At Monday’s Committee of the Whole Council Meeting, four citizens asked Council to be sure to follow up on their declaration of a Climate Emergency. Bruce Bellaire represented the Blue Dot group and asked that sufficient budget funds be allocated to an Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP), a Green Development Standard (GDS) and for one staff person to be hired to manage these over a two year period. Richard Tyssen attempted to put dollar estimates on these objectives and also asked for progress on the Tannery Secondary Plan. Gudron Ludorf – Weaver (Gigi) of Sustainable Cobourg supported these requests and said that “these are not normal circumstances”. At the forum at the end of the meeting when any citizen can ask a question, Warren McCarthy emphasized that a response to an emergency should not be timid – a suitable level of response is required.
Bruce (photo above right) said that “it’s not just a declaration – it needs action”.
All four indicated that they did not believe the amount of $85k per year (for 2 years) currently in the draft budget is enough. They asked that if necessary the budget for 2020 should be higher than the 1.9% increase in the levy targeted.
Their concerns were not directly addressed in the meeting but were referred to the budget discussions which are scheduled for Thursday this week. The responsibility for this work would be in Glenn McGlashon’s planning department and it seems that he has put $85K in the budget for two years towards developing an ICSP. The GDS is not mentioned but Gigi said that this is a separate item and also needs funds.
At the same meeting, Council adopted a definition of Sustainability proposed by the Sustainability and Climate Change Advisory Committee – albeit slightly modified:
Sustainability is environmental, economic, social and cultural actions that meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
Background Notes
- Blue Dot is a David Suzuki Foundation Environmental Organization with a Northumberland Chapter (Facebook)
- Sustainable Cobourg is a Cobourg based environmental activist organization
- Report on Council’s declaration of a Climate Emergency – 20 Nov 2019
Print Article:
What happened to our pal Mark Jones?
I recommend you read the side column. All comments from pseudonym Mark Jones were deleted because he/she consistently used a false email address contrary to blog rules. Some offenders take a while to be caught but the penalty is the same. Email addresses and IP addresses provide some degree of assurance that contributors are legitimate. These are kept confidential so posters can be assured of privacy.
Your pal, not ours.
Just a (sarcastic) figure of speech, but he did seem to be on the same side of the argument as you and I even thought it might have been you using another alias/pseudonym just to stir up the pot. You’ve made outrageous statements before just to do that very thing.
By the way, what do you mean by “not ours“? Do you speak for others?
I’m looking for an evening class where we drink wine and make tin foil hats. I’m renovating my house and adding much larger closets, with outlets, so I can watch the news and listen to NPR from inside while wearing my freshly minted head piece (shhhh they are listening). We are polluting the soil, the air and life sustaining water. We are exploiting our natural resources, destroying forests and farm land and killing entire ecosystems while pushing species to extinction, on land, in the air and in our oceans. These facts are not under debate – would be wise to end the finger pointing and work collaboratively to fix the @#$ problems. “WE” are the earth – we are what we eat, drink, breath and we are a part of the environment we inhabit. Global domination can be fought one day however not much will matter without food, water, air and shelter. See Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.
Views on this news?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/blackrock-investment-climate-change-1.5426465
Lots of people with this attitude in Australia, particularly New South Wales.
Should be fun to visit again.
“Australia urged foreign tourists on Tuesday to put aside concerns about raging bushfires after the United States downgraded a travel warning, even as thick smoke disrupted preparations for the Australian Open tennis tournament in Melbourne.” Reuters
“Should be fun to visit again.”
As a true believer of Greta Thunberg, who refuses to contaminate the world with air flight exhaust, my question, Mr Luedtke, is how will you get to New South Wales to enjoy all that fun?
swim
That, of course, is impossible. Just like Trump, bragging about the impossible.
Mr. Luedtke can swim if he wants, but if it were me, I’d take the airplane. It’s going there anyway and my inclusion wouldn’t cause any more air flight exhaust.
Much the same way some people brag about never personally owning a car but will happily go for rides in them.
Greta and Walter would be disappointed in your attitude about air flight. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-19/german-air-travel-slump-points-to-spread-of-flight-shame
“Much the same way some people brag about never personally owning a car but will happily go for rides in them.”
Of course. The point is to minimize one’s ‘carbon footprint’ What better way than with human powered transit? Oops. I’m bragging again. Call le petite Frenchy, the resident troll!
There more to Northumberland than just Cobourg
Reducing carbon dioxide emissions is a wonderful thing. Unlike the other nations that did sign on to the Paris Accord, The United States of America reduced its carbon emissions. Kudos to the United States of America. https://www.dailywire.com/news/study-us-leads-world-reducing-co2-emissions-while-james-barrett
NASA.climate.gov
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_climate_change
“Nearly all publishing climate scientists (97–98%) support the consensus on anthropogenic climate change, and the remaining 3% of contrarian studies either cannot be replicated or contain errors. A November 2019 study showed that the consensus among research scientists had grown to 100%, based on a review of 11,602 peer-reviewed articles published in the first 7 months of 2019.”
The fact that people are allowed to present the claim that this is unsettled, or unfounded as though it is fact is just proof that the moderation standards of this blog don’t extend to actually requiring good faith, due diligence or indeed any actual even vague association with the truth. It has become home to conspiracy, to fear-mongering, and to fallacy upon fallacy upon fallacy and frankly the fact that this will get downvoted to oblivion and indeed result in having people like Mark Jones (Who I don’t recall ever seeing comment here before today) call people’s love of their country into question is both sad and laughable.
John you really should just stop reporting on anything to do with climate on this blog if you expect to continue taking no steps whatsoever to moderate the actual content of people’s comments to deal with outright lying and conspiracy theory nonsense presented as fact.
Moderation does not include fact-checking. The articles are fact checked but comments are not. I expect everyone reading the comments to understand that comments by their nature are opinions – even if the authors present them as fact. Some may be factual, some may not. Some are also sarcasm or humour.
I also know that many people find the comments entertaining – and not all comments are taken seriously.
There’s a difference between fact-checking, and allowing the site to become grounds for conspiracy theorists spouting often very problematic garbage all over the place.
If you add a spoonful of sewage to a barrel full of wine, you get sewage.
Any discussion on climate (and indeed, any discussion on literally any topic that they can possibly reach into also making a discussion about climate) has turned to garbage, which turns more and more of the site into garbage.
The problem with the side that looks at overwhelming evidence and consensus and just says “Nah” and links to discredited hacks whose work can’t be duplicated, is full of errors, or has indeed been found to be so unscientific that it was considered wrong to even expect it to be capable of being correct is that they’re going to grow their echo chamber as everybody who actually understands the evidence realizes that the place is now just a dump for garbage, which reinforces the beliefs of the conspiracy nuts that they’ve somehow won.
You do excellent work John, but you’re putting your excellent work on display to be splattered in feces, and regardless of your excellent work, the more it looks and smells like shit, the less people will want to be around it.
Indeed, Dan. Obvious absurdities such as the “consensus among research scientists had grown to 100%” signals an end to scientific inquiry and will certainly turn the barrels of Renaissance wine to s**t.
You are so scientifically illiterate that there’s nothing to say to you. This is actually pathetic.
If you review every study on “climate change” or “global warming” that is published in actual peer-reviewed publications, so the studies are actually answerable to their techniques and their data, and their conclusions, and all of them are on the side of anthropocentric climate change, that is 100% of the scientific consensus. I’m sorry that random non-experts publishing unverified claims to Youtube aren’t counted. I’m sorry that people whose claims have bad data, or can’t be replicated don’t count.
I’m sorry that -non science- is not being counted with the -science-
Yes, Dan, anthropocentric climate change is accepted by everyone other than a few, pathetic, scientific illiterates. The science is completely settled so no need for actual proof or even any further research.
You guys remind me of me when I was trying to not quit smoking. Scientists and doctors the whole world over were warning us of the cancerous effects cigarette smoke had on us. But I would seek out those rare anecdotal reports from some white-coat quack over in Franistan or anywhere telling us it was OK, go ahead and smoke, the evidence against isn’t 100%, it’s only 99.9%. Why, there was even the report of a 100 year old woman who smoked since she was 12, and she never got cancer.
Good enough for me.
I, thankfully, got over my foolishness and finally listened to the overwhelming evidence and quit smoking. Hope I didn’t wait too long.
Doesn’t sound like you guys have kids or grand kids, but if you do and for their sake, don’t wait too long. You don’t have to go full Thunberg or anything, just do your small part. You know, recycle, compost, just stay out of the way of those that are trying to improve this place we live in. Small, simple things like that.
“A November 2019 study showed that the consensus among research scientists had grown to 100%”
Wow! 100% consensus was also achieved by Kim Il-Sung in the most recent vote in North Korea.
Dan … Thanks for this. What those who simply don’t respect the over-whelming science regarding climate-change, or how Council and the Budget process works, etc, don’t seem to understand is that their constant use of unflinching opinion and their frequent descent into name calling has a consequence. In my case I simply don’t bother to read their comments. No big loss but I understand this is also the case with many serious readers of these blogs.
Keith, I’m curious. How long before the discoveries of Becquerel was there consensus that the atom was immutable and indivisible? How long before the work of Michelson and Morley was there consensus that the æther existed? How long before Gödel published his incompleteness theorems was there consensus? Real science and mathematics are based on experiments and proofs rather than consensus.
I’m certain that some simply don’t bother to read these comments but for the rest of us, could you please explain how the budget process works? I doubt that knowledge of science is required.
entered in error
To those who succumb to climate change hysteria & waste our taxes – “HOW DARE YOU!”
I, and I’ll bet most Coburgers, don’t succumb to any climate hysteria. Change or anti-change, man made or natural.
The relatively few who do succumb (on both sides of the argument) can be found here on this blog.
Give it a rest Wally. Your arguments get lost in your own traffic.
It appears to me that his technique is a good example of what’s called the Gish Gallop. You make so many arguments with such rapidity that your opponents either have to respond quickly, and can be dismissed for “not doing enough research before responding” or have to leave most of the arguments unanswered, and thus can be dismissed for “Ignoring my points.”
Whine whine whine. Take your time. I’m taking my time. Relax. Research. Make your points. Time to join friends for a movie. ta ta
Now that you’ve told us you use pseudonyms, there’s a good one for you Wally. Beats using your SIN number or whatever that (9 digit with space in between each group of 3) is.
hey Frenchy, SIN OR SI Number, but not SIN number
What is wrong with “SIN number”? It goes with “parquet floor”.
Dr. John Robson investigates the unsound origins and fundamental inaccuracy, even dishonesty, of the claim that 97% of scientists, or “the world’s scientists”, or something agree that climate change is man-made, urgent and dangerous. https://youtu.be/ewJ6TI8ccAw
We have an environmental emergency and there are many things that can be done at the local level – part of this is climate change, although I don’t buy into the mass-hysteria, part of it is energy and finding better ways to address our unquenchable thirst for energy, we certainly have a consumer waste issue (plastics, batteries, chemicals, heavy metals, etc), we have a recycling deficit that needs to be addressed, we have clean, fresh water concerns that need immediate solutions and significant protection, we need to be incredibly protective of our farm lands and soil management because no will tear down subdivisions to make way for farming and we absolutely have a clean air crisis …
You don’t need to believe in climate change or read scientific reports to know we are screwing up the planet and things need to change.
@ rob
You post seems reasonable.
There are two very different things…
-One is the global political agenda of climate change.
-The other is care for a clean environment.
Do you agree that the two are different?
question.. where in Canada is this “screwing up the planet” occurring? Because then we can concentrate on that.
From what I see, Canada is very good at caring for the environment/nature. AS WE SHOULD BE.
If you feel that the planet is being “screwed up”, then don’t you think that we should be concerned with helping or promoting the huge polluters in the world to be as environmentally friendly as Canada is?
We enable China and India to pollute massively. We could boycott the super polluting countries until they reform. It would be great for our economy too.
That would be much much more effective if a cleaner world is the goal. Is that your goal?
And do you know about UN agenda 21? Is it concerning to you?
Can you see that climate change is a very powerful global political agenda that is being promoted from the top down.
Canada is a larger polluter
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/11/14/canada-produces-most-greenhouse-gas-emissions-than-any-other-g20-country-new-report-says.html
Of course. Check out the size of our land mass for food deliveries. We heat our homes in a climate of severe and long and lethal winters.
Maybe not for long.
“You don’t need to believe in climate change or read scientific reports to know we are screwing up the planet and things need to change.”
Sure. There’s no need for that scientific nonsense after all, everybody knows that everybody is screwing up an entire planet; gotta change. Sure. Change this: China has declared a socialist five year plan to build 700 reliable and cheap coal-fired plants for its people and the people of Africa. These plants have a life-span of 50-60 years. This will raise the co2 levels beyond the levels recommended by all international accords. And what do the whiney white climate activists have to say about this? Nuffen.
Mostly they say that while China is opening new, advanced coal plants that are more efficient and less polluting than their old plants, they are also closing an even larger coal capacity of older, less efficient more polluting coal plants.
So as an analogy, lets say they are taking actions that will cost 500 dollars, while at the same time taking actions that will save 1000 dollars, for a net savings of 500 dollars. What you’re doing is saying “They’re spending 500 dollars when they’re supposed to be saving money, and the whiners won’t address it.”
When what the “whiners” do is say “Yeah, saving 500 is worse than saving 1000, but both are substantially better than spending 500.”
Your takes are juvenile and lack nuance.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-45640706
2018 article before the announcement of 700 new coal-fired plants. Of course only fools would put their trust in data coming from a totalitarian dictatorshit.
The research, carried out by green campaigners CoalSwarm, suggests that 259 gigawatts of new capacity are under development in China. The authors say this is the same capacity to produce electricity as the entire US coal fleet. there was a surge in new coal projects approved at provincial level in China between 2014 and 2016. at present China has 993 gigawatts of coal power capacity, but the approved new plants would increase this by 25%.
In this study, the researchers used satellite photos to examine every power plant that was subject to a suspension order. They found construction ongoing at many locations.
the planet can’t tolerate another US-sized block of plants to be built,” said Ted Nace, from CoalSwarm.
According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), for the world to limit warming to below 1.75C above pre-industrial conditions, China would have to close all its power plants that don’t have carbon capture and storage facilities within 30 years. [good luck with that]
“Avoiding dangerous climate change requires essentially phasing out coal plants globally by 2045,” said Christine Shearer, lead author of the report. “China needs to begin planning for the aggressive retirement of its existing coal fleet, not building hundreds of new coal plants.” [the new ones have a life-span of 50-60 years.}
This is Coalswarm
Global Energy Monitor was launched under the name CoalSwarm in early 2008 and later that year was accepted as a project of Earth Island Institute, an incubator for innovative projects in ecology and social justice. Affiliation with Earth Island Institute gave access to logistical resources and 501(c)3 tax status, allowing the project to receive tax-deductible donations as well as foundation support. In 2018 CoalSwarm became an independent 501 (c3) organization, and in 2019 changed its name to Global Energy Monitor.
“Dr. John Robson looks back on the 10th anniversary of the exposure of the scandalous “Climategate” decision to delete awkward data that contradicted the idea that settled science said we face a man-made global warming crisis.” https://youtu.be/K_8xd0LCeRQ
The famous Michael Mann, who duped Al Gore with his hockey stick, was ridiculed by Mark Steyn, so Michael Mann decided to sue for defamation. The problem for Michel Mann was “discovery: In support if his belief in accountability and transparency, Michael Mann has refused to disclose any of the alleged” scientific data to support his contention ever since he made it. What is he hiding?
Concerning climate change, overwhelmingly, the science is not settled. Do you want to hang your trillions of dollars worth of policies, regulations and life disruption hat on that hook?
Accurate data and wisdom is called for, not hysteria, crisis, emergency, end of all in 11 years, panic, house on fire, catastrophe, teen angst, ad nauseum.
200 international science associations agree that climate change caused by greenhouse gases is a threat. They are joined by many U.S. societies such as the American Chemical Soceity,American Geophysical Union,Amerian Meterological Soceity,The International Academy of Science,the International Panel on climate change,U.S. Global Research Program.. I could list many more. These are not “left wing organizations”
“200 international science associations agree that climate change caused by greenhouse gases is a threat.”
Please provide a link or other supporting evidence to back up your claim.
but…how are they funded?
This kind of deceitfulness occurs all too often with climate activists.
“May 30, 2019. St. Mary, Montana. Officials at Glacier National Park (GNP) have begun quietly removing and altering signs and government literature which told visitors that the Park’s glaciers were all expected to disappear by either 2020 or 2030. In recent years the National Park Service prominently featured brochures, signs and films which boldly proclaimed that all glaciers at GNP were melting away rapidly. But now officials at GNP seem to be scrambling to hide or replace their previous hysterical claims while avoiding any notice to the public that the claims were inaccurate.”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/06/glacier-national-park-quietly-removes-its-gone-by-2020-signs-2/
Some scientists with the IPCC quietly remove unpalatable data from their reports, eg removing the Medieval Warming Period from Michael Mann’s hockey stick fraud that the Al Gore Rhythm machine made billions from.
Wally – (tsk tsk) you’re using a climate change denier blog ran by untalented hack and radio weatherman, Anthony Watts, as your credible source, who incidentally is funded by the Heartland Institute…see below.
Deceitfulness is not limited to one side or the other…..
Cut the condescending snobtalk. I know untalented blog commentators who couldn’t hack a cobweb. And of course we know how useless radio weatherpersons are, just by their occupation. Oooooo not the demon Heartland Institiute! Funded? Of course. So what? Soros funds things internationally. Lots of funds going around for all sides. Big deal. Cut the snobtalk Rob.
When Ontario used coal burning electrical plants we had a lot of smog days in the summer time , the haze over GTA was bad
Ontario stopped burning coal , no more smog days 🤔
I bet Some people here also want to remove all the pollution control on cars , I have To say if an old car drives by , the smell makes me sick , or a diesel car or truck is even worst
Don’t want to call it Climate Change than don’t , call it breathing clean air
Everyone wants clean air to breathe without the particulate pollution from coal power plants or diesel buses. Climate change activists want to eliminate CO2, something essential for plants, and seldom mention any real pollutants.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ask-the-experts-does-rising-co2-benefit-plants1/
On CO2 being good for plants … among other things, in the article scientists note that increased CO2 when growing foods reduces nutrient value of many food plants. To a point supplementing fields with fertilizer can help. However, the whole picture of increasing levels of CO2 over the long term needs to be considered.
Scientific American new owners are globalists and have bias, I canceled my subscriptions 18 years years ago. They think Newton’s laws did not apply on 9/11
PART !
A corporate research fellow in the Environmental Sciences Division and Climate Change Science Institute of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, notes the results scientists produce in labs are generally not what happens in the vastly more complex world outside. [Quite so, and the same applies to computer modelling.]
Scientists have observed the CO2 fertilization effect in natural ecosystems, including in a series of trials conducted over the past couple decades in outdoor forest plots. In those experiments artificially doubling CO2 from pre-industrial levels increased trees’ productivity by around 23 percent … For one of the experiments, however, that effect significantly diminished over time due to a nitrogen limitation. [All the other experiments in the series of trials did not diminish] That suggests we cannot assume the CO2 fertilization effect will persist indefinitely. [nor can we assume otherwise based on ONE experiment that was an anomaly in a series of trials]
Its negative consequences—such as drought and heat stress—would likely overwhelm any direct benefits that rising CO2 might offer plant life. What’s missing from that argument is that it’s not the whole picture. [The whole picture is missing from both sides of the argument]
For a lot of crops, more CO2 is like having extra material in the atmosphere that they can use to grow, says an assistant professor of environmental science and policy at the University of California, Davis.
For most of the other plants humans eat—including wheat, rice and soybeans—having higher CO2 will help them directly, Doubling CO2 from pre-industrial levels does boost the productivity of crops like wheat by some 11.5 percent and of those such as corn by around 8.4 percent.
PART 2
Research shows plants get some benefits early on from higher CO2, but that starts to saturate after the gas reaches a certain level … The more CO2 you have, the less and less benefit you get. And while rising carbon dioxide might seem like a boon for agriculture, … emphasizes any potential positive effects cannot be considered in isolation, and will likely be outweighed by many drawbacks. [The positive effects are not just a potentiality; they are an actuality. Those actual positive effects should be considered in context.
increased CO2 also benefits weeds that compete with farm plants.
Rising CO2’s effect on crops could also harm human health. “We know unequivocally that when you grow food at elevated CO2 levels in fields, it becomes less nutritious,” notes Samuel Myers, principal research scientist in environmental health at Harvard University. “[Food crops] lose significant amounts of iron and zinc—and grains [also] lose protein.” Myers and other researchers have found atmospheric CO2 levels predicted for mid-century—around 550 parts per million—could make food crops lose enough of those key nutrients to cause a protein deficiency in an estimated 150 million people and a zinc deficit in an additional 150 million to 200 million. (Both of those figures are in addition to the number of people who already have such a shortfall.) A total of 1.4 billion women of child-bearing age and young children who live in countries with a high prevalence of anemia would lose more than 3.8 percent of their dietary iron at such CO2 levels, according to Meyers.
The problem with [the skeptics’] argument is that it’s as if you can cherry-pick the CO2 fertilization effect from the overall effect of adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere,”
Turn off your computer then if you hate electricity and stop eating fresh produce. I remember rare smog days. Thanks to technology it is a thing of the past. We are here today now with scrubbers that don’t pollute barely at all. Not like hypocrite Greta Thunberg’s world travelers. Look at the pictures of her Tesla full of plastic garbage and the litter on the streets after climate marches.
Maybe the hypocrite celebrities will give us more fresh air if they stopped flying private jets, and being chauffeured in limousines then they can virtue signal.
Wrong! Smog days have disappeared because the plants were shut down altogther, not thanks to new technology in them. That was a Liberal Government move btw. If most of the commenters on this topic had their say, we would still have those coal power plants and smog days.
Well not quite. If you are interested in learning more about it, you can look up the work done by Babcock Wilcox ( scrubber installations )to greatly reduce the NOx emissions by from the coal plants at Nanticoke which contributed to smog.
We need to give the Liberal Government full credit for all of their accomplishments. The Liberals reduced smog days and more than doubled the cost of power. See https://www.oeb.ca/rates-and-your-bill/electricity-rates/historical-electricity-rates for details. Families trying to make ends meet may disagree that smog versus cost was a good trade-off.
Also incalcuable savings and lessened strain on the health care system if you want to go down that road. Besides that, I think most of us value our health over saving money on our electric bill…
Again, not quite.
The scrubbers that had been installed on select units of Ontario coal plant were greatly reducing the pollutants causing smog. At the same time, automobile emissions had been lowered due to environmental protections in the states again reducing smog. As Strauss notes, our electricity prices also skyrocketed in Ontario causing even more heavy manufacturers to leave Ontario ( globalism and free trade has already started that ball rolling) and therefore dropping electrical demand in Ontario.
We lost our manufacturing to jurisdictions with few, if any, environmental controls and labour standards. Not really a win for the planet.
It’s a stretch to conflate health care savings with the removal of coal plants when there were so many other factors at play.
Correct, Mrs. Anonymous, but you’ll never convince those whose goal is to make Canadians poorer.
This thread is supposed to be about our climate emergency. You are getting off topic with concerns about real pollutants such as SO2 and NOx; Greta only cares about CO2 and plastic straws. We need to get back on track!
We are wasting far too much money on this subject at the National level. Lets not be gullible enough
to get sucked in at the local level
What is missing from this picture is the general public, you and I … we in the execution of our daily lives who will either make or break any possibility of the mitigation or solution to the problem of climate change, species extinction, population growth and the unrelenting growth in the consumption of natural resources.
Advocates who recently appeared before Council are necessary. They serve to organize the debate. Governments and their beauraucracies are needed to create policies, regulations, laws and their means of enforcement to help US govern ourselves and the many interests WE represent. The catch is that how ever perfect the actions of advocates and government, nothing of significance will change unless the Public is involved, not only in carrying out the policies and regulations and laws but in creating them. This simply does not exist at the moment. Bang-the-Table is not debate, nor is Engage Cobourg. There is at present no opportunity for real and meaningful public debate in which We have the opportunity to hear from and be challenged by eachother.
Right now it’s all top-down. Should this form of decision making by our government continue I believe there will never be an effective solution to the problems that confront us.
Climate always changes and will keep changing forever because it is natural. The sun is our heat source; it is a variable star which means it gets hotter and colder in 11 year cycles. Also Earth gets tugged by the gravity and Electromagnetic forces of the planets like the ocean tides; the earth distance from the sun varies depending on the proximity of the planets define our orbital distance from the heat source the sun. The climate crisis is a communist totalitarian fantasy being used to enslave the planet..
If you accept that science brought us vaccines,airplanes and wonder drugs to name a few why cant you accept what scientists are telling us about climate change. The science is well understood from the basic chemistry and is supported by all the empirical studies
There are 3 tiers of science. 1st tier is secret military science which is hidden from us. 2nd tier is in tight circles of advanced R&D the average Joe can not so easily obtain. 3rd tier science is the garbage the universities teach. Professors at universities today teach this garbage science or lose their jobs because in 2020 universities are run by globalists (unless you get a good rogue professor who doesn’t follow rules. There are exceptions of course) Many professors went through the same meat grinder and perhaps believe the garbage they teach. Thankfully there are brave scientists who know and teach the truth and are too valuable to lose their jobs and they tell the truth like climate scientist Dr. Mototaka Nakamura. The Elite rich own corporations like google and are censoring the truth because their globalist belief and enormous influence their mountains of money can buy.
https://youtu.be/x1HVsRuqfpo
There are more scientists that are also highly censored.
The computer models predicting the climate crisis are greatly flawed and they are programmed to reach the answer the developer pays for
To the four climate emergency alarmists who want local taxpayers to shell out tax dollars and dramatically change our way of life in worship of false idols like climate icon Greta Thunberg and the ecological movement she represents I have but this to say. I and many others in Cobourg are not interested in your far-left, politically green radical views.
I was embarrassed by the uninformed, almost laughable hysteria they resorted to, such as blaming the horrific wildfires in Australia on anthropogenic climate change.
As is so often the case, the claim that the cause is climate change is patently false. The true cause is due to human activity and bad management policies.
Australians like living around vegetation that every year dries out enough to burn sky high and has nothing to do with climate change. It is spectacularly green when it rains during the relatively short rainy season and tinder-dry brown when it stops. When rainfall is high, as it was for recent years in Australia, vegetation grows even thicker, only to provide even more fuel for wildfires.
Australia and California have been ready to explode for years.
It’s long been known that unless government burns the vegetation intentionally before it overgrows, it will burn residents, their homes, and, tragically, their towns.
Policies resulting in drastic reduction of timber harvests, dismantling of fire suppression policies, and significant reductions of livestock grazing on federal lands are the real cause.
The Australian eucalyptus forests burn extremely hot due to the aromatic hydrocarbons they spew.
News reports also suggest that Australia has a firebug, not a climate change, crisis with the arrests of 183 people accused of setting fires over the past few months.
Our culture, our way of life, and our economy are all being questioned and challenged as a result of radical political and environmental activism instead of science.
To the members of our virtue signaling Council who were conned into approving the self-serving interests of the climate radicals the message is simple. Shame on you for succumbing to envirofascism.
The taxpayers of Cobourg are not interested in funding this hoax and false hope.
“Australia and California have been ready to explode for years.”
But not forever. Only in recent years, and more and more as years go by? I wonder why THAT could possibly be.
Our one saving grace is that all the noisy idiots who call people who accept the extremely broadly proven and accepted science “fascists” are old and will not be around to drag us kicking and screaming into ecological disaster for much longer.
Basic Stuff, from your comments I assume that you are not old like me and don’t remember the 1825 fire that burned much of New Brunswick. Or the 1910 fire that burned large parts of the western US. As Canuck Patriot pointed out, the lack of sound forest management rather than climate change is the most important contributor to current forest fires.
If you are young you will get a substantial inheritance from us old folks. Greta will soon be forgotten and you will be able to enjoy countless luxuries to which you contributed nothing.
You’re old enough to remember the 1825 and 1910 fires?
Do you remember Mrs. O’Leary’s cow too?
At my age I’ve probably forgotten more than I remember but I still enjoy reading historical accounts. If you want to learn more about the 1825 and 1910 forest fires Google is your friend.
Does Kevin’s wife have a cow?
“human actions do bear a large share of the blame for the scale of this ongoing tragedy, the cause is primarily bad management policies, not dreaded climate change. Governmental decisions, made under pressure from environmental groups, have made what would normally be big fires into hellish conflagrations.” https://www.thegwpf.com/australian-bushfires-made-worse-by-bad-green-policies/
This is an article, This Is Basic Stuff, that contains data, facts, graphs and other supporting evidence contending that “green policies” have seriously contributed to the conflagration. Policies made in urgency, in a panic, as if there is an emergency, stupid ill-thought out policies implemented by amateurs.
This Is Basic Stuff has only made groundless assertions; they have provided no scientific data to support their malicious assertions that climate change caused the fires. The saddest part is that This Is Basic Stuff spreads a sentiment that dupes many people.
Wally – GWPF is backed by wealthy “deniers”…
Climate activists are backed by all kind of billionaires from the wind and solar industry and Soros ad nauseum, etc.
Are you indulging in the guilt by association technique? And then suggest shunning such sites? These are smear techniques are used by religious believers against heretics, or in the socialist world, against dissidents.
Once again, the typical response by the emergency alarmists is to make the spurious claim that anthropogenic climate change has been proven and is accepted science.
Rather than wishing your elders dead and gone because their views don’t align with those of your patron saint, I’d suggest opening your mind and digging deeper.
The debate on climate change is not over. There is a mass of evidence that contradicts every single claim of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW). What you’ll find is a lot of bad, not accepted, science coupled with mass hysteria, stupidity, ignorance, falsification, bullying, and fraud in the climate change industry. And tons of evidence that there is no CAGW.
In the case of the Australia wildfires, start by reading up on Christine Finlay, the Queensland-based fire researcher, who has been tracking the relationship ¬between reduced cool burning and the frequency of firestorms.
She charted a century of archival bushfires between 1881 and 1981. She found that there was a marked increase in the size and frequency of fires after 1919 when bushfire-reduction operations increasingly moved away from traditional indigenous practices such as low–intensity cool burning.
Finlay says this ¬detailed correlation between the accumulation of catastrophic fuel loads and the frequency of extreme bushfires made it possible to forecast the dramatic increase in firestorms we have seen in the 21st century.
Finlay has the support of forester Vic Jurskis, who has written a book on how indigenous Australians managed the landscape with fire. According to Jurskis the latest wildfires are a “direct consequence of unprecedented accumulation of 3D continuous fuels as a result of green influence on politics.” He sums it up by saying “It’s all about fuel, not climate.”
“Finlay has the support of forester Vic Jurskis, who has written a book on how indigenous Australians managed the landscape with fire.”
The pathetic part is that this conflagration was the result of ill-considered green policies, and it is the height of arrogance and ignorance when North American progressive White Whiners presume to know better than aboriginals. The whole climate change issue is predominately a White Whiner fest. The whining comes mostly from privileged and spoiled Westerners. There is no broad climate change movement in Africa and Asia, but White Whiners continue to lobby for policies that would keep people of colour in energy poverty. The Chinese are currently colonizing Africa with the construction of a multitude of cheap, reliable coal fired plants that have a lifespan of 50-60 years and the people of India continue to invest in coal fired plants. Of course, the progressive White Whiners of the energy-rich North America presume to know what is best to Save Our Planet and never demonstrate their concerns about the 700 new coal-fired plants that China will be building in the next five years. Remember those lethal socialist Five-Year Plans of the USSR. .
Saving the Planet from anything requires global diversity. The climate change movement is a big White Whine Whoax that is bereft of authentic diversity.
“Australia and California have been ready to explode for years.”
The result of human mismanagement on the ground. Greens prevented such management with policies to prevent managed burns, claiming such burns lead to climate change. Fools.
There is also the serious issue of fat horses brought on by climate change. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/11/29/climate-change-making-horses-fat-causing-abundance-grass-grow/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_fb&fbclid=IwAR2_g00rsWKhsrl1DBqL2T6BgU9iiTcnP2ySUTAe2iUFVCBsYydTLEICAyw
And Australian green activists now have picked on killing 10,000 camels as a solution https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7858237/More-10-000-Australian-camels-die-drink-water.html?ito=facebook_share_article-top&fbclid=IwAR25EBfj53290q0W80sLrdBGyl9EH2bzOuFioQz07MjbrkIn8UYNIS-pYEY
It’s green policy run amuck.
I am a taxpayer and I do NOT agree with anything you said. However I DO agree with the comment from h/she who labelled him/herself “This is basic stuff”.
Alarmism at Cobourg Town Council, Jan 6 2020 https://youtu.be/2ZMZT3J8sCM
For a minute, I thought that was a real video.
Not real? It plays fine here.
Wow. Start storing food.
Also, the feds are/have pushing hard for the carbon tax, and an ever increasing tax, we are not naive. And yet there is no accountability as to where this hard earned money is going. Forcing money out of the pockets of hard working Canadians is a classic case case of ‘legal plunder’ It is particularly a violation to the millions of Canadians who very much oppose the climate change agenda. Clean environment YES! “climate change” NO!
The ever increasing tax comes with an ever increasing rebate for the actual individual Canadians you care so much about. Almost everybody gets more back from the rebate than they pay in the tax.
The average rebate exceeds the average tax across the board. Could this maybe be an additional burden on individual long-haul truckers? They’re about the only demographic of individual who actually consumes enough taxed material to lose out based on the rebate.
What a marvelous vote buying scheme to give everyone a cheque for more than they pay. Please explain how a tax like that solves any problem. BTW, those long haul truckers deliver your food, cars, iPads and everything else.
“How does a tax like that solve any problem”
Because the giant heavily polluting industries that are the bulk of the problem aren’t getting rebates. This is EXTREMELY basic stuff.
“Do you hate Canada?” would get you flunked out of even the most basic logic and argumentation class, Get out of here with your fear-mongering garbage.
…and where the hell do you think those “giant heavily polluting industries that are the bulk of the problem” will get the money to pay those carbon taxes? Anyone who believes that a government has invented a tax scheme that refunds more than it collects needs to go back to school. No matter how you obfuscate the path that these taxes take, the simple reality is that there is only ONE source of tax money…the tax-paying consumer. And you can bet that those “giant heavily polluting industries that are the bulk of the problem” will keep a cut of those taxes just for the trouble of dealing with the extra bureaucracy of it all.
The rebates exceed the taxes.
So discouraging to wade through all this negativity. Why is it the same people responsible for the dire climate crisis are so adamantly in denial it even exists? It’s not like we didn’t know. I clearly remember learning about all this way back in the days of black and white television, one per household. As for Suzuki, his choice of living space is his decision, and after being confined to an internment camp as a child in Canada’s disgraceful show of racism towards people who looked Japanese (he was born in Vancouver for heaven’s sake) we owe him and others like him our respect, nothing less.
@DB
I very much disagree. I feel that the negativity comes from the alarmists. I do not think there could be anything more negative and discouraging than ‘the sky is falling’ ‘ mass extinction’ global agenda of “climate change”.
I very much support people who work towards a cleaner environment, but the point is that the people who you might call ‘deniers’ are people who are simply asking people to be informed and to be aware that environmentalism is being used to put in place globalism in the form of UN agenda 21. We are saying that the climate change agenda is very insidious and political and to look for yourselves.
Also, I don’t understand you making a link to racism but it shows that perhaps you are desperate and want to use PC as a weapon to force your opinions on others? I find it dirty pool non the less… pardon the pun.
The climate change agenda will be most destructive to the third world and the poor in general. David Suzuki and the global elite .0001% will continue to live the luxurious life of jet setters.
Of course the choice of one’s living space should be a personal thing. Did anyone suggest otherwise? However, “hypocrite” is the usual word for one who berates others for their living space choices.
Perhaps in the 1970s you were “learning” from movie stars and talking heads on your single black-white TV rather than reading actual scientific literature. See https://tinyurl.com/yzgwz96a for almost 300 peer reviewed scientific papers of the era that reported that there was cooling rather than warming. Or see the Washington Post Newspaper at https://tinyurl.com/yhtvzaco
See some of us do remember George Carlin
the Planets just fine Save the people
To most of the comments here…
OK, Boomer
The mating call of the ill-informed.
Interesting quote from a Star story about a dad and his son.
“His will ultimately be the generation to properly tackle the challenge of climate change, of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption, while those who came before them merely bickered as to its existence.”
Climate change is a national issue not a Cobourg alone solvable issue. If Ottawa or Queen’s Park were trying to draw the Cobourg’s of the country into a unified plan we should listen. Blue Dot’s strategy appears to be a desire to conquer little Town’s like Cobourg across Canada and then toot their horn to the Feds. How can our Council craft a best for Cobourg taxpayers’ budget when every local activist group in town wants their mission statements to be an integral part of our budget?
Isn’t pandering to every fringe group the way to win elections?
If anyone missed the Ricky Gervais’ Monologue at the 2020 Golden Globes they shoould check it out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCNdTLHZAeo
I love it when the self righteous Elite Hollywood SJW Liberals get destroyed by their own hypocrisy.
Virtue signalling left got their butt handed to them before blaming the audience for the changing climate which has always changed and will keep changing for the coming eternity.
These filthy rich Hollyweird actors with their incredibly expensive clothing and jewellery some are wearing costs more money than most people make in a year, yet they want us to feel guilty for using up the Earth’s resources. Forget the all flew to this event in private jets and each took limousines to arrive like they were important yet want to tax us for living.
They blame us for “global warming ” for Australian fires but it turns out https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10693625/australia-bushfires-180-arson-arrests/
Try https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wt21w6-_M4c to watch Ricky’s material from Canada.
When it comes to Climate Change, Suzuki’s personal life is a joke!
Send our Mayor back to China and then on to India to lobby for reduced coal fired electricity generating facilities.
How about a reduced bus scheduled bus service in Cobourg to reduced the pollution from these vehicles. Are we as a town ready to give up our Xmas lights…reduce our electricity needs?
No AC for town offices/buildings? Save more electricity?
Thanks for the excellent suggestions, cornbread, but they don’t go nearly far enough to fight our recently declared climate emergency. I suggest that the bus and taxi services be eliminated rather than merely reduced. Walking would improve the health of Cobourgians. Not only no AC for town buildings but heating can also be drastically reduced since the poorly informed hot air from climate change activists is more than sufficient to provide heating if everyone wears natural, bamboo, clothing. Council has banned the sale of bottled water but has ignored the carbon footprint resulting from meat products. Why not a complete ban on meat sales at ribfest and other events? As in many California towns the planned green building code should prohibit gas furnaces, gas stoves and gas hot water heaters.
Just a few suggestions before my second morning coffee. Ooops, I forgot. We must ban coffee in Cobourg in order to protect the rain forest!
“Walking would improve the health of Cobourgians”
It would certainly do that. It would be a win-win, one for the climate, one for the social health care system. Transportation is a notably large emitter of co2. There are manual bikes and trikes; zero emitters, like walking. I’ve done both all my life. I’ve ridden in many publicly available emitters, hired taxis, flew abroad, but, like the Mennonites, I did not own a personal emitter.
I do find it interesting that all too often those who press “emergency” “panic” “house on fire” “fear” drive to their meetings via fossil fueled vehicles. Joaquim Phoenix pointed out that the gathered glitterati at the Golden Globe Awards flew in on their private jets to enjoy a vegan dinner. (I wonder if will be vegan next year, or will it be a different virtue?)
Ten years ago Sustainable Cobourg held a municipal candidates meeting at the Cobourg Library. The event was well-attended; the parking lot was full. I rode my bike around the building; only one other bike was locked up. The parking lot was full of emitters. I noted this and asked the candidates to stand up if they did not arrive at this meeting in a motor vehicle; only one stood up. The parking lot was full of emitters. Donna Todd was elected that year. She walked her talk.
Every Councillor and municipal employee should keep track of their emissions, with monthly meetings to discuss further emission reductions. Town Council has signed on to the “emergency” and have declared it a “top priority.” So 2020 should be the year of virtue action, when Councillors walk their talk. It’s a small town, not a big city, so walk to your meetings or bike to them — not every day is inclement. Set the example that you advocate. Walk Your Talk!
You forgot BBQs..what will we do to handle small “burn offs” that promote healthier forest growth and reduce major forest fires like California and Australia?
I went by one of David Suzuki’s mansions many times in Vancouver and usually all the lights were on, just like Al Gore cares not about having all the lights on.
Virtue signalling John Travolta has 2 private jumbo jets parked at his Mansion with an airstrip.
Get a load of this Hollywood hypocrisy and remember they say you are the problem with your SUVs and your electric refrigerators
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTScjfUaZDY
Speaking of China when is the Mayor going to give Council and the public a detailed report on the all expenses paid for trip he and the former Mayor took? If my memory serves me correctly, he promised to table the report a year ago. What’s he keeping secret?
Save The Planet !!!! Many of us older citizens and inhabitants now ZOOMERS of of Earth will remember the now deceased
George Carlin and his historic stint on save the earth that came about as a result of the Hippy and Green peace movements and their many years of Good Campaigning to Save the Planet 40 + years ago If you can find a video on George Carlin’s save the Planet its well worth watching if nothing else it will lift your spirits
in conclusion
” You can’t save the Planet !! it will look after it self as it has time and time again it will rid it self of petulant s just like it did in the past , What We Need is to SAVE THE PEOPLE ! “
I am concerned that this sounds exactly how these international corporate executives are taking advantage of our kind Canadian compassion. The International Monetary Fund is losing control of world finances due to the usury and unfair Keynesian economics so they are trying to switch the petrodollar for a totally fabricated climate crisis carbon credit money system just like IMF Christine Lagarde stated in her recent speech.
The IMF is working with the UN using this phony climate crisis to complete their own totalitarian agenda of take control of our country and they are doing this using the municipal governments in Canada including ours local government .
If you don’t know what UN Agenda 21 and UN Agenda 2030 is
then watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXqOzAW
and educate yourself because it is in your own interest to see what plans they have for you.
I hope that you are not suggesting that Cobourg’s Councillors were duped by the UN, Suzuki, Greta and the other caring people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXqOzAW
I’m getting “Video unavailable”.
That is odd. it was just there. Here is another
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXqOzAWeTmY
Thank you.
And another you tube, the best one I have watched of the dozens I have bookmarked.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMfYjKauHbs
This video is unavailable because it’s intended only for people in the U.S. The “Loyal Canadian” is commenting from a U.S. location.
I am happy to see that others spend some time educating themselves on the UN shenanigans and the scam on which the UN is spending billions to baffle us all. It is shocking, and it is also shocking that some residents of our own town are trying to do the same. Wake up, start educating yourself folks. Your are being duped, and I for sure don’t want a cent of our tax dollars spent on anything to do with climate change. Read some books, learn the real reason why the UN is doing this. It is not complicated.
I recommend the following for climate change information:
1, Climate Depot, https://www.climatedepot.com/
2. CO2 Coalition, http://co2coalition.org/about/
3. What Up With That, https://wattsupwiththat.com/
4. No Tricks Zone, https://notrickszone.com/
5. Wind Concerns Ontario, http://www.windconcernsontario.ca/
I also recommend a few Patrick Moore videos. Dr Moore was one of the founders of Greenpeace. It was the late 60s and he achieved his doctorate as a climate scientist, something that Dr Suzuki is not. Patrick Moore has always been applauded for speaking truth to power. He took to the high seas and put his life at risk for his environmental beliefs, something that Suzuki has never done.
1. Overview of real climate science, https://youtu.be/S6sKPSKkvVs
2. Polar Bear Scare, https://youtu.be/4BFdyYu4w_Q
3. Walrus Death Leap https://youtu.be/pSKsoYzapgQ
Note that if you have 2 or more links in a comment, it will need approval before it’s published. Approval means that it’s judged not to be spam or offensive – and does not imply any opinion one way or another. Approval could be delayed too – no implication from that either.
Wally, can’t find anything that says Patrick Moore was a founder of Greenpeace, only that he was a past president…
Can you give me a link to that info.
Appreciated
Nope. Can’t. Patrick was an early member, not a ‘founder’. My bad. He was, of course, the only Greenpeace member with a Doctorate in Ecology.
Good luck with the planning department. They’re in the business of rubber stamping sprawl, big box/strip malls, drive-thrus and connecting it all with big ole arterial roads.