“Climate Crisis” and Eco-Activism Have Completely Jumped the Shark
Today in “The Science™”: Blue jeans cause climate change that creates earthquakes and impoverishes Indonesian trans sex workers.
I have been covering the pseudoscience behind “climate crisis” for quite some time at Legal Insurrection.
Some of the recent narrative pushes have been astonishing and exceedingly hilarious.
-
- The CDC Links ‘Climate Crisis’ to Horrors of Flesh-Eating Bacteria
- Media Beclowns Itself with Articles Linking Israel’s Military Efforts in Gaza to….Climate Crisis
- California OK’s Plan to Allow Insurance Companies to Use “Climate Crisis” to Inflate Rates
- New Climate Crisis Scare: Killer Tsunamis from the Antarctic
- CNN Dilutes National Margarita Day Joy with Climate Crisis Drama
As ridiculous as these claims and headlines are, it is now clear that the “climate crisis” pseudoscience and its accompanying narrative have completely jumped the shark.
Let’s start with an item that some of our Legal Insurrection readers shared yesterday about the earthquake in New Jersey. It turns out that a the Green Party candidate for US Senate it the state endeavored to connect the quake with climate change.
It did not go well for her.
I experienced my first earthquake in NJ. We never get earthquakes. The climate crisis is real.
The weirdest experience ever.
— Christina Amira Khalil (@Christina4NJ) April 5, 2024
Khalil earned over 10,000 comments mocking her assertion and some fascinating lessons about the geology of the East Coast. She was bitterly clinging to a particularly laughable “emerging issues” article linking earthquakes to climate crisis…until the over-whelming evidence of plate tectonics became too much to bear.
Turns out, there were fairly sizeable quakes along the Ramapo Fault in the 1700s, long before there were any cars or significant industrialization. Once again, my science trumps your pseudoscience. https://t.co/EDB766pXSy
— Leslie Eastman ☥ (@Mutnodjmet) April 6, 2024
Let’s take a look at another ridiculous assertion: Climate change is making life more difficult for transgender Indonesian sex workers.
Trans women like Patiha are among the most affected by extreme weather linked to climate change, as well as suffering disproportionately when disasters strike.
“No one is coming out during the longer rainy season,” said Patiha. “It is very hard to make money during that unpredictable weather.”
Which leads me to ask why researchers are studying sex workers in Indonesia. But, I digress.
There is much mocking of this trite piece of pseudoscience.
The Climate Crisis gets worse every day. Every time you start your car you are complicit in the genocide of trans sex workers in Indonesia. Stay at home, eat lentils and turn your heating and lights off. https://t.co/jR0SuAfIKj
— Allen Grove (@AllenGrove15) April 4, 2024
Rounding out today’s review of eco-activist nonsense is the a study linking the most iconic item in the American wardrobe — blue jeans — to carbon dioxide emissions.
Bonus: The study was done by Chinese researchers.
Wearing a pair of fast fashion jeans just once creates 2.5kg of CO2, the equivalent of driving a petrol car 6.4 miles.
Scientists from the Guangdong University of Technology analysed the life cycle of a pair of Levi’s jeans from growing the cotton to their eventual disposal.
They found that some jeans were worn only seven times – earning them the classifiation of ‘fast fashion’ – and produced 11 times more CO2 than jeans wore more often.
Dr Ya Zhou, the study’s lead author says: ‘The humble wardrobe staple – a pair of jeans – has a significant impact on the environment.
Yet the Chinese seem very unconcerned about their carbon footprint.
China approved 114 gigawatts (GW) of coal power capacity in 2023, up 10% from a year earlier, with the world’s top carbon polluter now at risk of falling short on climate targets after sanctioning dozens of new plants, research showed on Thursday.
In an effort to bring climate-warming emissions to a peak by 2030, China has vowed to “strictly control” new coal-fired generation capacity, and has also connected record numbers of new wind and solar plants to its grid.
And the research is being mocked and derided in social media.
Stop with these lies. We are on our way to our FL vacation house today. We’re both wearing jeans and he’s driving our F150 because we’re hauling some gear. Tell all fearmongering lying ‘scientists’ so they can cry about it.
— Savannah (@BasedSavannah) April 5, 2024
During my time writing about environmental science, I do not recall so much push-back against so-called “experts” and the woke minions in the media. This gives me profound hope that better science, a foundation of good and effective policies, will finally be able to be freely shared and widely accepted.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
So “climate change” concerns Indonesian sex workers greatly… but not monkeypox, right? Yeah, that’s the ticket.
“Every time you start your car you are complicit in the genocide of trans sex workers in Indonesia. Stay at home, eat lentils and turn your heating and lights off.”
Worried about greenhouse gases? Eat more lentils. Morons.
If these weirdos want to pretend to have a religion about climate change… fine… but can they please skip ahead to the part where they throw themselves into volcanos, into the Arctic or whatever other method their spirit animal tells them to use?
Face it, their goal is to be the priests on top of the pyramids cutting out other people’s hearts, not the ones on the altar. The climate gods must be appeased or the sun won’t rise tomorrow.
Nah. I’m not convinced by their hesitation to fully commit to the logical conclusion of their argument. If humans are ‘bad’ b/c we use modern technology to have a 1st world lifestyle and this is harmful then these weirdos should be willing to become martyrs or at least go live elsewhere, outside a 1st or 2nd world environment so they won’t be tempted to back slide.
They’ve got to stick around long enough to make sure the rest of us die off. And I think they are like the maniacs who plan to murder their families, then kill themselves, but only go through with the first half of the plan. If they ever managed to reach their goal for the rest of us, things would start looking different and they’d realize the world needs a few “enlightened” humans.
Oh goody goody now I know howto reduce the nubmer of sex woerkers in Indoinesia wuthout even leaving my own hometown. I’ll jst go out and light off my stinky old school diesel powered pickup truck a dozen times a day.
Morons!!! This ain’t “The Science” its propaganda. Sorry, my sack is already full I’m not buying today.
Science reveals Google’s energy hog server farms create more CO2 than 300 million cars, but is mitigated by 46 Altamont Pass wind turbines.
Matt Taibbi mocks
New NPR Chief Katherine Maher.
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi
FYI, people without a Twitter account can still access specific tweets if the specific URL is provided, but providing just the member’s main thread gets them only the posts made before Twitter put its firewall up.
but ONLY when the wind is blowing. Which, because of “climb mutt chaynge” is happening less and less often. Oh we’re ALL dooooomed.
The left needs to make up its mind as to the cause of all evil in the world:
Is it climate change?
Or is it Trump?
Climate Trump! A new super villain!
Nah, get it right:
Trump trumps climate every time.
Too bad about the jeans. Could have asked Dan Goldman to surrender his fortune.
“No one is coming… during the longer rainy season,” said Patiha. “It is very hard to make money during that unpredictable weather.”
A tranny hooker can’t throw any BJ’s because of my SUV?
My response to that? Suck my
….errr wait a sec….
I believe “tailpipe” is the word for which you are hunting.
You’re welcome
And here I thought I already heard all the stupid bullshit that communist retards could come up with
Why are “scientists” studying trans sex workers in Indonesia? Because they couldn’t afford the ones closer to home, even with a grant.
It’s a journalistic story about a particular group of people, not a scientific study.
Bullshit. It’s propaganda, you silly dingus.
Sure buddy, keep pretending. When the only thing you can do is smear the other viewpoint you really do demonstrate how poorly thought out your position is
Scientists or journalists, they found a way to get their employer to pay for a tropical vacation _and_ hookers.
Cited Article: here is a journalistic story about the real world impacts of climate change on a group of vulnerable people
This article: Laughs at vulnerable people and makes no point whatsoever with respect to demonstrating the legitimacy of climate change.
No, the cited article sounds too much like the giant floating trash island in the ocean — a lie from beginning to end.
This sounds like you are using feelings rather than facts and therefore can be disregarded
Nah. I’m a chemist, and I’ve been following econut bs for years.
Here’s a credulous link about that highly exaggerated trash island.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_garbage_patch
The problem with the “environmentalists” is that they refuse to listen to anybody with a real technical degree.
This is more realistic.
https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/great-pacific-garbage-patch-isnt-what-you-think/
There is no such island. And, when some credulous enviros set out on a boat to find it, they couldn’t. So, they made artificial floating masses of straw and crap to help people visualize it. Their posts eventually were wiped from the Net due to derision.
It’s not really clear to me how citing a different thing where your claim appears to be that that thing is a lie only to find you cited Article says no such thing. Seems like if your going to make a claim saying that it’s a lie you’d actually cite something that doesn’t show the exact opposite. Bizzare
Speaking of legitimacy, it’s time to update your programming, marx. There’s a new doomsday.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/un-climate-chief-presses-for-faster-action-says-humans-have-2-years-left-to-save-the-world/ar-BB1lopyG
Non responsive to any point made.
Non responsive with respect to determining whether global warming is an issue
Non responsive on the effe ta of global warming and climate change
Non responsive with respect to what the article you cite actually means or entail.
Basically you’ve said nothing of value. At all.
Of course it is responsive. It’s another report that illustrates why the UN has no credibility on this topic.
It’s not, not even remotely. An ignorant understanding of what is meant with respect to these predictions followed by a total lack of argument with respect to any aspect of the claims being made really only points to your lack of credibility.
You’re not really that stupid, are you BarfE? The climate cult loons have been making outlandish claims for more than half a century, and they have all been proven to be wrong, over and over again. It’s all rooted in some Malthusian fever dream, and/or a Marxist quest for power, or some combination of the two, depending on what motivates the individual climate loon.
There is a great fable called ‘The Boy Who Cried Wolf’. You should read it some time.
@Paul
No Paul climate deniers have misrepresented, lied and generally been FOS. Take for example the criticism that science predicted an ice age. Climate deniers took a single person’s view and pretended it was the entire scientific communities position, it wasn’t, at all. It’s all smears to covered over the fact that climate deniers cannot explain the temperature curves we are seeing.
A bunch of ladyboy prostitutes don’t make as much money when it’s raining.
Cry me a river.
That’s your opinion, which is fine but that just informs everyone of what type of person you are given the nature of the article.
“This article: Laughs at vulnerable people and makes no point whatsoever with respect to demonstrating the legitimacy of climate change.”
Horse sh*t. The article tried to link two things that have absolutely nothing to do with each other, using today’s most-favored protected classes.
The real laughing that is going on is the ENTIRE LI commenter community laughing at your ridiculous and almost-unreadable assertions.
You’re so ridiculous you HAVE to be an AI bot, right?
“The article tried to link two things that have absolutely nothing to do with each other”
Actually they do, its demonstrably the case that rainfall has increased and that there is a causal link with climate change. The cited article then goes onto state how this specifically affects a particular group. Then this article just claims the opposite, doesn’t actually address any of the contents, doesn’t make an argument. In other words the article doesn’t provide any substance.
“The real laughing that is going on is the ENTIRE LI commenter community laughing at your ridiculous and almost-unreadable assertions.”
Firstly they aren’t assertions, its objectively the case that this article doesn’t actually make any argument whatsoever it just makes a series of assertions; that’s as opposed to the cited article which has actual facts which are never contradicted by this article. Secondly why should I care about LI commenters laughing given the complete lack of substantive response. Ho ho ho isn’t exactly a compelling argument is it.
Wait a minute: the study said wearing jeans only 7 times creates more pollution than wearing them more often. That means the problem is wearing jeans too seldom.
I’m wearing my new Pistola jeans for the third time today…I’m committed to at least 8 ‘wears’.
I wore Levi’s for many years. Lliterally. I’d get two pair and wear the cleaner one for out in public, then for work when they got too dirty to wear in public. Then I’d put on some shorts and lander them both. I’d generally get three years out of each pair. There is only OINE time I wor my Levi’s just once. First time I wore hem on my way home I stopped by and noticed by boat, moored aling the river, was signficantly down on her marks. Oh the bilge pump battery is low. So I got out, boarded, used the Armstring ,ark pump to empty her bilge, then switched to the standby charged batery for the pump. I then picked up the discharged battery to carry out to the car to bring home for a recharge. Next morning I went to install my worn only one time pair of “new” Levi’s and was shocked to discover about a third of the uppar part was.GONE. the battery I had carried evidently had some acid on it which slopped onto the new jearns as I carried it down to the boot of the car.
THus I ONLY wore that pair ONE TIME. And since wearing Levis ONLY ONE TIME causes so much pollution today’s rapidly accelerating climate change MUST be directly caused by that one pair I only wore one time.
OK now HOLD IT right there. Before you start laughing at my “scientific method” please realise mine is nearly identical to that of these paid chinese propaganda manufacturers. There are only two differences between that group and myself: first they are chinese, I’m a Yank. Second, they get PAID government money for their mind-bending rants.. I get the ends of my fingers flattened as I bang these keys.
I once knew people who would wear a pair of jeans just once, for 3 years. Then I stopped drinking…
I always suspected that transsexualism is jeanetic.
Wearing a pair of fast fashion jeans just once creates 2.5kg of CO2, the equivalent of driving a petrol car 6.4 miles.
so slipping on pair of Levi’s just one time “creates” that much CO2, about five times the total weight of only ONE pair? SHow your work…..
then they claim that is the equivalent of driving a petrol car 6.4 MILES. First clue they are making it up, mixing meric and US measures. But think about it.
Driving a car twenty five miles produces ten kilos of CO2? A nirmal car today will return about 20 miles on a galllon, of petrol, which weighs about 4 kilos. So the car MAKES more weight of CO2 in that 15 miles than the total weight of the fuel it burns to go that far?
Wha ARE these clowns smoking?
And my old English Mini )as opposed to the new German one, so called) all got 54 miles to the gallon (US gallon not imperial) whilst crusing at 75 mph. But that vehicle was banned from the US market because it was two inches too short. Didn’t matter which size engine, I had them all.. 850, 997, 998, 1070, and 1275 cc displacement. All got the same economy at cruise. Pushing them in the twisties, now, that’s another thing.
But NO one can build that car any more “because, regs”. Nearly four times the fuel efficiency as most of today’s cars but we can’t use them. Now THAT is government folly at work.
And the chynee are fussing over my LEvi’s? One thing they did NOT address… jow about the blue jeans I wear today, Wrangler, which cost only ten bucks the pair? Do they case as much CO2 release as Levi’s?
Is that 15 miles or 25? You seem to have slipped somewhere. But it’s not important. I’ll ignore that rather than look up everything I’d need to calculate fuel mileage in kg per mile myself.
When you burn most fuels, you add several times the mass of oxygen to the mass of the fuel in the products. E.g., burning pure carbon C + O2 = CO2. The atomic mass of carbon is 12, and oxygen is 16. So you burn 12 grams of carbon with 32 grams of oxygen, and get 44 grams of CO2. Carbon to CO2 multiplies the mass 3.67 times.
But your car doesn’t burn coal, let alone pure carbon, it burns light hydrocarbons, excluding those so light they’d boil out of your fuel tank. I think octane C8H18 is close enough to the average molecule of gasoline. This has a molecular mass of 114. It burns:
2 C8H18 + 25 O2 = 16 CO2 + 18 H2O
This added 800 grams of oxygen to 228 grams of fuel, giving 1028 grams of combustion products. But it isn’t all CO2. The CO2 from this reaction is 16 x 44 = 704. That’s an increase in mass of 3.08 times. Your 4 kg of petrol releases 12 kg of CO2. If you drove a SUV in city traffic, you might burn 6.5kg of petrol to go 15 miles, and release 20 kg of CO2.
I don’t see that claim as unreasonable. However, it’s coming from people that probably couldn’t tell you whether they were measuring “carbon” or carbon dioxide – and have no idea what else affects climate, nor whether the “scientists” they like to quote have ever confirmed a hypothesis by making accurate predictions with it.
Great. Now do it for a windmill. What is the car-miles equivalent for putting up one of those?
Blue Jeans can do anything. I’m so old, I remember when billboards of Heather Locklear’s bum in designer jeans contributed to the Soviet collapse.
“Comrade, can we have some of that ability in great Socialist Utopia; I’m feeling a need.”
Leave a Comment