In the interest of publishing what the true believers of climate change think, Pipeline Online published this op-ed from two university professors, one from Concordia, the other from McGill. They want to shut down all fossil fuels – coal, oil, natural gas, now. Period. The article came from The Canadian Press.
If we don’t end the use of fossil fuels, all of the rest adds up to little more than branches piled on the tracks in front of a runaway train. They might slow the train temporarily, but until we get inside the engine and shut off the throttle, the train will keep accelerating.
– Eric Galbraith, H. Damon Matthews
And, in a related note: the assault on art continues, this time in Vienna, in the name of saving the planet from fossil fuels.
I wonder if Professor Galbraith still owns the petroleum-based jacket, gloves, hat, and sunglasses that he’s wearing in the picture.
IPhone, boat he is on, probe in his hand, food he eats, etc.
He should remove them.
For purity of ideology.
I would like to see the ones who say no more fossil fuels go without using anything made or used by it for 1 month.
I’d settle for a small randomized controlled trial. Say Ontario and Quebec for a winter. One with fossil fuels one without. Flip a coin.
The rest of us can watch.
Toss the coin over your shoulder & let ’em both walk the talk. They’d still vote Lieberal next election, but at least they’d have an eddication.
I honestly don’t know why there aren’t reality TV shows for idiots who hate petroleum, or who think that they can do a real job with only a gender studies degree.
Imagine the entertainment value of watching these twerps spit up blood in twenty minutes of doing a real job.
Survivor? Naked and Afraid?
Both would be pretty close to petroleum free
they said the quiet part out loud…Malthusian theory is alive and thriving in academia… pay no attention to the glaring contradictions and denial of economic reality..
The human contribution to CO2 in our atmosphere is only 3.9% (of the total 0.04 %). In 5 days, a single volcano will undo 5 years worth everybody doing everything they can to eliminate human CO2. How can humans possibly be affecting the climate? Makes no sense. What am I missing?
Note also that CO2 contributes less than 5% of the greenhouse effect. The main greenhouse gas is water vapour at well over 90%.
Even if we are generous and say that CO2 is 5% of the greenhouse effect and that man-made emissions are also 5% (an exaggeration), then man-made emissions account for 0.25% of the greenhouse effect. Turning that around, it means over 99.75% of the greenhouse effect is completely beyond our control.
The first thing you learn in meteorology is that without water vapour there is no weather.
What are you missing? Simple, you are ignoring the message and actually thinking for yourself.
Another thing that everybody is missing in this whole environmental debacle is the effect that modern irrigation methods inject more water vapor into our atmosphere than at any other time in human history.
If we were to eliminate modern agricultural irrigation, that is to say stop using the DIESEL/COAL/NATURAL GAS powered pumps that distribute the water to the fields and orchards that provide our sustinance we would eliminate a large percentage of these ‘university professors’ that are so keen to tell us all how we should live. To coin an oft quoted phrase “Never in the course of human history has so much been owed by so many to so few!” If it wasn’t for powered irrigation our agricultural producers would not be able to produce the quantity of crops that sustain our life style.
What is missing ?
The carbon they want to eliminate is YOU.
Check out the history of volcanic eruptions on growing seasons across the world.
Long, cold winters and few crops.
Gailbraith and Matthews are mentally ill. It’s as simple as that.
I know many here are non-religious, but history’s most famous and bestselling Book has this to say about such people:
“For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools…”
Romans 1: 21-23
Not mental illness. Spiritual illness. That whole chapter is eye-opening.
They certainly aren’t rational thinkers.
End fossil fuel use and how many billions will die as a result?
Someone pointed out a couple years back, if we end all use of fossil fuels, within 6 months there won’t be a tree left on the planet. People won’t simply sit in the dark and die, they’ll fight for their lives to the end, and if that involves killing every last tree they’ll do it.
They say, “Ending fossil fuel use is essential to end the climate crisis, and there is no alternative.” Well no problem then, because there is no climate crisis.
The gold in professor dipshit’s earing was mined and smelted using fossil fuels. He should lose it. Ditto his composite spectacles. What a f##ing hypocritical moron.
The heat in those universities obviously need to be turned off to save the planet.
De-funding the education system needs to be a priority, academics are too stupid for words.
how about all the medicines that have direct or indirect links to carbon fuels? How about the specialized lubricants (get your minds out of the gutter) that keep the wind turbines turning? The list is endless of what is connected to petroleum. Have they ever considered what is connected to these energy supplies? Nope. No asphalt or concrete roadways for them. Hope they love mud roads caked with horse manure
Actually they only say to end the use of fossil FUELS. If oil is used for medicines or lubricants or plastics or asphalt, it isn’t being used as a fuel.
Do you think they would stop there? Fanaticism has no off switch
Clearly these dullards have no idea how things work. How we get food, how we get heat and cooling, how we get from A to B … what keeps an airplane in the sky … where sneakers and sunglasses come from …. And what about those power boats and campers and vinyl siding for millions of homes … etc etc etc.
They are destructive fools …. I hope this fad passes soon.
For those who were spared university, ‘dullard’ is a first year university word for ‘stupid’. “Incongruous’ is the other word they learn on in the first few days of classes.
Pony tail: Check
Earring: Check
Punchable face: Oh yeah
May as well have “Marxist” tattooed on his forehead. Greta let the communist cat out of the bag with her anti capitalist musings the other day so I think we all know what they’re really jonesing for.
The supposed intelligentsia of the world have historically always run roughshod over the lives of others with their warped views and always with the same catastrophic results.
Ontario is utterly hopeless but it isn’t too late for the West.
It might be. DS wants to build a GD train between Calgary and Banniff…
DB
Looked at numerous times…waste of Public coin IMO. IF and that’s a big if, there were ANY KIND of demand, Private Companies would been chomping at the bit.
It’s the same as flying between the two cities, by the time you get to the terminal, get to your destination, now you need transport to your final destination(s) at your destination, so public transport, if it goes right to where you need, is slow and what if you need to pick up something and haul it?
Versus driving there in your own vehicle at your own time, when you get there you still have your own vehicle to drive around and do what you need to do, on your own schedule and drive back.
But they want to take that away from you by making it too expensive to do so. They want you dependent on someone else’s time, schedule and equipment. They want to take away your own agency and be beholden to them!
Steak, it’s just stupid. What’re the passengers going to do once they get to Banff? Call an Uber to take them to the trailhead? Rent a car to take ’em the additional hour to the ski hill?? Take an e-scooter to cruise downtown en route to the Banff Springs Hotel? May as well just drive from Calgary & avoid the entire transfer hassle.
And, as you note, a waste of taxpayer $$$. We’ll not only get stuck w/ the construction bill, maintenance & repairs, but we’ll end up subsidizing ticket costs, too. California high-speed rail project, redux. Throwing money into a hole. F’ing socialism.
She couldn’t find any other higher priority than this? I guess it’s important to buy votes in the big cities before the election.
Take the money from this & what they’re going to piss away on the hydrogen plant in Edmonton (another stupid idea) & use it as a down payment on a shiny new oil refinery.
Interestingly enough, H. Damon Matthews had an article published in January 2016 Nature Climate Change magazine. It stated that “Globally, the researchers saw an average temperature increase of 1.7 ±0.4°C per trillion tonnes of carbon in CO2 emissions (TtC), which is consistent with reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” This is equivalent to 0.0000017⁰C per megatonne (Mt). With this data, we can do some simple math on the impact of government programs on global temperature:
The stated objective for Canada’s carbon tax was a reduction of 90 Mega tonnes (Mt) by 2022. The impact of this on global temperature would be:
90Mt/yr x 0.0000017⁰C/Mt = 0.00015⁰C/yr. Stated differently, this is one Centigrade degree per 6667 years.
The public at large has no frame of reference for the physical impact of temperature changes. How can we relate the projected temperature changes to everyday experiences? Let’s use the federal carbon tax figure as an example (90 Mt/yr reduction by 2022).
As altitude increases, temperature cools. This ‘adiabatic lapse rate’ is 1.98 °C/1,000 ft. By 2020 the temperature impact of the federal carbon tax would ‘feel’ the same as an altitude increase of 0.9 inches or 2.3 centimeters. That’s like stepping on a thick carpet.
With latitude, average temperature cools by about .6°C / 100 mi. The 0.00015°C projected temperature decrease would be the same as achieved by moving Northward 132 feet, or roughly two suburban building lots.
The cost/benefit ratio for emissions reduction programs is incredibly poor. For example, Germany’s U.S. $120 Billion in subsidies for solar panels will postpone global warming by 23 hours by the end of the Century!
Until the government starts reporting the impact of emissions reduction programs in degrees, rather than meaningless tonnes of CO2 the public will remain in the dark.
Thanks for those numbers. I like numbers; they’re hard to spin to make them say something they don’t.
Many people seem to think that if we cut our CO2 output, Canada’s (or whatever province’s) weather will stabilize and we won’t see warming. They’re the ones that told the Fort McMurrayites that it was their fault that their city was burning several years ago. These folks are ignorant of the fact that the earth’s atmosphere is in constant circulation—that’s what wind is, after all—and that today we are breathing the air that China or Russia polluted a couple of days ago. The air we kept so pristine has moved on to the US or Spain or something. Constantly moving. So unless the big emitters get on board, anything we do will have no effect whatever, and even if they did we’d see no change in temperatures because manmade CO2 is only about 3% of the world’s emissions. Most comes from natural sources.
That’s a nice, reasonable summary; however there is no clear link between CO2 emissions and planetary temperature. Nothing in nature is that uni-causal, and professing that there is does not help anyone.
ps. Anything that is consistent with what the IPCC claims is, by definition, false.
roaddog,
Agree that there is no “clear” link – even my post has a wide uncertainty range: 1.7 ±0.4°C. “Equilibrium climate sensitivity” (ECS) estimates for the temperature change for doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere range from 1.5°C to 4.5°C. So, a lot of uncertainty.
From my perspective, some unknown positive relationship exists and it’s not constructive to say it doesn’t. That doesn’t excuse the idiotic counterproductive “green” crap that these “environmentalists” espouse.
The IPCC scientists at the Working Group level do some good work. This is undone by the sleazy IPCC politicians who have the last word on what gets published.
You first. They can stop using fossil fuels today, if they are serious.
Anyone who believes these trend setters can join them in the dark, dank, depressed vision of the future. They can join all those who feel not enough money is directed towards education and health care by putting additional money, their own, into the Canada Revenue pot.
As for these professors, am I alone in thinking their ‘published work’ is meant to solicit funding to keep their home fires burning ?
Unless you’re some mad mud-hutter or Borneo jungle bunny, nobody is living without oil and gas.
So, I think the authors believe that a majority of the population has now been brain-washed into believing the World Warming War’s Propaganda without actually paying attention to the absurdity.
So, the question is, are they right?
I don’t think so.
The Parasite Class pushes harder whenever they sense or meet resistance…
And it seems quite clear that painting paintings isn’t going to convince Dad’s from driving their little princesses to gymnastics class in February.
Prepare for escalation.
“Professors”
Such professors along with their faculties should be replaced with library cards. Their students then might have a chance of learning something of value. “If you want to know what is wrong with society, look at what is taught at Universities” – Ayn Rand
Every day, I’m finding more reasons to actually appreciate the genocide.
When half of what you earn somehow ends up back to the government AND THEY STILL WON’T LEAVE YOU ALONE…..just jab all of them on their side again…and their spawn…
Lunatics. Upper class TWITS.
This country’s CO2 output is but a rounding error in Global output.
The only result of this idiotic suggestion, to end all fossil fuels now in Canada, would be massive deaths due to starvation and exposure/hypothermia, throughout this country.
For “smart” people, they sure are stupid. Members of the Death Cult!
No fossil fuels = welcome back to the 18th century. How are your horse-riding skills? How about leading a team of ox to plow a farmers field? Remember how to can vegetables to last the long cold winter? Got a hefty axe to cut down trees to burn wood for heat and to cook? Do you remember which herbs growing in your area may be useful medicinally? Do you have a clean stream or river nearby to get water? Have an outhouse or latrine? Know how to shear a sheep and do something with the wool?
I’d give those professors less than a day in that lifestyle before they begged for mercy.
Include all the wildlife products and bi-products needed. Fossil fuels replaced whale oil, leather gaskets, tallow, lye, etc., etc.,etc.
Tallow and lye, for example, are still in use but not on a major industrial scale as they were prior to the 29th Century.
Years ago I recall helping clean up the basement one summer. There was an old style icebox in one corner with various & sundry stuff stored in it. Included an old granite bowl w/ chunks o’ lye soap in it that had probably been made by my grandmother decades before.
18th century?
Not!
Without fossil fuels it would be more like the 8th century BC.
You can talk about what hypocrites they are for using petroleum-based products and talk about the economic impacts until we’re blue in the face. But until we have the guts to shut off the oil and gas in the winter nothing will change. As you can see by their demands they’re out to destroy us, it’s total war and they’re kicking our asses. Time to go nuclear, literally and figuratively. And shut down the systems that send taxes to Ottawa.
Gorilla campaign to shut off their NG and block their meters?
This is just more evidence that “education” does not equal INTELLIGENCE. The two idiots might hold doctorates but they’re still too stupid to take care of day-to-day normalities.
As a former academic it embarrassed me that a PhD would come up with such a stupid analogy. Branches on the track? Really? Thank god dumbasses lke him never really get any power…oh wait.
This is why there needs to be a tanker moratorium in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. And won’t someone think of the belugas?
I never realized that Canadien universities had a faculty moron quota that they had to meet.
Those who suggest no more fossil fuels should be the first to be denied them.
All the comments got me thinkin’ …. Certain (most!) family members subscribe to the anti fossil fuel lunacy. … So, what if I promised everyone that this year’s gifts should contain zero fossil fuel input? A google search led straight to Amazon, pretend dinosaur fosslis, minerals etc but obviously at some point, whether extraction, packing, transporting there have been fossil fuels involved in a significant way. Not only that, the money I would use to buy such stuff is all tainted. That cannot do.
Making something myself, like carving something out of wood means using a knife made with fossil fuels. It’s really tough. Can anyone offer some genuine, fossil pure gift suggestions?
Pet rock
Chia pet
Leather/straw belt/bag/hat/gloves
Harry Potter broom
Anything used/re-gifted
Sure.Send them an invite to go walking in search of some Leverite ore.
As you cannot send them anything that requires transportation.
And eventually you could clue them in,as to what leve ‘er right might be..
But do not hurry.
Do they actually believe this twaddle?
Anyone who uses the “net-zero” expression seriously is dangerously ignorant as it is synonymous with stone or bronze age squalor. Every media moron, professor, teacher, corporate rent seeker, and above all, politician that cheers about net zero is promoting mass genocide and deindustrialization. Anyone who advocates for an energy transition away from carbon that does not acknowledge the need to increase the use of fossil fuels in doing so is also guilty of the same thing.