‘Green Antoinettes’ live large, preach small



Politicians, celebrities, and billionaires who lecture ordinary people about their carbon footprints live by another set of rules. They travel by private jet, dine in excess, and retreat to mansions powered by the very energy sources they want banned. It’s a spectacle of hypocrisy so pervasive, the media barely blinks.

Even scientists who scold the public about emissions fly thousands of miles to United Nations climate conferences — racking up the same greenhouse gases they claim will destroy the planet. This is two-tiered climate morality: Those with power indulge, while everyone else is told to sacrifice. Preaching austerity from a private jet has become the “let them eat cake” of our age.

Hypocrisy that pays

The real question isn’t whether the hypocrisy exists but why it’s so tolerated. The answer, in part, is that too many people have found ways to profit from it — through subsidies, grants, and the ever-expanding green grift.

Families pay more and travel less, while the jet-setters congratulate themselves for ‘saving the planet.’

According to data from Yard, celebrities such as Taylor Swift and Leonardo DiCaprio emitted between 3,000 and 4,400 tons of carbon dioxide in 2022 from private jet travel alone — hundreds or even thousands of times the annual emissions of an average citizen.

For perspective: Bangladesh emits about 0.71 tons of carbon dioxide per person annually. Ghana emits 0.74, Ethiopia 0.13, and Kenya 0.4. A single year of indulgence by an American climate icon outweighs the lifetime footprint of entire villages in the developing world.

The climate elite

Filmmaker Steven Spielberg, who condemns “climate deniers” as morally deficient, has a carbon footprint equivalent to nearly 280 average Americans or more than 2,200 Indians. DiCaprio built his global brand on climate activism — then took a private jet from Europe to New York to collect an environmental award.

If the hypocrisy of celebrities is glaring, the behavior of politicians is worse.

Records show that Sen. Bernie Sanders’ campaign spent over $221,000 on private jets in just one quarter — even as the Vermont socialist voted for laws that punish fossil fuel use and floated the idea of criminal charges for energy executives.

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Fighting Oligarchy tour, meant to challenge wealth and privilege, relied on carbon-intensive travel of its own. The Bronx Democrat later scaled back her private jet use after criticism — by switching to first-class flights instead.

The priesthood of carbon

At United Nations climate conferences, the hypocrisy reaches liturgical heights. The gatherings are usually held in luxury destinations like Dubai, Glasgow, or Sharm El Sheikh. Each transcontinental flight emits roughly 2 tons of carbon dioxide per traveler — the annual output of a citizen in many poorer nations.

Yet these same scientists and bureaucrats push for energy restrictions in developing countries, demanding that millions forgo affordable electricity to meet arbitrary “net-zero” targets. Their supposed moral authority rests not on sacrifice but on self-congratulation.

RELATED: Airlines and banks admit net-zero promises were pure fantasy

Photo by WILLIAM WEST/AFP via Getty Images

A reckoning awaits

The hypocrisy would be merely irritating if the consequences weren’t so destructive. The push for “net-zero emissions” — a fantasy that defies both physics and economics — is driving up the cost of gasoline, electricity, and food while shrinking personal freedom. Families pay more and travel less, while the jet-setters congratulate themselves for “saving the planet.”

They’re not leading an energy transition. They’re entrenching a new aristocracy — one in which elites keep their privileges while the working class bears the pain in the name of the “greater good.”

The rise of Donald Trump and other skeptics has interrupted this march toward a green oligarchy, but the climate faithful persist. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s alliance with the Vatican to “terminate” global warming is only the latest display of moral vanity.

Eventually, voters will see through this 21st-century version of aristocratic corruption. The public may not wield guillotines, but the electoral version will do just fine. Off with their subsidies!

Airlines and banks admit net-zero promises were pure fantasy



We were promised a “green” utopia, free of fossil fuels, powered by sunshine and breezes. However, the net-zero hobbits living in this imaginary Shire were blissfully ignorant of hard realities dictated by physics, engineering, and economics.

Once trumpeted by corporate giants and governments alike, the vision of a world without greenhouse gas emissions is crumbling. It’s pseudoscience coupled with false assurances incapable of sustaining the weight of one reality after another. Major airlines, energy companies, and financial institutions are abandoning net-zero commitments that were always destined to clash with the demands of business imperatives and people’s needs.

Becoming mainstream again is the understanding that affordable and reliable energy, prosperity, and human freedom are inextricably linked — a non-negotiable connection.

Anti-fossil fuel crusaders assured the public that jet travel could be reshaped through “green” fuel and futuristic aircraft. But in 2024, Air New Zealand shattered that illusion by declaring its 2030 emissions target impossible to achieve.

Another blow to the green version of a Middle-earth fantasy came from Airbus, which pushed into never-never land fantasies with its plans to deliver a hydrogen-powered aircraft by 2035.

The necessary technology simply does not exist — neither for airplanes nor so-called sustainable fuels in commercial quantities.

The airline industry’s capitulation is not an isolated incident. It’s a major domino falling in a long line of corporate and governmental U-turns signaling a great awakening.

Over the past 24 months, major banks and investment firms have staged an exodus from climate alliances, no longer willing to bear the costs or regulatory risks of practices that discriminate against enterprises such as traditional energy companies.

The Net-Zero Banking Alliance, once a beacon of green aspirations, has lost some of its largest members, including HSBC and UBS, and all the largest U.S. banks, among them J.P. Morgan, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup.

The climate industrial complex, through its organs at the United Nations, sought to impose anti-fossil fuel goals on the global shipping industry via the International Maritime Organization. However, in 2025, the United States took a bold stand by formally opposing the IMO’s position.

Across the Atlantic, Scotland made headlines in April 2024 by abandoning its ambitious target to cut emissions by 75% by 2030. At Germany’s Munich Motor Show in 2025, Stellantis — parent company of brands like Jeep, Peugeot, and Vauxhall — declared it would no longer aim to produce only electric vehicles by 2030.

The company called the European Union’s 2035 zero-emission mandate “unrealistic.” Others have cut back or canceled production of EVs, most recently Acura’s ZDX, which was sent packing shortly after the Japanese manufacturer and General Motors ended a joint EV venture.

RELATED: Trump’s climate policy shift could save American farmers from disaster

Photo by JamesBrey via Getty Images

The Science-Based Targets initiative was supposed to be the gold-standard arbiter of net-zero commitments. Yet energy giants like Shell, BP, and Enbridge have quit advisory groups linked to the Science-Based Targets initiative, recalibrating their strategies toward pragmatism in the development of oil and natural gas. BP, for example, slashed future spending on net-zero ventures while upping investments in traditional hydrocarbons by nearly 20%.

All these reversals share a common cause: the profound disconnect between activist goals and economic reality. On paper, it sounds charitable to promise emissions cuts and decarbonized operations by mid-century. However, these pledges assume nonexistent technology, rely on unaffordable energy sources, and require disruption to economic activity that no rational executive team can tolerate. Financial institutions have realized that lending to developers and users of fossil fuels is vital for national security, especially in times of geopolitical uncertainty. Oil and natural gas continue to be essential for infrastructure, industrial processes, and the daily lives of billions. “Green” lending strategies that sounded good at climate summits failed to deliver returns under market pressure.

Becoming mainstream again is the understanding that affordable and reliable energy, prosperity, and human freedom are inextricably linked — a non-negotiable connection. The great climate scare is not ending with a bang, but with quiet, commonsense calculations.

‘Green Energy’ Is Quietly Polluting A Landfill Near You

'You can’t reuse turbines, and there are now thousands upon thousands of blades just sitting there in warehouses already ... It’s an environmental disaster.'

It Takes A Lot Of Jet Fuel To Throw A Funeral For A Climate Alarmist Pope

If Francis’ climate beliefs were ever to become policy prescriptions, most of the world would die, starting with the poor, elderly, and sick.

Navy Scraps Biden-Era ‘Climate Action’ Plan, Returns Focus To Warfighting

The U.S. Navy officially scrapped a Biden-era “climate action” plan for the force on Tuesday, signifying the Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to refocus the military towards warfighting. “Today, I’m focusing on the warfighters first, and I’m rescinding the Biden administration’s climate action program. Our focus needs to be on lethality and our warfighters,” Navy Secretary […]

New York Could Save New Englanders $1B If It Stopped Blocking A Natural Gas Pipeline

The Constitution Pipeline could save New Englanders $1 billion in energy costs while providing more reliable energy than renewable energy.

EPA Targets Obama-Era Rules That Let Climate Zealots Hold America Hostage

The Endangerment Finding will be reconsidered, a move that will shake the very foundation of the climate change movement.

With the country shivering, now is the time to counter the war on carbon



Carbon forms the basis of plant life and emerges from nearly all energy sources, aside from nuclear power, that keep us warm. With forecasts predicting a prolonged cold spell for much of the country, now is the time to end the war on carbon, human life, and effective energy production. Wyoming conservatives offer a solution with SF 92, the “Make Carbon Dioxide Great Again” bill.

For years, most Republican governors have embraced or tolerated the push for “carbon neutral” energy — also known as transitioning away from reliable energy sources to less effective options that harm land and the environment. They mainly differ from Democrats on how quickly to pursue this potential energy nuclear winter. In Wyoming, where the governor supports going “carbon negative,” a group of conservatives is taking the offensive, rejecting the idea that carbon is the problem instead of a key driver of the economy.

Most Americans are staying warm this winter because of carbon-based fuels. Let’s stop demonizing them.

State Sen. Cheri Steinmetz and former Wyoming Freedom Caucus Chairman John Bear introduced legislation that would prohibit the state from restricting carbon-based energy sources or treating carbon like a pollutant. The measure specifically overturns a five-year-old liberal law requiring coal-fired power plants to use “carbon capture” technology.

Wyoming should lead the nation in coal production, but the industry has been crushed by the carbon hoax. The state government has only advanced the hoax instead of fighting it. Under the new bill, Wyoming would reimburse consumers for fees paid under the mandatory carbon capture retrofitting program.

Most important, the bill begins with several pages of findings debunking the idea that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, that it causes the climate to warm, and that human activity significantly contributes to such warming. It calls carbon “a foundational nutrient necessary for all life on earth,” a stance every Republican-led legislature needs to adopt.

The most consequential lie of our time

Human activity accounts for only about 4% of atmospheric carbon, leaving the exact share of carbon dioxide increases caused by humans in dispute. A recent paper in the journal Health Physics by University of Massachusetts Lowell researchers, using Carbon-14 data, concluded that only 12% of CO2 added to the atmosphere since 1750 is man-made — “much too low to be the cause of global warming,” they write.

That’s why we have no clear correlation, let alone proof of causation, between energy usage and higher carbon levels, or between those higher carbon levels and rising temperatures. For instance, although renewables increased by 12% and coal use dropped by 8% in 2022, U.S. carbon emissions still rose by 1.3%. Climate conspiracists have gotten what they want, even though human input remains too small to affect processes that clearly play out over thousands of years.

And there is certainly no evidence that carbon systematically causes irrevocable warming across the globe. Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore says carbon dioxide typically lags about 800 years behind temperature increases, which he believes indicates that higher temperatures come first and rising CO2 follows. “There is no situation where we have proven that CO2 is the cause and temperature is the effect. None,” he said. “There isn’t any situation where we can actually say we know that from empirical evidence, from science.”

Moore observes that warmer periods began long before modern industrialization. For instance, the 1930s dust bowls in the United States set numerous high-temperature records. One study found that Italy was 3 to 4 degrees Celsius warmer 10,000 to 12,000 years ago, despite CO2 levels then being 20% below the preindustrial level of 280 parts per million.

Moore says the current warming trend has lasted about 300 years, beginning 150 years before fossil fuels came into broad use. He argues the warming rate hasn’t changed despite exponential increases in carbon emissions, concluding that “it hasn’t moved the thermometer in the slightest.”

“And that’s kind of all people have to know to see that they’re being tricked.”

CO2 has nothing to do with it

Some scientists argue warming trends align more with absorbed solar radiation than with carbon dioxide levels, which they say explains why observed warming isn’t uniform. A new study from multiple southern-state earth science departments reports that the Southeast United States has been cooling for the past 120 years, despite emissions and the urban heat island effect.

Other studies suggest cloud cover and other complex meteorological factors drive various warming cycles at different times and places. One study identifies the jet stream as a “dynamic driver of climate variability” going back to 1300.

Some researchers attribute warming trends to rising sea surface temperatures rather than emissions, arguing that emissions are “irrelevant” compared to cyclical ocean changes. They add that human activity cannot meaningfully heat the oceans, noting a study showing the atmosphere — whatever it contains — only influences the top 0.01 millimeter of the ocean’s surface.

Finally, critics say it’s naïve to think we can measure every corner of the Earth’s temperature for the past 150 years and predict the next century within a degree Fahrenheit. Another recent study, confirmed by NASA satellite data, suggests that from 1880 to 2020, global warming estimates were inflated by 42% because of aging weather stations

This lie is too dangerous to ignore, and Republicans must stop parroting it. We should end the practice of ruining our lives and the environment in service of the carbon hoax.

Every state should pass legislation like Wyoming’s SF 92 and eliminate any mention — let alone a mandate — of anti-carbon policies. At the federal level, Congress must repeal all anti-carbon mandates and subsidies, including the carbon capture grift.

What better time to champion common sense than a month when much of the country is bracing for freezing temperatures? Despite hundreds of billions in subsidies, a monopoly on public discourse, and anti-carbon mandates, solar and wind still provide only about 10% of electricity — and most of that comes from areas not facing extreme cold. Most Americans are staying warm this winter because of carbon-based fuels. Let’s stop demonizing them.

Warning: This government scam would be the 'destruction of rural America'



Another day, another government proposal that will throw a wrench in American citizens' freedom.

The SEC proposal would allow for the creation of a new type of company called a “natural asset company,” which could buy up land to use natural processes — like the generation of fresh air — to write off carbon emissions.

Glenn Beck calls the proposal “horrifying.”

Utah Treasurer Marlo Oaks is in agreement, telling Glenn that the proposal will “permanently stop economically essential activities like grazing, mineral extraction, modern agriculture” and “severely curtail recreational access.”

“We’re basically talking about the destruction of rural America,” he adds, noting that the move is simply “an effort to take control of America’s natural resources.”

The proposal is “essentially placing a value on natural processes,” Oaks continues, using “biological systems that provide clear air, water, food” as an example.

To put it simply, Oak calls it “just another scam” that uses “God-given processes” at the expense of our country.

“It represents a massive transfer of wealth,” he adds.

Glenn is aware that all of this has seriously far-reaching implications.

“Our food prices will go through the roof,” Glenn says, “and good luck going to a national park.”

“This is so evil. This is so incredibly evil,” he adds.


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.