The 2019 United Nations Climate Action Summit will be held in New York on September 23rd. In attendance will be 16 year old Swedish environmental diva Greta Thunberg, who recently sailed across the Atlantic Ocean in a state-of-the-art “carbon neutral” sailboat in order to protest air travel. Her presence is so highly anticipated that on media attendance lists she is the only one mentioned by name. The guest lists look something like this, “Presidents, Prime Ministers, leading environmental scientists and Greta Thunberg!”
Who is Thunberg? A superstar in environmental circles. And the rise of her star has been an extraordinary thing to witness. In 12 short months she went from an impeccant looking teenager skipping school on Friday outside the Swedish parliament building with her famous “School strike for climate” sign, to the recipient of a Nobel peace prize nomination, a spot on Time magazine’s 100 most influential people list, an audience with the Pope and many other heads of state, an open invite to every climate conference on the planet and countless awards and cover stories. If it was possible to have a living person canonized, the paperwork would already be filed.
She was 15 when she achieved such infamy, how does a 15 year old achieve superstar status in a matter of weeks? Well, famous activist parents who just happen to be publishing a book, a well known PR guru pulling strings behind the scenes, total obsession by the media since the first moments of the campaign, thorough coaching by radical environmentalist outfits, tentative links to people like George Soros and Bill Gates etc. There hasn’t been an attempt to make Thunberg seem genuine or “real”, so I won’t waste any more words trying to prove she isn’t.
Whether Thunberg is genuine or completely manufactured really isn’t that important. What is important is the way she is conveying her message and the rabid, almost cult-like following she has amassed and what it says about the environmental movement as a whole. While the left is constantly decrying anybody for having the audacity to criticize a teenager, perhaps they should be a little more conscientious of the fact that they are using a 16 year old as a political stooge. Not just any 16 year old, but one with self-professed mental afflictions like Asperger’s syndrome, obsessive compulsive disorder and “self-mutism.”
The stench of desperation is thick on this latest propaganda campaign and is a canary in the coalmine for how radical the environmental left is willing to become in order to achieve their agenda. Thunberg sounds cult-like in her approach, and the hundreds of thousands of children around the world she has galvanized into protests are more than willing to follow her alarmist example. It’s a bit chilling to hear some of what is coming out of Thunberg’s mouth: things like “I don’t want you to have hope, I want you to panic” and “we have come here to let you know change is coming whether you like it or not” sound more appropriate coming from a lunatic on a street corner yelling about the end of times than a 16 year old girl.
With help from some of the past decade’s premier charlatans, like former US President Barack Obama, who claimed in his 2014 State of the Union Address that “the debate is over… climate change is a fact” the left has decided unilaterally that their science is right, no deliberations necessary. Despite the fact that the media and the universities, who control a vast amount of the “scientists” are almost completely left leaning and biased, the debate is over. Impressionable young minds like Thunberg and her army of feet-stamping minors have taken the sentimentalist bait and don’t need to bother themselves with data or research. The debate is over, Barack Obama said it!
To those who believe the debate is over a few things should be pointed out. In recent news is the development related to Michael Mann’s infamous 1998 “hockey stick graph” which has been cited constantly in the past few decades as the definitive evidence that global warming is real. It was even used as the basis for Al Gore’s 2006 documentary An Inconvenient Truth which earned the former vice president a Nobel Peace prize in conjunction with the IPCC. (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.) When criticized for “data manipulation”, “academic and scientific misconduct” and “poor mathematics” Mann sued his critics for libel in what was known as the “climate change trial of the century.” Just last month, the court threw out Mann’s case and ordered him to pay all legal costs of the frivolous lawsuits. Unsurprisingly, he lost the lawsuits because he could not prove in court how he came up with the numbers on his ominous graph.
If their integrity needed any less credibility, it is important to note the sheer hypocrisy of those radical environmentalists whose words and advice are taken as gospel. I mentioned that Thunberg recently crossed the Atlantic in a state-of-the-art carbon neutral sailboat to protest air travel. This sort of elitist virtue signaling is more insulting than it is admirable. Gainfully employed people typically can’t afford to waste four weeks (round trip) crossing the ocean in a $4 million yacht that was once the personal racing boat of the Rothschilds. The crew who captained the voyage across the Atlantic are flying back to Europe, and being replaced by a crew of five who are flying to New York to bring the vessel home. Thunberg herself admits she “doesn’t know how” she will get back to Europe and unfortunately US lawmaker Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s “trains across the ocean” haven’t begun construction yet. We can assume that when Thunberg is done inculcating the North American continent with fear there will be a convenient last-minute emergency which will necessitate an exception in her promise that she would never fly again.
In another recent display of elitist dissembling, over 100 private airplanes and several chartered yachts graced the atmosphere with their CO2 en-route to Google’s climate change conference in early August. These were all occupied by the politicians and celebrities who tell you to drive hybrid cars and stop having kids because it’s bad for the environment while simultaneously flying their private jets around the world and demanding that all European countries import migrants to replace the declining population rates.
It’s as simple as watching the actions instead of listening to the words of these alarmists to understand what this hysteria is all about. The private planes, yachts, empty mansions bereft of solar panels and reluctance to put wind turbines in the neighborhoods of their summer homes all paint a picture quite opposite of what the liberal vocal elite preaches. They claim to want to save the Earth while completely ignoring the parts of it most culpable for pollution like India and China. This movement was never about saving the Earth, but about control. Each piece of regulation and legislation they pass is another small victory in their goal of chipping away at our personal freedoms.
It is not going unnoticed. On September 6th the chief of the World Meteorological Organization Petteri Taalas admonished climate alarmists in an interview given with a Finnish magazine saying “Climate experts have been attacked by these people and they claim we should be much more radical. They are doomsters and extremists.” He went on to condemn the idea being pushed by environmentalists that children are a negative thing and claimed that the alarmists are using IPCC reports like religious extremists use their bibles, by finding certain pieces or sections from which they try to justify their extreme views.
The co-founder of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore, called Taalas’ remarks the biggest crack in the alarmist narrative in a long time, tipping his hat to actual data and not the hysterical ranting of the political stooges previously mentioned in this article by saying “the meteorologists are real scientists and probably fed up with Greta, Mann, Gore and AOC (Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) catastrophists.”
It sounds like Moore is insinuating a 16 year old may not have the most reputable opinion on climate change science after all. Unfortunately, we get ahead of ourselves expecting this argument to return to a good faith debate on the science, the entire climate change debate has turned into a political debate. Had Thunberg spent less time skipping school to meet with her activist coach she might have learned about the scientific method, which insists on looking at all the evidence in a critical and unbiased manner, not simply kowtowing to emotional extravagance and delirium.
By Eric Alexiev