy media behemoth New York Times reminds me of the novel 'The Leopard' and the film 'The Magnificent Ambersons'. A Once a dynastic and aristocratic newspaper 'of record' slowly erodes into obscurity and decadence.

It's really easy to observe this. First there was the Jayson Blair scandal. While it was dismissed, if memory serves me right, as though it was 'just one of those things and we're only human'', it seemed like a pretty big one for me. How does a newspaper with the power and resources of the NYT allow this to happen? We're always told to watch for 'fake news' and here's a major paper engaging in, well, fake news.

From that point on, they have issued correction after retraction after correction. The NYT is not above letting a narrative lead before facts are gathered or engaging in smear hit pieces (as they did with Dave Rubin). And they're hardly alone as their fellow sister Ivy League debutante The Washington Post makes an ass of itself on a, I'd say, semi-regular basis. One of those shinier moments was when they went after a bunch of kids putting them in jeopardy through their patently irresponsible fake journalism.

Democracy for the win WaPo!

There were, for example, charges of plagiarism against former editor Jill Abramson.

But are these couple of examples surprising given what we're learning about its editorial staff?

Well, there was the unsubstantiated story about Brett Kavanaugh cleared by editor James Dao. Of course, Vox did what all left-wing rags do and try and claim the right 'spun' this wrongly and made a mountain out of a molehill. Yeh, sure.

And AOC doesn't deserve to be constantly verbally spanked with facts about her ignorant illiberal gibberish.

From Dao's twitter bio:


New York Times op-ed editor. I assume"
I might be old fashioned, but I always thought a journalist and editor shouldn't, you know, assume?

I digress.

One of the more infamous example was the hiring of Sarah Jeong and her manic anti-white screeds. She later claimed she was only defending herself from internet trolls. Whites no doubt.

More recently, there was Tom Wright-Piersanti.

Though perhaps a self-hating woke white privileged hipster, his ire was directed agains the Jews.

As if these four examples aren't enough. Then another two popped up recently.

Like usual, I'm sure she thinks the real racists are the ones bringing this to light. Hey, they created the toxic atmosphere of digging up the past, right? Something, something, live and die by the...sword is it?

Then there's one Jazmine Hughes. Hughes is black so she gets totes a pass. Free reign racism on this organic plantation farm baby!

Oh. Isolated you may think and assert? Seems like a habit to me. 

Despite all this, is it fair to impugn the entire paper?

Perhaps not. It doesn't mean there's some real reporting going on and this is mostly restricted to the opinion/editorial side. I don't know.

Still, the interesting part is this is probably fixable. 


The NYT. Where stained ascots meet woke millennials and racist SJW affirmative action hires sip poorly stirred Martini on warn out couches and drab wallpaper. All crying and yelling at the moon for a world long lost and narratives formed to shape the world in their image mocked - and worse - ignored.

Being GreenGreta

Ok. I mentioned I would impart my thoughts on Greta - aka Pipi Propagandastocking; aka GreenGreta; aka as Angry Scared Greta.

Let's leave aside the long history of the left using children in their schemes and scams from Hitler Youth (and this is how use an analogy) to Teachers Unions in contemporary times.

When all else fails, throw the kids into the mix and appeal to emotions. Obama did it when he tried to bring in gun control policy.

'Don't believe me! Believe these kids!"



Late last week I got an email from my daughter's school (a private and once proud Catholic school. Alas, the emphasis on the Catholic part has waned it would appear) notifying parents of the climate change protest organized by Greta Lundberg and her grimy, manipulative handlers.

My wife asked her if she was planning to go and she said 'no'. Her mother replied, 'Phew. Good. Your father wasn't going to let you go!'


Here's why.

To me, after reading a little backstory into this girl, she suffers from some serious mental disorders including OCD and Asperger Syndrome. As for the mental illness assertion, this is tricker. She described having selective mutism and depression (which included self-starving) but those could be coping mechanisms to the Asperger Syndrome and so we shouldn't be too flippant with claiming she has mental illness.

Not an easy combo to deal with. And apparently, her sister is also afflicted with severe mental disorders.

None of this, of course, excludes her from criticism since she chose to enter the public realm.

She, as per her own account, became frightened of the prospects of what climate change could do to earth and everyone in it. Before she was 10 years old, She feared the Apocalypse (ironic given how the left hates the Bible and religion. Although, one wouldn't be wrong in asserting they simply replaced Christianity with another religion. In this case, Climate dogma decorated with the requisite fears and doomsday scenarios) and she set out to prevent this from happening by warning us all.

With these problems, her parents chose to push her into the limelight rather than get her the help she needs and deserves.

By not doing so, I feel it's tantamount to child abuse. Put it this way, if she was some average student in some average town, it's not a stretch child services would be involved.

But she's a celebrity and a cause celebre with a narrative that fits the zeitgeist perfectly. So she's good to go.

How anyone would take a child with no life experience or sufficient scientific literacy seriously is beyond my pay grade to grasp.

It's a simple calculus that's unfolding before your eyes: Child has mental illness, child sees climate burning, child is terrified, parents exploit child...and the result is her having a neurotic, mental breakdown on international TV.

That's not passion. It's literally a scared and vulnerable child who should be at damn school and keeping her childhood happy.

Her parents are terrible people and parents who send their kids on Friday are no better. Their indifference or lack of information only fuels the madness of adults using kids as Child-Prophets of climate doom.

Now she's in the public spotlight where she's fair game. The idea she can wag and scold as people venerate her and not be criticized is preposterous. How dare we attack this girl?!? It's the same old and tiresome screams whenever AOC is held to account for her nonsensical diatribes and illiberal disposition.

As for the asshole so-called adults in the room. Go look up Sarah Silverman comparing her to Jesus. Others have compared her to Joan of Arc. She makes the talk show rounds including The Daily Show. All are playing their part in this sad story. She's their prophet in the religion of climate change. Her mother claims she can see CO2 - an odourless and colourless gas.

I can't but help think this won't end well for Greta once the dates slotted for doom come and go.

Despite all this, I wish her well because she's just a kid. 


The immature and intellectually stunted adults in the room, of course, can't help themselves from being total immature jackasses in encouraging her.

She has been given an 'Alt Nobel peace prize'. You know, the ribbon given to such men of peace like Arafat, Gore and Obama.

I'm just waiting for some Ivy League school to give her an Honorary degree.


Despite His Clown World Behaviour, Trudeau Still Hanging In

I just read that the Conservatives and Liberals are neck and neck in the polls - to the extent you can trust the polls.

Mind boggling despite all the dubious actions of one of the most incompetent, arrogant and ideological party yet in this country.

Leave aside the scandals (that have made democracy a joke here) and policies (that attack free speech and liberty). Just from a decent and moral angle, this PM has been a failure.

Just a couple of examples.

He admitted to groping a woman and his response was to drag everyone else down to his level claiming it was a teachable moment of the country.

More recently, he spun his blackface antics again into one where the country shares in his own stupidity citing we're a 'racialized' (whatever the fuck that means) country with many people who still feel marginalized in the face of overt and subjective racism.

Listening to this clown speak you'd think Canada was a shithole. Yet, at the same time, he says Canada is the 'best country in the world'.

His spinning sophistry is truly remarkable.

But there it is. Canadians still think he's fit to run this country.

Ah the shortcomings of democracy.

Climate Change Ka-Ching!

I have my thoughts on GreenGreta and will get to them shortly. But first....a couple of climate videos.


I now take the position that climate change is mass hysteria. It's worth noting that it's one thing to care for the environment and want to be conscious about how we impact it and quite another to take the position that earth is in trouble and humans are destroying it therefore we need to enact draconian laws that will impact humans negatively thinking and believing because the 'science is settled' it will have a positive effect on the environment. This is problematic because what if the premises are all wrong? What if it's not 'settled'?

Will they care about the unintended consequences that may occur? Not very compassion, say, if our privileged Western standards determine a set of policies that result in the mass starvation of people in developing countries, no?

It's an anti-humanist position to take and it's no secret one of the tenets of climate change followers keep is the need to 'destroy capitalism'. As one sign at a protest showed, 'System Change!'

Which is precisely, among other things including how date is being manipulated, what skeptics (aka deniers to proponents of climate change)are warning against.

I think they lost the plot when they began to irresponsibly use children as pawns in their propaganda with Greta being most popular at the moment as well as looking to silence counter views.

At this point, you can believe that we should be responsible in our actions and interactions with the environment - which to me, the West does a better job than any other civilization - and this is laudable. However, we should be extremely cautious at the laws and policies we're looking to implement on this crusade. From where I sit, they will less help the environment and more line up the pockets of people in a position to profit off the racket.

We shouldn't be rushing into things. Electric cars are an example. The government is forcing auto makers into target dates to meet certain quotas despite the market and engineering behind EV's isn't anywhere near where it needs to be. They do this because it's believe the know-how is there but there was no will so it needed to be forced.

This is foolish. If car builders weren't doing it it's because there's a logical reason - from economic feasibility to market to demand to plain old viable logistics - for it. But it's conspiratorially believed corporations don't want to 'do right' and gosh-golly we're gonna make them do it!

For example, ironically, the technology of internal combustion continues to evolve and get more efficient but the actual production of an EV is not very friendly to the environment. Some will contend yes but we'll be removed from our dependence on oil and gas in the long run but this very much has to be seen. The idea fossil fuels is pure dirt is actually misleading as Patrick Moore contends in the video linked.

Besides, it's not like climate prognosticators have a great track record, right?

We're not as scientifically literate as we may think and as I delve more and more into this, I'm starting to fear that how we respond is going to be, ironically, more catastrophic than the climate itself.


Trudeau Blocks RCMP Investigation Into SNC-Lavalin On Eve Of Election Announcement

It boggles the mind how putridly arrogant Justin Trudeau is.

He's the overlord of a corrupted Liberal party.

What's more troubling, is the ability of a government to block an investigation.

Trudeau's cynical shenanigans are a disgrace and shines a light directly upon this petty, juvenile punk of a man.

Canadians should vote to reign him in and fire his sorry wannabe authoritarian ass.


Polluted And Compromised Science

Some articles you should be aware of.

Separate physics courses for minorities at Stanford.

The unintended or even predictable consequences of this should be interesting.


Once again, the progressive left misrepresent the arguments made about Greta Thunberg. It's less about her and more about her dealing with Asperger Syndrome and the impression that her parents are taking advantage of hereto push out their own climate change agenda.

It has nothing to do with misogyny or other usual and tiresome assertions designed to detract from the argument made.

It does smell as though it's all carefully planned.

Is it child abuse? To me, it looks likes it. You psychologically scare kids about climate while using them as politics pawns in an adult world?

Yeh. Not good.


You know. At this point, if you're still using '97% consensus' as pat of your argument to defend man made climate change, you really need to be more curious.

What fascinates me about this is a) it has long been challenged that the consensus is even reliable and b) is how they talk as if 97% consensus is a permanently fixed figure. As if people's minds can't change and c) how they got away with misrepresenting the work of some of the scientists in their claim.

More details here as CEI is asking NASA to take down the claim from its website.

That NASA is peddling this nonsense is somewhat problematic if not downright bizarre.

The claim at this point is just plain irrelevant anyway. Always was.


Michael Mann is hiding some data. Dude sues for libel and then refuses to produce the documents that could put it all to rest.

What's he hiding?

The Hockey Stick theory has gone the way of the DoDo bird and 97% consensus it has been that thoroughly challenged and debunked.


Too many white people.

Remember. Maddow is a Rhodes Scholar.

I know. Makes you wonder.

Remember also. They're obsessed with gender and race. The side that says there's no such thing as biological gender simultaneously believe there's an oppressive patriarchy.

Their logic is filled with so much sophistry and as many fallacies, it's impossible to follow or rebut.

This NPR article could be featured in the 'Fall of the West.' instalment.

Fall Of The West Reason #848585856

I don't wade into the cess pool of mob madness that is Twitter voluntarily preferring instead to come across Tweets that I pick up from others.

For example....

Follow @AlGalpin

No, this is not a joke.

He was being serious.

I'm hardly what one would characterize as a weapons guy but I do own a shot gun, a pellet gun, a small hunter's knife and four different styles and sizes of Swiss Army knives.

I'll tackle the inanity of his bewildered stupidity in a second. 

First, it's simple. It's handy, normal and and perfectly legal to own such items despite the hysterical emotional narratives of the zeitgeist in the West. Boy Scouts and young kids - boy or girl - learn to use them responsibly at very young ages. 

It's good to be proficient with such devices in a free society. 

Second, pocket knives are incredibly useful. 

Third, women like men. Not emasculated cucks.

Which, every time I read something out of England, is what they've seemingly become. And Canada is not that far behind when we have a cuck supreme as head of the government at the moment. 

It's worth noting England is the place where they want to ban knives and in some cases police have been known to confiscate people's property which includes.....butter knives.

Laugh. But we're not far off from this mental, dystopian, pearl clutching behaviour.

The final point is notice how this person doesn't understand why a 17 year-old would need a pocket knife.

This mentality falls right in line with people who say 'why anyone needs a gun' or any other thing they don't have themselves.

It's a remarkably paternalistic and self-absorbed opinion to have.

People do and have all sorts of things for different reasons. 

It's why it's best to live and let live but nestled behind such opinions are nasty, nattering nannies who look to take away people's rights. Is there any doubt this guy doesn't support gun rights?

In short, live and let live and mind your own damn beeswax if don't understand why someone doesn't do something you don't like.

You have to beat these people back with a fricken house sweeper. 


Canadians Are Appallingly Apathetic

I was reading about how the Liberals and Conservatives are in a virtual deadlock going into the election in October.

Which is shocking given the behaviour and poor governance of perhaps one of the most ideological and arrogant government seen in a loooong time - if ever.

Setting aside the stupid and sophomoric antics of the Prime Minister, there's also a troubling reality of his willingness to essentially break the laws and commit ethics violations.

Which ties in very well with him saying he 'admires China's basic dictatorship.'

Look. People. My fellow compatriots. Trudeau is but a poor leader with a shallow mind.

The whole SNC-Lavalin affair may just be par for the course in the world of shady business and politics, but what happened during and after it is the part Canadians should be focused on.

One should just read Mario Dion's findings in detail. It's truly breathtaking in its violations that could but come from an arrogant body politic.

From attempting to influence an AG to circumnavigate the rule of law, to firing her for not bending to changing prosecutorial rules in the criminal code after heavy lobbying from a company to explicit violations to the Conflict of Interest Act.

Above all, his claim of him having done so was to nobly 'save jobs' also runs into direct violation of the Conflict of Interest Act which specifically says an AG must not take into consideration the 'economic interest of the nation' in order to decide if a prosecution can move forward.

Trudeau, at the end of it all, was willing to ignore the rule of law to 'save 9000 jobs'.

This is how banana republics and tin pot dictators behave. Pick and chose what they like in the laws.

Essentially, as we found out the Act is toothless. In other words, just a bunch of 'hey. don't do it and we'll trust you to not break the spirit of these words!'

Along came Justin who shat all over that notion.

What good is a nation if it can't even held its own leaders to account despite our brave proclamations of being committed to the rule of law?

Justin failed spectacularly on this front and Canadians are willing to give him another mandate.

Doesn't say much about us as a vigilant and diligent citizenry on guard for thee and our democracy.

Appalling apathetic.

And disgraceful.