The new world order is being fueled by Green propaganda
by John Myers
It seems macabre that 40,000 delegates from 190 countries, including more than 130 heads of state, are marching around Paris today, less than three weeks after an ISIS terror attack slaughtered 130 innocents. The 40,000 are in Paris not to honor the dead but to discuss strategies that will defeat the gravest threat ever to planet Earth: climate change.
A reasonable person might think they would discuss the spread of ISIS or Turkey’s shooting down a Russian jet, an act that has put both the Kremlin and NATO on the road to war. Apparently, the most important task for world leaders is to plan strategies to defeat the weather at the U.N. climate change conference.
Fighting climate change seems more like a cult than an international undertaking. If so, then President Barack Obama is its Grand Poobah. According to a recent Breitbart report, Obama and others in his administration have said 23 times over the years that climate change is a grave threat to the planet:
In a January 15, 2008 presidential campaign speech on Iraq and Afghanistan, Barack Obama said the “immediate danger” of oil-backed terrorism “is eclipsed only by the long-term threat from climate change, which will lead to devastating weather patterns, terrible storms, drought, and famine. That means people competing for food and water in the next fifty years in the very places that have known horrific violence in the last fifty: Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia. Most disastrously, that could mean destructive storms on our shores, and the disappearance of our coastline.”
Last month, Obama said that the Paris climate change conference will be a “powerful rebuke” to terrorists.
Secretary of State John Kerry also chimed in about the inherent dangers of climate change, saying:
If our military vehicles are unable to move anywhere in the region here or elsewhere because they’re up to their axles in water and all the roads leading into and out of the base here are flooded, that affects military readiness.
I asked my friend about what Kerry said. He travels extensively between continents and has recently returned after working for two years in Saudi Arabia.
“I don’t know what part of the world Kerry is talking about,” said my friend, “but I can tell you that I haven’t witnessed any noticeable changes.” He added that during his time in the Middle East, he witnessed only one severe rainstorm.
My friend added that he doesn’t think Kerry should be going out on a limb in places where trees don’t grow. So don’t expect the Pentagon to bring back the DD or “Donald Duck” tank, which floated to shore during the coastal invasion of Normandy in June 1944.
Unfortunately, Obama and Kerry are not the only ones in governments that act climate change crazy. Others in Western government have gone so far as to blame the spread of radical Islam on the weather, although the exact relationship has yet to be dreamed up.
At its best, the United Nations is useless. But lending its name in Paris to a crisis that doesn’t even exist is a new low even for the U.N. The phony crisis is also a new low for Democrats like Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton.
During the first Democratic presidential debate, Sanders said that climate change is the greatest national security threat facing the nation. He reiterated that in the second debate, the day after ISIS had killed more in Paris than Adolph Hitler’s armies had when Nazi Germany occupied it in June 1940.
The secrecy of electricity
But that’s not important. What is important is that the planet’s temperature may be rising by a small fraction of 1 degree. Delusional leaders are preparing to wage this war with green energy. A major and most laughable weapon in this fantasy war is the electric car. It’s easy to see how asinine the whole PR blitz behind it is. Then you get an appreciation that something else is going on that has nothing to do with the weather.
Besides using crooked politicians, the globalists have a vested interest in the development and sales of the electric car, one of the worst products developed since Howard Hughes’ Spruce Goose.
The Achilles’ heel of the electric car is its battery; that multihundred-pound hunk of lithium that powers these expensive automobiles over short distances.
Electric cars have a limited distance they can travel before being recharged. Also, their batteries must be thrown out or recycled when after a few years they no longer hold a charge.
I decided to find the cost of a new battery on an electric vehicle? I found no easy answer. After spending two hours on Google and other search engines, I decided to do my research the old-fashioned way and began making phone calls.
I found out I wasn’t dealing with my daddy’s Oldsmobile. Most people have a rough idea of the cost of replacing an engine or a transmission. Prices are plastered all over print ads and are quoted on AM radio.
But finding out what it would cost you to replace that giant battery in an electric car is not easy. This is because the only information I could find on them was their KWH. If you are like me and did not know what that is, a kilowatt-hour is a derived unit of energy equal to 3.6 megajoules. Are you with me so far? Don’t worry about it if you are not. Things like megajoules were the reason I had to drop out of chemistry after my freshman year.
Electric car batteries boil down to how much energy is being transmitted or used at a constant rate (power) over an hour. That is hardly the same as looking up on Google a new transmission for my GM or asking a mechanic for an estimate over the phone, which I did and within a minute came back with a price of $1,500 installed.
I picked up the phone and called a Nissan dealership. After half an hour, I got to speak to the head of the parts department. Good place to start, I thought, because the dealership is running a series of ads on its electric compact car, the Leaf.
I asked him how much a new battery for the Leaf costs. There was this long pause on the phone. Then he said he didn’t have a clue as to the answer. He said he would have to call around and get back to me. An hour later, he phoned. He tracked it down from the headquarters of Nissan Canada. A new battery for a Leaf costs slightly more than $5,000. This might seem expensive but consider that this tiny subcompact’s unsubsidized cost is at least $50,000.
I asked him the going price of Nissan’s best-selling car that was much the same as the Leaf but runs on a gasoline engine. He told me a new one can be purchased for less than 17 grand.
Before hanging up, I asked him which of the two cars he would recommend to a friend. “It wouldn’t be the Leaf, that’s for sure.” He pointed out that a person of limited means couldn’t afford to buy the Leaf.
I checked around and found it gets worse. A new Tesla 900-pound battery costs $30,000. That is about the same price as a brand-new gas-powered Honda.
All of this tells you two things: Electric cars are toys for the wealthy, and there will have to be a revolution in battery technology before electric cars will ever appeal to the masses. It should be of no consequence to the Greens, however, because electric cars leave a bigger carbon footprint than my old ’77 Pontiac Trans Am with its 400 cubic inch engine.
How is this possible? My Trans Am ran off of relatively efficient, cheap and clean gasoline. Electric cars run off of electricity. And electricity doesn’t grow on trees. It is generated by a source power plant. What I find interesting is that electric cars will have to recharge their batteries by a very dirty wellspring. World leaders know this. They also know the flaws and expenses of other clean energy fuels. Yet they press forward with their lies, propaganda and conferences.
Next week, I will examine the staggering costs of going green, as well as why I believe that there is a clandestine global government that is fanning fears over climate change for its own odious aims.