Europe's battered Green movement tries to salvage climate agenda

Is it possible to get articles on this site without a hard-left slant? The green movement is battered because years of screeching about the sky falling, exaggerated claims of catastrophe, and proposals and policies that inflict more harm than good, are wearing thin on a public whose costs of and restrictions on living are escalating.

All the while the people in charge making these rules are living high on the hog, immune to the damage their policies are causing while trying to egg on the doom-mongering and slandering anyone who opposes them as "far-right" - as if pointing out the obvious that solar and wind can't reliably replace nuclear or fossil-fuel power generation links someone to that nasty little Austrian from last century. Pathetic, and no wonder they're losing credibility fast.

The climate issue is burning more than ever. This issue must be addressed if we do not want to commit suicide. However, the advancements in electrical transportation and in solar energy provide some alleviation and some hope.

solar and wind can't reliably replace nuclear or fossil-fuel power generation

 Wind cannot, but solar can. Nuclear is good too. And we also have retention technology now. Fossil fuel is our nemesis.

NBToday  02:21 pm JST

The climate issue is burning more than ever. This issue must be addressed if we do not want to commit suicide. However, the advancements in electrical transportation and in solar energy provide some alleviation and some hope.

 

solar and wind can't reliably replace nuclear or fossil-fuel power generation

 Wind cannot, but solar can. Nuclear is good too. And we also have retention technology now. Fossil fuel is our nemesis.

Aside from your admission that nuclear is good too, I'm afraid the facts are against you, and more people are coming to understand this. Hence the hit pieces appearing in the corporate and government media attempting to link people who question the net zero insanity to fascism. When they can't win an argument on facts, they go for name-calling and denouncement, a typically collectivist authoritarian tactic that only shows how weak they really are.

Wonder who the oil and gas companies and big landowners are funding. They have all the money. And subsidies. As they say, always follow the money.

And subsidies. As they say, always follow the money.

Where do you think the subsidies come from? Mars? Nope. They're funded by the same taxpayers being screwed by the governments who hand over those subsidies.

I'm afraid the facts are against you

What facts?

Yes, you are right. Big land and big oil get big subsidies from the taxpayer because they influence the governments that hand them over. They won't want to see that diminished, will they? So, they will tend to fund parties and policies that keep the subsidies in place for doing the same as they have always done. Greens seem to provide a threat to that. Plus there is the even bigger problem of a threat to the trillion dollar a year global profits of oil and gas. They have very deep pockets to fund any opposition. And do. Hence, follow the money, as many are wont to say.

This is not good.

This means whatever catastrophe they were warning the world before is coming now with certainty.

Anybody recalls the predictions/science projections?

When and what are coming ? Can't recall now because nevee seen anybody say themagain for a long time now

Climate change has accelerated since the last EU election, pushing the world this year to cap its first 12-month spell of temperatures more than 1.5C above pre-industrial times. Polls show most European voters - around three-quarters - remain highly concerned.

So we already hit the lower limit they set. Ah it says more than so past the limit. What are suppose to happen now that we're past 1.5 C

Yes, you are right. Big land and big oil get big subsidies from the taxpayer because they influence the governments that hand them over. They won't want to see that diminished, will they? So, they will tend to fund parties and policies that keep the subsidies in place for doing the same as they have always done. Greens seem to provide a threat to that. Plus there is the even bigger problem of a threat to the trillion dollar a year global profits of oil and gas. They have very deep pockets to fund any opposition. And do. Hence, follow the money, as many are wont to say.

You're partly right, in that the big industries you mentioned take an each-way bet by funding both sides to keep the subsidies coming. But the Greens are ideological purists, and are quite prepared to impoverish their countries to further their red-green watermelon agenda - with themselves in charge, of course and immune from the damage they wreak.

ianToday  05:29 pm JST

This is not good. 

This means whatever catastrophe they were warning the world before is coming now with certainty.

Anybody recalls the predictions/science projections?

When and what are coming ? Can't recall now because nevee seen anybody say themagain for a long time now

They'll eventually be right, but the Sun will have to run out of its hydrogen fuel first. We'll be alright for a while yet.

If people who call this "mother nature doing what she does" are so right about their beliefs, I wonder how their crystal ball sees say when it will end. Will few survive? Will it continue until we all die? The climatologists have made predictions that have all come to be and they say that human activity is the cause. Let's pretend (now, mother nature believers, I'm just saying let's pretend, okay?) that they are right. Would it hurt to try out their suggestions? It may at least slow down our doomsday. Exxon and others might suffer a little bit for a little while and if science is wrong, why we could go back to doing what humans do.