The Anti-Human Meeting of the Elites in Glasgow

Leave it to the Great Resetters to hold their meeting to resolve the self-described “climate crisis” in a city whose very existence is owed to the unearthing and continual burning of fossil fuels. What would Glasgow be, after all, without coal and oil and heavy industry and James Watt? I’ll tell you: it would be an inhospitable hovel/backwater, that is, when the River Clyde wasn’t totally frozen over. Back ice? The inhabitants would be about a century if not less removed from their major industry consisting of haggis production and donning blue face paint in order to kill English constituting their chief pastime. Getting things warm where people live, especially if the locale is more than a hop, skip or a jump from the tropics, is a time honored human necessity and tradition. You know, for survival. Warmer is better, especially when the Earth is in a prolonged ice age, because fossil fuel has allowed for Glasgow churches (no matter how empty they might be, they are still pretty to look at) and CHVRCHES.

Next to endless warfare/welfare and the equally self-inflicted Covid hysteria, the supposed increase of global temperatures by a mere 2 degrees Fahrenheit over the course of 3 centuries checks all of the boxes for modern states. “Climate change” appears and is then presented by a pliant mass media as:

1. an existential crisis.
2. an emergency so serious only big government can solve it, like winning the Cold War or something (maybe the War on Hot? Like that moniker, Greta?).
3. a foreboding apocalypse should “we do nothing”.
4. a scientific “certainty”; dissent from which means you are a denier/rube and ought to be put on your own iceberg next to the (not so endangered as it turns out) polar bears.
5. a problem that can only be remedied through massive government expenditure but one that is also never resolved because there are no benchmarks for resolution.

Come on: You’ve heard this all before. Schools need more dollars. The poor need more obsolete job training. What happens in the Middle East if we leave? How do we finance “investments” without a central bank? You can take your masks off and enjoy Thanksgiving when the case, no hospitalization, no case, no death, no infection rate abates. When educational outcomes worsen the more expenditure increases, well, that means the solution of course is more expenditure for government schools. When public jobs programs end up getting no one enrolled in actual, viable jobs, well the answer is because we don’t use box TVs anymore, or automation is ruining everything, let’s look into universal basic income. Wars are expensive! Instead of ending them because we don’t win them anyway anymore, we have to have a central bank print our way out of it. We’re all in this together, and we need to give Big Pharma hundreds of billions of dollars to save you dolts with our genetic treatment derived from living fetal tissue. All the while no one in government dares to even roll back expected future expenditures. On and on.

Alex Epstein concerns himself with true care of the environment and takes the non-radical but today radical stance that people are not viruses ravaging Mother Earth’s respiratory system. He asserts what ought to be obvious: The climate action that needs to be taken is to make fossil fuels and nuclear energy MORE, NOT LESS available and affordable. Worst of all for the apparatchik comrades in arms in Scotland this week, the best way to accomplish that is for government to do nothing but get out of the way. Market fixes, not compulsory mass wealth distribution from poor people in wealthy countries to rich people in rich countries enforcing carbon quotas. Doing nothing, hence, will benefit the planet and save actual people from crushing poverty. The two aims are by no means mutually exclusive, despite what Boris Johnson and every undergrad at Stanford might want to believe, because they are damned fools. Do what the true believers in Glasgow wish and the planet and people will be much, much worse off.

Looks like this reporter picked the one, wrong voice of dissent to interview:

It should be noted that Alex (as far as I know) is not related to Jeffery, who did not kill himself.

Ghislaine Maxwell‘s trial is set. I wonder how many in Glasgow she’s set to implicate. Will she be able to? Stay tuned.