The Worst Climate Stories Of The Week (Experts Say This Isn’t Crazy)
This week, the Cult of Scientism eclipses reality yet again. (Get it?)
What do you get when you combine landfills, chemically altering the atmosphere for the climate, exploding electric vehicles, the Chinese Communist Party, blue jeans, vulnerable Indonesian transgender sex workers, earthquakes, cicadas, a solar eclipse, and skyrocketing energy prices? Global warming, of course!
Just like this year’s cicada apocalypse, this week we have a swarm of crazy stories that hatched all at once. It’s a confluence of crazy we haven’t seen in a long time.
We’re just going to jump right into it, but stick around to the end. We have more good news as Americans abandon the idea of electric vehicles (EVs), and we have a whopper of a myth to debunk about landfills in America.
Let’s go.
Hey Babe, Take A Walk On the Climate Side
We’d like to credit the Babylon Bee for another outrageously fake headline. But it wasn’t the Bee this time—this story is real. It actually appeared in the mainstream press. With a mandate to scour the earth for ANY tangential connection to climate, one intrepid reporter found the most random intersection of victimology perhaps in the history of intersectionality. This article appeared in the UK Independent, bringing the world’s attention to the plight of vulnerable transgender sex workers in Indonesia whose incomes drop during the rainy season.
Who knew there was a transgender sex worker season?
Wouldn’t it be awful if somebody started geoengineering our atmosphere, leading to unintended consequences like creating more cloud cover and a longer rainy season? Why ask that question? Oh, no reason …
Weren’t We Just Talking About This?
Yes, just last week, in fact. The New York Times bragged about all sorts of geoengineering projects by “scientists” who hope to reverse global warming. Another story this week, this time in Scientific American, tells of scientists shooting microscopic salt particles into the air in San Francisco to see if they could make more clouds, to reflect sunlight away from the earth. The researchers didn’t announce their operation until it started, to avoid “backlash.” It will go until the end of May. Even the radicals at Scientific American expressed misgivings about the project, saying this doesn’t address carbon dioxide emissions, and could alter weather patterns in “unclear ways.” No pun intended.
No word from the vulnerable Indonesian transgender sex workers on what they thought of more clouds.
Climate Change? It’s In Your Jeans
A totally super serious scientific paper in totally super serious journal proved your pants cause global warming. And, the fewer times you wear your fancy new jeans, the more carbon dioxide they emit. A team of researchers published a paper in the journal Science of the Total Environment in which they castigate the “fast fashion” industry as wasteful and bad for the climate. Incidentally, this scientific journal appears to dedicate itself to calculating carbon footprints for things using computer models, so you know they use sound science. The scientists developed a computer model to assess the carbon footprint of high-fashion jeans made overseas, then transported to and sold in America. Using consumer data, they assumed consumers wore their “high fashion” jeans an average of seven times before discarding them. They say these jeans contribute as much carbon dioxide to the atmosphere as driving a car over six miles. The experts conclude by speculating the fashion industry overall contributes up to 10% of global human carbon emissions.
So we’ve come to the only logical conclusion: stop wearing pants to save the earth from global boiling!
Makes ya wonder what the vulnerable trans Indonesian sex workers wear …
This Week In Exploding EVs
Nothing to see here, just another battery powered vehicle catching fire and putting people at risk.
From the Necessarily Skyrocket Files
Remember that time when Senator Barack Obama campaigned for president, and he told reporters that under his carbon reduction plan, electricity costs would “necessarily skyrocket?” And when he also said, “If somebody wants to build a coal-fired power plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them?”
A new report shows people in the United Kingdom, billed as a “world leader” in offshore wind and green energy in general, pay about double for their electricity as folks in the United States. They pay five times as much as in China. Incidentally, power providers don’t go bankrupt in China when they build a coal-fired plant.
How’s The View Down There?
You’ve probably already seen this, but it definitely deserves another … view. This scintillating exchange happened on The View last week, in which co-host and Mensa member Sunny Hostin blamed the earthquake in New York, the solar eclipse, and the emergence of two huge populations of cicadas across America on climate change. We haven’t seen this level of academic achievement since actor and climate expert Danny Glover blamed the Haiti earthquake on climate change.
Leave it to Australia to make fun of our news for us.
Maybe The View will have the vulnerable trans sex workers from Indonesia on a future episode to lend their perspective?
Good News: EV Climate Continues to Erode, and We’re Not Running Out Of Land
Polls continue to show Americans just don’t want to buy EVs, especially with Biden’s taxpayer funded subsidies running out. Despite the new tailpipe emission regulations requiring 50% of new car sales to be electric by 2030, a Gallup Poll shows fewer and fewer Americans care. Only 35% of poll respondants said they might consider buying an EV, down eight points from 2023. Maybe they heard the world expects to quadruple oil production by 2030.
Trashy Thoughts
This week’s question from Just Facts debunks a myth that has persisted for decades, despite all available evidence to the contrary. We are not running out of landfill space. We’ll have enough space to put our trash in perpetuity. It’s downright funny when people allow themselves to worry about such a triviality. The problem literally doesn’t exist.
If the U.S. stopped recycling and buried all of its municipal trash for the next 100 years in a single landfill that was 30 feet high, how much of the nation’s land area would this landfill cover?
Correct Answer
About 0.1%Correct Answer Rate 59%
Tell Me More
If the U.S. stopped recycling and buried all of its municipal trash for the next 100 years in a 30-foot-high landfill, it would cover 0.06% of the nation’s land area. More realistically, the actual area in use will be an order of magnitude smaller because (a) the U.S. recycles, burns, or composts 48% of its trash, (b) landfills can be more than 200 feet high, (c) after 30 to 50 years, landfills are often covered and used for purposes such as parks, golf courses, ski slopes, and airfields. Despite these facts, media outlets have been reporting for more than 30 years that the U.S. is “nearly out of space” to dispose of trash. Hence, a scientific survey shows that 66% of voters believe the correct answer to this question is more than 5%.
Documentation
Landfill Space
Scientific Survey
Scientific Survey Methodologies
