Tag Archives: environmental activism

“…demands made by Greta Thunberg would put global prosperity at risk and exacerbate world hunger.”

In the interview Vahrenholt, a leading founder of Germany’s modern environmental movement, tells the NDR that following the demands made by Greta Thunberg would put global prosperity at risk and exacerbate world hunger. He says the amazing improvement human society has seen over the last 100 years is thanks to “reliable energy supplies”.

“A declaration of a fake emergency is just like yelling “fire” in a crowded theatre”

“A couple of days after skeptics were banned by The Conversation, came an article advising how people who do illegal, potentially dangerous things can use the “climate emergency” as a legal defense.” click here

Oil companies fund climate alarmism (Is this why the price of gas is climbing?)

“Climate alarmists often accuse skeptics, like myself and independent groups like the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow and Heartland Institute, of being in the pay of Big Oil. This is completely false – the Big Lie repeated so often that people eventually believe it. We do not receive even a dime from Big Oil. It’s part of the green fairy tale that skepticism exists only because the oil companies are funding it.” click here

Greenpeace hipocrisy

“We have made a mistake, one that we have tried to correct,” Greenpeace International, based in Amsterdam, admitted in mid-November, adding it allowed Rainbow Warrior II “to be scrapped on a beaching yard in Bangladesh, in a way that does not live up to the standards we set ourselves and campaigned with our allies to have adopted across the world.” click here

The business model of Greenpeace

“Greenpeace have successfully created a public perception that they are fighting to protect humanity, nature and the environment from the evils of corrupt industries and vested interests. This perception is so popular and wide-spread that whenever Greenpeace speaks out on an issue it is automatically assumed to be true, and anybody who questions Greenpeace’s claims is assumed to be corrupt. However, as we will discuss in this report, the reality is almost exactly the opposite…” click here

Environmental activist groups repeat history; refusal to meet with EPA Administrator disingenuous

Government agency representatives meeting with advocacy groups of all political sides is a normal practice within the US federal regulatory system. Ex parte communications for information exchange are certainly allowed under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and can be productive for both parties if done in the right manner. Concern about “transparency” is a red herring because any and all conversations of such meetings must be documented and placed in the corresponding regulatory docket. 

It is disingenuous if an advocacy group from one political side, when invited refuses to meet with EPA officials, and then later complains that groups opposing their position are meeting with the EPA officials.

These same environmental advocacy groups used similar tactics in the 1980s and 1990s where these groups filed lawsuits to drive much of EPA regulatory activity through court orders.

“An environmental group declined an offer to meet with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt in 2017 over concerns the meeting would not be “transparent,” E&E News reports.” click here

Student newsletter editor, sociology professor suffer from Christianophobia?

Christianophobia = an irrational animosity towards or hatred of Christians, or Christianity in general. (McMillan Dictionary)

“The article relies heavily on Iliff School of Theology sociology professor Antony Alumkal, whose book Paranoid Science Owens asserts “charts the long and complicated relationship between science and the American Christian evangelical movement, examining the intra-religious tensions that have accompanied various strands of science denial, including the intelligent design and anti-environmental movements.” 

Expanding on this, Owens falsely claims “far-right American evangelicals have been responsible for some of the most radical opposition to scientific positions regarding topics such as climate change and evolution, working in close tandem with secular free-market idealogues.” [sic]” click here