Summary:
Many argue that fossil fuels have wreaked havoc on our climate, leading to worsened conditions, increased deaths, and deteriorating air and water quality. But the reality is different.
Fossil fuels, thanks to their ultra-cost-effective energy, power machines that drive our unparalleled productivity. This productivity, in turn, translates to climate and environmental mastery.
A staggering 95% reduction in climate-related deaths can be attributed to our improved ability to protect ourselves from climate-related dangers such as extreme temperatures, droughts, storms, floods, and wildfires. How do we achieve this protection? Through the use of fossil-fueled machines that construct resilient buildings and provide heating in cold climates and cooling in hot ones.
Media Validation: BBC and Bloomberg
If you thought the idea of the “flying-free world” and “no more cheap flights to save the planet” was pure hyperbole, think again. Even legacy media outlets like the BBC and Bloomberg are sounding the alarm.
The BBC, a trusted source for many, reported on this seismic shift, acknowledging that a world with no flights might pose logistical challenges but could usher in lower-carbon modes of transportation. Activists have long urged people to fly less or not at all to combat ballooning aviation emissions.
Bloomberg, known for its financial insights, published a piece that should make us all sit up and take notice: “No More Cheap Flights Is the New Reality for Air Travel.” It’s not just a temporary hiccup; it’s a fundamental transformation in the way we fly.
The European Union’s Emissions Trading System
Part of this shift is rooted in the European Union’s Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). Airlines must now account for every metric ton of carbon dioxide released during flights within the European Economic Area, the UK, and Switzerland. The kicker? They currently receive half of these emissions allowances for free, but this arrangement is slated to end in 2026. Starting in 2024, the share of allowances they must purchase will steadily rise. In essence, this will double their carbon costs in just three years.
The Religion of Climate Activism
As Tucker Carlson astutely pointed out, climate activists have unintentionally crafted a new religion, complete with recognizable elements of conventional faith. There’s the notion of an Eden, a time before settlers arrived, and an original sin – the Industrial Revolution. Their belief system foretells a climate catastrophe akin to an end of times scenario.
The alarming concern here is the potential for “Climate Lockdowns,” a term Tucker Carlson has warned us about before. It’s not just flights or energy; it’s our way of life that’s on the line.
The Battle of Moral Narratives: Pro-Human vs. Anti-Humanistic
In the grand tapestry of human existence, we require a guiding story, a narrative that shapes our values and moral compass. At its core, this narrative comprises a hierarchy with a primary moral objective to strive toward.
As humans, we stand at a crossroads where we can choose to embrace either a pro-human or an anti-humanistic narrative. The choices we make dictate our path forward and the world we create.
Pro-Human Moral Stance: A Case for Animal Testing
Consider the ethical dilemma of animal testing. Here, you have a choice: a pro-human moral stance that prioritizes advancing human flourishing or an anti-humanistic perspective that places animal equality above all else.
In the context of advancing human flourishing – the highest moral goal – animal testing becomes a crucial tool. It allows us to save countless human lives and improve our well-being. The pro-human stance recognizes the value of testing animals to achieve these noble objectives.
The Complexity of Moral Choices
It’s important to note that while the majority support animal testing for medical research, a substantial number of people worldwide deem any form of animal testing as immoral. Even some scientists who acknowledge its benefits struggle with this moral conflict.
Why? Because their primary moral objective aligns with the notion of animal equality, a belief that humans should neither interfere with nor harm other animals. This perspective transcends the benefits animal testing brings to human lives.
The Influence of Moral Objectives
What’s clear from this example is that your primary moral goal can profoundly shape your moral choices, even when you possess factual knowledge about the benefits of those choices.
History bears witness to this phenomenon. Throughout the ages, individuals and knowledge systems have supported and enacted harmful anti-humanistic policies despite knowing better. Examples include slavery, racism, and Nazism.
The Anti-Humanistic Stance in Climate Change Discourse
Now, let’s shift our focus to the present, particularly the realm of climate change. What becomes evident is that the prevailing knowledge system operates under an anti-humanistic stance.
This narrative places Earth on a pedestal, likening it to a delicate nurturer violated by a parasitical, evil, white, male-dominated, capitalist system. Within this quasi-religious ideology, Earth attains a near-divine status, untouched and pure.
Environmentalism’s True Moral Objective: Eliminating Human Impact
Within the confines of radical environmentalism, the true moral objective isn’t merely to eliminate CO2. If that were the case, advocates would champion nuclear energy as the solution, given its zero CO2 emissions, safety record, and cost-effectiveness comparable to fossil fuels.
The absence of such advocacy reveals a deeper truth – the ultimate aim of environmentalism is to eradicate all human impact on what they perceive as a quasi-religious, virgin-like, and delicate planet.
This perspective offers a profound insight into the moral underpinnings of the environmental discourse. It transcends the surface-level debates about CO2 and unveils a narrative that calls for a radical reimagining of our relationship with the world we inhabit. It’s a narrative that demands your scrutiny and critical thought as we navigate the complex terrain of environmental responsibility and human flourishing.
Global Boiling or Cooling? The Wildfire Paradox
First, let’s address the wildfire frenzy that’s dominated recent headlines and has been used to vilify humans as Earth’s parasites. The narrative suggests that global warming has set our planet ablaze, but the data paint a different picture.
For over two decades, satellites have been monitoring global fire activity, and the evidence is unequivocal: the area of the world’s land engulfed in flames has been consistently decreasing since the early 2000s. In 2022, this trend reached a new record low, with only 2.2% of land area affected by fires.
Surprisingly, you won’t find this reported widely. Instead, the media often portrays a world in flames. Case in point: The New York Times’ “Postcards from a World on Fire” project, complete with a photorealistic animation of a burning globe, aimed to convince readers of an imminent climate crisis. But the reality on the ground doesn’t align with this alarmist narrative.
The Myth of “Unbreathable” Air
Another claim you may have encountered is that “the air is unbreathable.” This assertion, too, falls apart when subjected to scrutiny.
For decades, environmental doomsayers predicted that increased fossil fuel use would lead to worsening pollution. However, the United States defies this narrative. Through technological advancements, the nation demonstrates that more fossil fuel consumption can coexist with less pollution.
Consider this graph, which reveals that as fossil fuel use has increased, pollution levels have decreased:
Climate and Environmental Mastery: Fossil Fuels’ Role
Many argue that fossil fuels have wreaked havoc on our climate, leading to worsened conditions, increased deaths, and deteriorating air and water quality. But the reality is different.
Fossil fuels, thanks to their ultra-cost-effective energy, power machines that drive our unparalleled productivity. This productivity, in turn, translates to climate and environmental mastery.
A staggering 95% reduction in climate-related deaths can be attributed to our improved ability to protect ourselves from climate-related dangers such as extreme temperatures, droughts, storms, floods, and wildfires. How do we achieve this protection? Through the use of fossil-fueled machines that construct resilient buildings and provide heating in cold climates and cooling in hot ones.
In essence, ultra-cost-effective fossil fuel energy empowers machines to shield us from the climate’s wrath.
Clean Water and Fossil Fuels: An Unexpected Connection
It’s often argued that fossil fuel use worsens water quality, but the evidence tells a different story. While fossil fuels can contribute to water pollution, human ingenuity has made us increasingly adept at producing more fossil fuel energy with less pollution.
In fact, the prediction that water pollution would spiral out of control due to fossil fuel use has proven false. Instead, water quality has improved worldwide, thanks in part to fossil fuels. These energy sources not only mitigate their own water pollution but also play a crucial role in producing clean water.
In conclusion, the untold story of fossil fuels is one of empowerment and environmental stewardship. These energy sources have given us the means to master our environment and climate, freeing us to innovate and address challenges. So, when you hear calls for intermittent, dilute, and unreliable solar and wind energy, remember this: what we need is more fossil fuels, not less.
