A-listers flock to Google summit in private jets, mega yachts to talk climate change

Just had to post this for the comic relief but really it's exactly what all true believes do only in a mega scale.

"The world’s rich and famous have flocked to a posh Italian resort to talk about saving Mother Earth — but they sure are punishing her in the process."
"Many of the guests, including Obama and DiCaprio — who has his own climate change foundation — have described global warming as the biggest threat to future generations."
"But according to Italian press reports, the attendees were expected to show up in 114 private jets, and 40 had arrived by Sunday.

"The Post crunched the numbers and found that 114 flights from Los Angeles to Palermo, Italy, where Camp guests landed, would spew an estimated 100,000 kilograms of CO2 into the air"
Many of the attendees were seen in photos tooling around the island in high-speed sports vehicles, including Perry, who has made videos for UNICEF about climate change and was seen in a Maserati SUV that gets about 15 mpg city. "

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/google-summit-celebrities-climate-change

 

Yup, they are hypocrites of the greatest sort... They preach that carbon based fuels are evil, yet they are just fine with making use of them in each of their own private jets...

Hard to take someone seriously when they don't even take their own rhetoric seriously...

 

One would think they're trying to discredit their own propaganda.

 

But, but, but, .... you don’t understand. These are Plato’s elite. Their mental capacities are so vast that any expense and huge situational carbon foots tracks are insignificant compared to the goodness and salvation they generate.

 

This doesnt seem much different than a priest reminding his congregation of the importance of sexual morality while he rapes the alter boy...

 

Apparently there is a Twitter firestorm over this even though the left in this forum is ignoring it.

Google summit on climate change attended by stars in private jets, mega yachts slammed as 'hypocritical'

"Following an Italian press report claiming that the Google Campers would flock to Sicily for a three-day, $20 million event in 114 private jets, social media users were quick to point out what they saw as a disconnect. "
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/google-summit-attended-by-hollywood-stars-slammed-as-hypocritical

 

It's Gulfstream owners fighting climate change!

But then Google is a bunch of self-righteous hypocrites that have even brought back blacklists for conservatives.

 

It also appears that the Journolist is back. Notice how all the leftie talking heads use the same phrases after some news events: manufactured, bombshell, Constitutional crisis, .....

 

Well... thank all that's holy that our glitterati can all travel in style and enjoy the very lavish vacation while the rest of the world suffers their indignant wrath at just living....

 

A meeting of Yacht and Gulfstream owners against climate change.

They fool no one.

The Tyranny Of The Socially Self-Righteous - A Coercive Green New Deal

The world, he warns, has a window of perhaps 12 years to transform the way people work and live, or its curtains for the planet...

Social and economic crises, real and imagined, often seem to bring out the most wrongheaded thinking in matters of government policy. Following the 2008 financial crisis and with the fear of “global warming,” there has been a revival in the case for “democratic” socialism. But now its proponents are “out of the closet” with a clear cut and explicit call for forcefully imposed, authoritarian central planning of the world.

China as a Model for a Future Eco-Authoritarianism

He compares two lifeboats lost at sea, whose ship survivors are facing doom if they do not reach the safety of land. On one of the lifeboats, the occupants form committees to discuss and debate which direction to go and how best to manage the meager supplies they have on board. All their jabbering eats up precious time and limited resources, with no definitive decision about what to do. Here is seen the dilemma and dysfunction of indecisive democratic decision-making.

On the other lifeboat, after some debate and discussion, a “leader” emerges and takes charge. He assigns tasks to the people in the lifeboat, he decides on a course for the boat to follow (hopefully) to reach land, and organizes how best to ration out the available supplies for the lifeboat occupants until safety has been reached.

They claim the time for the delays and indecisiveness of the democratic talking shop of the first lifeboat type is now passed. America and the world must follow the authoritarian model of the second lifeboat. They greatly admire the example of modern China under President Xi Jinping. Government directs and plans the overall direction of Chinese society and the economy.

While talking clean air, China keeps building coal-burning furnaces.

Un-Democratic Street Violence for a Green New Deal

The current climate of democratic discourse and disagreement that only frustrates his desire for strict and centralized planning through authoritarian controls that many people in American society and around the world are not willing to accept and obey. So Violence is the "solution".

This self-righteous son-of-a-bitch is so certain that he is right about the dimensions and dangers of presumed global warming that he is willing to see the implementation of thuggery and mob action. In his mind, the time for persuasion is over. It is time to disrupt society, halt some of the wheels of production and industry through violence (that is what “blockades” mean), and pressure the political change that many if not most in the country may have no belief in or desire for.

All Collectivisms are Premised on Coercion

These same tactics were used by the Nazis and communists to disrupt society, shut down opposition and resistance, and compel the wider society to acquiesce and conform to the demands of a minority determined to force their collectivist social engineering on everyone one else.

Mr. Feffer’s call for violent and disruptive direct action is an ideological presumption that the threat or the use of force and violence are justified in the arena of human relationships in the name of remaking people and society into different forms, even when a large number of them object to being remolded and straight-jacketed.

The socially self-righteous ideologues purpose to impose economic dictatorship. They oppose and detest free market liberalism. Nothing is worse than the opponent of all forms of collectivism, because such liberalism means they cannot compel other people in act against their own wishes. Nothing is worse for all collectivists than not having the power to use force on others.

 

They are the biggest bunch of hypocrites.

WHAT IF THE “GLOBAL TEMPERATURE” DOESN’T EVEN EXIST? Issues & Insights (I&I) has the answer.

According to university research, “global temperature” is a meaningless concept.

“Discussions on global warming often refer to ‘global temperature.’ Yet the concept is thermodynamically as well as mathematically an impossibility,” says Science Daily, paraphrasing Bjarne Andresen, a professor at the University of Copenhagen’s Niels Bohr Institute, one of three authors of a paper questioning the “validity of a ‘global temperature.'”​

Science Daily explains how the “global temperature” is determined.

“The temperature obtained by collecting measurements of air temperatures at a large number of measuring stations around the globe, weighing them according to the area they represent, and then calculating the yearly average according to the usual method of adding all values and dividing by the number of points.”​

But a “temperature can be defined only for a homogeneous system,” says Andresen. The climate is not regulated by a single temperature. Instead, “differences of temperatures drive the processes and create the storms, sea currents, thunder, etc. which make up the climate”.

While it’s “possible to treat temperature statistically locally,” says Science Daily, “it is meaningless to talk about a global temperature for Earth. The globe consists of a huge number of components which one cannot just add up and average. That would correspond to calculating the average phone number in the phone book. That is meaningless.”

There are two ways to measure temperature: geometrically and mathematically. They can produce a large enough difference to show a four-degree gap, which is sufficient to drive “all the thermodynamic processes which create storms, thunder, sea currents, etc.,” according to Science Daily.

So if global temperature is unknowable, how can the IPCC and the entire industry of alarmists and activists be so sure there exists a threshold we cannot pass? Of course the IPCC says it knows the unknowable. In its latest report, released this month, it yet again maintained that the global temperature must “kept to well below 2ºC, if not 1.5oC” above pre-industrial levels to avoid disaster.

A few years after the University of Copenhagen report was published, University of Guelph economist Ross McKitrick, one of the report’s authors, noted in another paper that “number of weather stations providing data . . . plunged in 1990 and again in 2005. The sample size has fallen by over 75% from its peak in the early 1970s, and is now smaller than at any time since 1919.”

“There are serious quality problems in the surface temperature data sets that call into question whether the global temperature history, especially over land, can be considered both continuous and precise. Users should be aware of these limitations, especially in policy-sensitive applications.”

The global warming alarmists, who have seized and now control the narrative — because, like a child who won’t stop crying for a toy he can’t have, they refuse give up — have a credibility problem. Actually, they have several. The public will eventually forget about them all, though, just as it has overlooked the mistakes by those who predicted other catastrophes that never arrived, such as Y2K, the new Ice Age, acid rain, mass human starvation, overpopulation, peak oil, and the Silent Spring.

After all, humans have been watching Doomsday prophets fail throughout history. They’ve been so common we hardly notice them.

 

The thread premise is like saying, "My minister told me adultery was wrong but then he was caught cheating on his wife. Therefore, since he was a hypocrite, it's ok for me to cheat on my wife."

 

Yes, plus SST (sea surface temperature) is dependent on the ocean currents (both horizontal and vertical) and has nothing to do with reradiating from the atmosphere and too many land measurements are corrupted by urban heat island effects.

 

That’s not it. The premise is that the minister doesn’t believe what he is preaching.

 

But even if he doesn't believe what he is preaching, his message is still correct: You shouldn't commit adultery.
So even if the celebrities don't believe what they are preaching, the message is still correct: You should reduce your carbon footprint.

 

If that is what floats your boat then do so. What is unfair though is for others to subsidize that decision.

 

But it's OK for half the population to do nothing to reduce their footprint while the other half goes without?

 

I have noticed lately that the public at large has reached the saturation point with this global warming hysteria being shoved down their throats constantly. There seems to be a shoulder shrug attitude developing as many people accept it's getting warmer and man is to blame but they have accepted it as just the way it is and life goes on. It's looking like the attempt to sow mass panic with a false narrative is backfiring and actually causing complacency.

 

Talk to anyone under 20.
They do not agree with you.

 

Reducing your footprint is a personal choice. Regardless reducing your footprint has no effect on global average temperature.

 

I'll agree the kids are successfully brainwashed and very afraid but as they mature they tend to grow out if it. This has been going on a very long time now and I've watched as children grow up thinking the end is near and then get jobs raise families and laugh about their previous youthful hysteria

 

That is why it must be universal.

 

Brainwashed?
I think you mean informed.

 

There is no politically possible way to significantly reduce CO2 emissions. Democracies will vote out politicians who attempt to reduce the use of fossil fuels and totalitarian governments will not reduce economic growth. Besides global warming is beneficial.