Climate change freight train accelerating, the bridge is out, and Lord of the Flies children calling the shots. Nothing to do but enjoy the scenery until the climate masterplan blows sky high


Ah, we do live in crazy times. Here in the western world, that is. Much of the world remains focused on what humans have for centuries – ensuring enough food for the day, enough firewood or other fuel for the time being, and enough potable water for household duties. But here in the west, we have evolved into a whole new sphere of worry, one borne of a few generations for whom everything they ever wanted has been handed to them, in little worlds so coddled and helicoptered that hardship is now defined as poor wifi.

Because humans are susceptible to fear, and because fear is a very useful tool, this generation of young humans has been targeted as instruments of social change, under the guise of climate change. One example among many is the “3% project”, the work of several climate activist groups including Ecojustice, the same group that is working to make skepticism about climate dogma illegal. That’s right, a group that is trying to make free speech illegal is now partial architect of a project to persuade school children that fossil fuels are evil, and that anyone who says they aren’t is a shill for Big Oil (and possibly a criminal as well, as Bernie Sanders himself has declared that “fossil fuel executives” are). This “3% Project” has had mandatory showings in schools.

The latest culmination of the climate industry is a group of Canadian teenagers who have been funded by the David Suzuki Foundation to sue the federal government for…well, it’s hard to say what they’re actually suing for. According to news reports, the kids have “suffered specific, individualized injuries”, have lost “parts of their everyday culture”, and that these young Canadians “can’t dream, pursue a career or think about raising children in the face of a deteriorating climate.” The parallels to Lord of the Flies are astonishing: “The book portrays their descent into savagery; left to themselves on a paradisiacal island, far from modern civilization, the well-educated boys regress to a primitive state.”

At the same time, unbeknownst to them because David Suzuki & co carefully shield these little ears from the real world, Germany’s renewable experiment, the world’s most aggressive, is on the ropes.  Germany has had flat-lined emissions levels since 2009, despite spending $36 billion per year over the last 5 years on renewables. By 2025, Germany will have spent $580 billion on renewables with little environmental impact overall. Now, resistance to new projects is widespread across the country, making the 2025 target even harder to hit.

On this side of the pond, California, a global leader in attempting to go to renewable energy, has spent $100 billion on renewables, and is now enjoying the life of a third-world country with power outages being enforced whenever the predictable annual dry season arrives. Rubbing salt in the wound, people who jumped on the EV bandwagon are now finding that that maybe wasn’t such a great idea, and that possibly gasoline has benefits they may have swept under the rug as they sit at home immobile in the dark.

Meanwhile, back in Canada, the group of terrified/dreamless/doomed/decultured/suffering/perma-childless youngsters that is suing the government scored one of most bizarre victories in legal history – the defendant, federal environment minister Catherine McKenna, is cheering them on. In the US, two states are currently suing ExxonMobil for providing the fuel that keeps those citizens alive, while simultaneously in Canada kids are suing a climate-activist government that appears to hope they win.

As has been said countless times, you can’t make this stuff up. You can’t fight it either. It’s a new plague sweeping the world, like millions of youths with suicide vests strapped on, except these youths don’t know what explosives are. Dr. Suzuki prefers not to tell them.

Against this force, what do fossil fuel companies have to say for themselves? Generally not much other than to point to those little charts, up and to the right, all of them, showing rising fossil fuel consumption year in and year out, for coal, oil and natural gas. Those little charts are tiny encapsulations of life as we know it. That is the entire world voting through usage, including every hypocritical activist. Providers of the world’s fuels, the reliable fuels that keep 7 billion people alive, have actively tried to state their case, to no avail. Their efforts are like straight-arming an avalanche.

We need to realize the impossibility of fighting this tide, of trying to reason with a cohort that will enlist children to fight their political war.

This incredible, dumbfounding, global shit show will not stop until a major catastrophe occurs. Fuel supplies will be strangled and people will freeze to death, or mass power outages from unreliable power sources like wind and solar will lead to some sort of humanitarian disaster. And the youth will rise up and shout that we need to try harder, and the cycle will repeat, until the dead bodies are piled sufficiently high for the light bulbs to start going on in these young minds, the first suspicions that maybe they’ve been lied to.

All we can do is sit back and watch the tragedy unfold.

While watching the world bite the hand that feeds, use your spare time wisely to learn about energy reality! Order a copy of “The End of Fossil Fuel Insanity” available at, or You will be eternally grateful you did.


Donations to keep this site free of influence and of ads gratefully accepted! In any multiple of $5. Thanks!



Screen Shot 2019-02-07 at 7.59.59 PM





  1. Oldtimer64 says:

    We need a famine.


  2. matismf says:

    Nothing that an appropriate application 0f .308 can’t rapidly repair…


  3. Robbie says:

    I realize the kids have been taught a fairy tale in school and much of the media now, which will have plenty of scary story real world consequences besides their own mental health. Already, according to the estimates I looked up 5-10 years ago, around 40,000 more people starved to death during the late 2000’s global food price spike as a result of ethanol subsidies. The estimates seemed to range from 10,000 to 200,000.

    Meanwhile, while it’s appropriate to have concerns about projected excessive warming for other countries, Canada is set to benefit from warming probably up to even 3 or 4 degrees. I read a review of projected costs in different regions which mentioned twice that benefits for northern temperate countries are dominated by “the Canada effect”.

    But even in Canada the kids have been taught the fairy tale, during a time when surface and satellite temperatures were so flat that I believe two or three grade cohorts were born, grew up, and graduated school in a stretch of time when there was no statistically significant warming (excluding potential increased ocean uptake) in their entire lives. They have no idea, quite the opposite, as global warming – which at 1 degree above the cool 1850 baseline has with little question been overall strongly positive so far – is coming up as a stressor for suicidal teens.

    It’s definitely a freight train. There is good news though. Climate economists seem to uniformly recommend policies that I believe wouldn’t impose a severe cost for decades (primarily a carbon tax starting at $3-15 per ton of CO2) which would give us the necessary 2+ decades to see if the low levels of warming this century are a strong trend. If climate engineering gains enough cachet it’s possible that a backstop technology like Marine Cloud Whitening estimated to cost 30 million a year will calm everyone down. (If they want to be…) The tech seems to have the potential to dampen hurricanes and reduce rainfall in targeted areas, and maybe could be adapted to increase rainfall as a side benefit.

    There is a worst case scenario, but even that isn’t the end of the world. Say climate activists succeed in wasting 2-3% of the world’s GDP for multiple decades. I saw a recent UN recommendation of 2.5% of GDP per year. I think it would take about 50 years for the costs to add up to the relative amount of world GDP spent on WWI and WWII. So hey, the downside risk is that they probably can’t cause a more severe financial loss than the combined world wars. That would be a tragedy in itself that would extend well beyond finances, and especially if some other severe worldwide event also happened, but it’s not as scary as the full flight Global Warming fairy tale – although I think it would match up to the costs that the IPCC actually projects from a strong CO2 doubling temperature estimate of 3 degrees of warming.


  4. wtfamisupposedtodoforausername says:

    The climate thingy with it’s adolescent promoters will be swept away by war. It’s coming.


  5. abrnsr says:

    Apparently Greta’s handlers & funders are evading the program failures at home in Sweden:

    Liked by 2 people

  1. […] As has been said countless times, you can’t make this stuff up. You can’t fight it either. It’s a new plague sweeping the world, like millions of youths with suicide vests strapped on, except these youths don’t know what explosives are. Their handlers prefer not to sully their minds with trifles like that. Read on… […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: