Connect with us

Great Reset

Climate expert warns against extreme ‘weather porn’ from alarmists pushing ‘draconian’ policies

Published

8 months ago

8 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Doug Mainwaring

Bjorn Lomborg, author and president of the Copenhagen Consensus, continues to call attention to the extreme measures being demanded by climate change activists and politicians.

A climate expert has taken aim against what he calls “weather porn” – images and stories meant to convey a false impression that the world is on the brink of cataclysmic climate disaster – in order to force unnecessary policy changes by governments across the globe that will destroy prosperity and kill, not save, human lives.

In a series of recent opinion pieces and social media posts, Bjorn Lomborg, author, president of the Copenhagen Consensus, and a visiting fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, continues to call attention to the extreme measures being demanded by climate change activists and politicians who seek to inflict policies that are far more harmful than helpful.

“Watching the news, you get the sense that climate change is making the planet unlivable. We are bombarded with images of floods, droughts, storms and wildfires,” wrote Lomborg in his recent newsletter. “But this impression is wildly misleading and makes it harder to get climate change policy right. Data show climate-related events like floods, droughts, storms and wildfires aren’t killing more people.”

“Quite the contrary. Over the past decade, climate-related disasters have killed 98% fewer people than a century ago,” said Lomborg. “If we want to achieve fewer disaster deaths, we should promote prosperity, adaptation, and resilience. But when we are inundated with ‘weather porn’ and miss the fact that deaths have dropped precipitously, we end up focusing on the least effective policies first.”

‘Six billion deaths in less than a year’

In an op-ed published by The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), Lomborg described what would happen if climate alarmists were to suddenly get their way:

The world still gets four-fifths of its energy from fossil fuels, because renewable sources rarely provide good alternatives. Half the world’s population entirely depends on food grown with synthetic fertilizer produced almost entirely by natural gas. If we rapidly ceased using fossil fuels, four billion people would suddenly be without food.

Add the billions of people dependent on fossil-fuel heating in the winter, along with our dependence on fossil fuels for steel, cement, plastics and transportation, and it is no wonder that one recent estimate by economist Neil Record showed an abrupt end to fossil fuel use would cause six billion deaths in less than a year.

Global elites have made it clear that they have judged the world to be vastly overpopulated, and have set for themselves a goal of reducing the world’s total population to just 500 million people. An “abrupt end to fossil fuel use” would come very close to achieving their utopian anti-human goal.

“Why is the environmental movement stewarded over by murderous, human-hating wackos who desire to see billions of people die?” asked James Corbett of the Corbett Report last month.

Not mincing words, Corbett continued: “Because the conservation movement (and all of the mainstream environmental organizations that grew out of that movement) was pioneered by murderous, human-hating eugenicists and funded by the eugenicist royals who wanted to keep their beautiful natural vistas clear of the riff-raff scurrying around beneath them.”

“Why do nation after nation appear to be in a race to the bottom, implementing policies that will actively hinder the productivity of their own populations and making it more and more difficult for those on the lowest rung of the economic ladder to eke out a subsistence living on the corporate-governmental fascist plantation that we call the developed world?” wondered Corbett.

‘Follow the science’ obscures truth, allows for the promotion of dangerous policies

Lomborg has said that the constant refrain of “follow the science” allows politicians to “obscure and avoid responsibility for lopsided climate-policy trade-offs.”

“More than one million people die in traffic accidents globally each year. Overnight, governments could solve this entirely man-made problem by reducing speed limits everywhere to 3 miles an hour, but we’d laugh any politician who suggested it out of office,” wrote Lomborg in his WSJ piece.

“It would be absurd to focus solely on lives saved if the cost would be economic and societal destruction,” said the climate expert. “Yet politicians widely employ the same one-sided reasoning in the name of fighting climate change. It’s simply a matter, they say, of ‘following the science.’”

Draconian net-zero climate policies are, according to Lomborg, prohibitively costly.

Recent peer-reviewed climate-economic research shows the total cost “will average $27 trillion each year across the century, reaching $60 trillion a year in 2100.”

“Net zero is more than seven times as costly as the climate problem it tries to address,” yet this is precisely what the Biden administration is hoping to achieve by 2050.

Outgoing U.S. climate chief John Kerry, one of the chief purveyors of “weather porn,” suggested recently that if climate change is not quickly addressed, we face planetary destruction “beyond comprehension.”

UN climate change executive secretary Simon Stiell issued a similarly ominous if not shrill warning on X this week: “We have two years to save the world,” and therefore, “starting now, we need a quantum leap in climate finance [and] Bold new national climate plans by all nations.”

Lomborg fired back on X, dismissing the UN climate honcho’s hyperbolic claims.

“UN employees have been telling the same stale story for more than half a century: Now, that is right now, we have just a few years to save the world.”

“Some of the most popular climate policies will have costs far greater than climate change itself. When politicians try to shut down discussion with claims that they’re ‘following the science,’” concluded  Lomborg in the pages of the WSJ.

“Don’t let them,” he urged.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Daily Caller / 21 hours ago

LNG Farce Sums Up Four Years Of Ridiculous Biden Energy Policy

armed forces / 21 hours ago

Canada among NATO members that could face penalties for lack of military spending

National / 21 hours ago

Canadian gov’t budget report targets charitable status of pro-life groups, churches

MAiD

Nearly half of non-terminally ill Canadians who choose euthanasia say they are lonely

Published on December 19, 2024

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Of the 662 people who were not in danger of death but succumbed to medical assistance in dying last year, 47.1 percent cited as reasons for wanting to die ‘isolation or loneliness.’

Official government data shows that about half of Canadians who are not terminally ill yet wanted to end their lives via state-sanctioned assisted suicide did so last year because they said they were lonely.

According to data published by Health Canada on December 11 in its fifth annual report on medical assistance in dying (MAID), 15,342 people were approved for and died by euthanasia in 2023.

A total of 14,721 of these deaths were in cases where illness or disability were likely down the road or considered “reasonably foreseeable.” These are called Track 1 MAiD deaths.

However, 662 deaths were people who were not dying. Of these Track 2 deaths, 47.1 percent cited as reasons for wanting to die “isolation or loneliness.” By comparison, about 21.1 percent of Track 1 deaths reported the same feelings for wanting to die by doctor-led suicide.

The report stated that “social isolation and loneliness are shown to have a serious impact on physical and mental health, quality of life, and longevity.”

Of the Track 2 deaths, 35.7 percent lived alone, compared with 30.2 percent of Track 1 deaths. Of Track 1 deaths, the average age was 77.7 years. The average age of Track 2 deaths was 75.

Of note is that this year’s Health Canada report on MAiD is the first to include so-called “verbal” requests from individuals as official. Previously, those who wanted to die via assisted suicide had to submit a form to Health Canada in order to be officially recorded as a request to die by suicide.

Under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, whose Liberal government legalized MAiD in 2016, the deadly program has continued to relax its rules on who is eligible for death.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, 1 in 20 Canadian deaths in 2023 came from assisted suicide.

Last week, LifeSiteNews reported how a senior Canadian couple said that a hospice care center presented euthanasia to one of them as an option because they could not afford increased care costs on their fixed income.

Canadian pro-life leaders have criticized the Trudeau government’s continued push for expanding MAiD.

Indeed, most Canadians fear the nation’s euthanasia regime unfairly targets those who are financially and socially vulnerable while still supporting the immoral practice in general.

In 2021, the program expanded from killing only terminally ill patients to allowing the chronically ill to qualify. Since then, the government has sought to include those suffering solely from mental illness.

The number of Canadians killed by lethal injection under the nation’s MAiD program since 2016 stands at close to 65,000, with an estimated 16,000 deaths in 2023 alone. Many fear that because the official statistics are manipulated the number may be even higher.

Canada had approximately 15,280 euthanasia deaths in 2023.

Continue Reading

MAiD

Saskatchewan seniors say they were offered euthanasia when faced with increased hospice costs

Published on December 15, 2024

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Most Canadians fear the nation’s euthanasia regime unfairly targets those who are financially and socially vulnerable

A senior aged Canadian couple has said that a hospice care center presented euthanasia to one of them as an option as they were facing increased care costs they could not afford on their fixed income.

71-year-old Fred Sandeski from Saskatchewan, who suffers from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) along with a host of other ailments such as diabetes and epilepsy, and his wife Teresa, who also has failing health, say death via Canada’s Medical Assistance in Dying euthanasia program was suggested to them when they realized they would not be able to cover the costs associated with increased care at a hospice center.

According to the Epoch Times, when Fred started with palliative care, “they were just listing us the availability of what options they had for us,” and MAiD was presented as “one option.”

Thankfully, Sandeski refused MAiD, saying, “I really, really believe that the Lord has put me on this earth for a reason, and he’s not going to let me go until I’m done.” 

Sandeski’s plight was brought to the attention of the provincial government of Saskatchewan by the opposition New Democratic Party’s shadow minister for seniors, Keith Jorgenson, who encouraged Saskatchewan Health Minister Jeremy Cockrill to help the couple.

In response, Cockrill said that he had reached out to the Sandeskis and would “find a solution that’s going to work for Fred and Theresa this week.” 

He added that when it comes to the care home having offered them MAiD as a solution to their plight, he would “hope that any health care professional in this province, having those discussions with a patient has a strong understanding of the patient’s health and familial context.” 

Instances of people being offered MAiD as a solution to their health issues have become commonplace in Canada, as reported by LifeSiteNews.  

Indeed, most Canadians fear the nation’s euthanasia regime unfairly targets those who are financially and socially vulnerable while still supporting the immoral practice in general.   

Recently, the United Conservative government of Alberta said it would push back against the Canadian federal government’s continued desire to expand euthanasia in the nation, announcing it will be launching a review of the legislation and policies surrounding the grim practice, which will include a period of public engagement.  

Under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, whose government legalized MAiD in 2016, the deadly program has continued to relax who is eligible for death.

In 2021, the program expanded from killing only terminally ill patients to allowing the chronically ill to qualify, as since then the government has sought to include those suffering solely from mental illness.

The number of Canadians killed by lethal injection under the nation’s MAiD program since 2016 stands at close to 65,000, with an estimated 16,000 deaths in 2023 alone. Many fear that because the official statistics are manipulated the number may be even higher.   

Canada had approximately 15,280 euthanasia deaths in 2023. 

Continue Reading

Trending

X