Big Oil turns on Trump over Paris accord exit for all the wrong reasons



One of Donald Trump’s priorities upon returning to the Oval Office in January is to withdraw the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement. This move is welcome news for those who oppose the decarbonization agenda, which undermines freedom, prosperity, and mobility. Given that petroleum the bête noire of the global climate cult, you might expect major oil companies would support U.S. withdrawal from the agreement. That doesn’t appear to be the case.

Soon after Trump’s intentions for the Paris agreement became clear, major oil companies signaled their opposition to his decision. Instead, they favor continuing down the path of heavy regulation and government subsidies for their industry, aligned with the priorities of the global climate community. As reported by Fox News, “Big Oil is calling on President-elect Donald Trump to keep the U.S. in the Paris climate agreement after withdrawing from the treaty during his first term.”

It’s disheartening to see a once-iconic American oil company transform into a post-capitalist entity that depends heavily on government funding for its revenue.

Why would companies whose primary business is extracting and selling petroleum align themselves with an unelected body openly hostile to oil and committed to achieving "net zero" production within a generation?

Unfortunately, this approach is a betrayal to those who have long defended Big Oil as a pillar of capitalism. Big Oil’s actions now appear to be in direct conflict with free-market principles.

By supporting government-mandated climate compliance, major oil companies can eliminate competition from smaller players in the short term, consolidating their market dominance. In the long term, they aim to secure government grants and subsidies for carbon-related initiatives, positioning these as a significant revenue stream.

ExxonMobil has made it clear that it sees the government as its future largest customer, carbon-related initiatives as its primary product, and government funding as its main revenue source. In the short term, the company seeks to leverage government power, under the Paris Climate Agreement, to eliminate competition from independent oil producers.

The Wall Street Journal reports that ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods opposes Donald Trump’s plan to withdraw from the climate accord. According to the article, Woods argues against the withdrawal, citing ExxonMobil’s efforts to expand outreach to government officials and advocate for “global carbon accounting measures.”

While the specifics of “global carbon accounting” remain unclear, it seems far removed from real-world generally accepted accounting principles. It is reasonable to assume that this concept involves government officials distributing taxpayer money to favored entities — a group Woods clearly intends for ExxonMobil to join.

The WSJ story goes on to say that ExxonMobil and other major oil companies are lobbying the incoming GOP leadership to preserve tax credits included in Joe Biden’s “signature climate law,” the Inflation Reduction Act. These credits reward technologies like carbon capture, in which the companies are heavily invested.

The IRA is a boon for Big Oil’s carbon-related projects. During an energy conference last March, Woods voiced his support for the legislation, stating, “I was very supportive of the IRA — I am very supportive of the IRA …”

In plain terms, ExxonMobil wants more taxpayer money and federal tax credits to fund its carbon mitigation initiatives. Meanwhile, you better believe small, independent drillers in West Texas are left out of these taxpayer subsidies. ExxonMobil, by contrast, is angling to make taxpayer subsidies a major source of revenue.

The Guardian in August highlighted how ExxonMobil has pivoted its business strategy to heavily rely on government subsidies for its carbon capture and storage operations. The company launched its Low Carbon Solutions division in 2021 and began lobbying for direct government funding. Through the Inflation Reduction Act, ExxonMobil secured a subsidy of $85 per ton of captured carbon. Dan Ammann, head of the Low Carbon Solutions unit, said the carbon capture business could eventually become “larger than ExxonMobil’s base business.”

It’s disheartening to see a once-iconic American oil company transform into a post-capitalist entity that depends heavily on government funding for its revenue.

Trump’s selection of Chris Wright as energy secretary offers a glimmer of hope for the American petroleum industry.

In the oil patch, Wright’s appointment has been met with much rejoicing. As the founder and CEO of Liberty Energy, Wright understands well the challenges faced by independent oil producers. Unlike major oil company executives who apologize for their industry and align themselves with climate activists, Wright unapologetically defends the petroleum sector. Described as a “dedicated humanitarian on a mission to better human lives by expanding access to abundant, affordable, and reliable energy,” Wright has earned respect across the industry.

But Wright’s fight to protect American oil won’t just involve battling left-wing advocates of net-zero policies. He will also face opposition from major oil company executives who have aligned with radical climate agendas, working to suppress independent producers while ceding control of the oil business to the government. He’ll need all the help he can get.

Green policies fuel riches for elites, pain for the rest



Azerbaijan’s government has some troubling practices, and the world should pay attention. Whether you believe in a climate emergency or not — and especially if you do — the shenanigans at the ongoing COP29 climate conference in this authoritarian Caucasus nation should raise alarms.

Recent U.N. climate conferences, including COP28 in the United Arab Emirates and COP29 in Azerbaijan, reveal a troubling trend: Global environmental activists seem unbothered by the severe wealth inequality their policies exacerbate. These activists actively collaborate with state oil tycoons to secure their own gains, often at the expense of ordinary people.

Climate alarmism remains a luxury belief held predominantly by wealthy elites, not ordinary people.

The authoritarian regimes of the UAE and Azerbaijan epitomize this disparity. In Azerbaijan, the average GDP per person is about 18 times higher than the median income. In contrast, this ratio in Western nations typically ranges between four and five. These glaring inequalities underscore the cozy relationship between government elites and global environmental activists.

Climate activists and state oil moguls actively disregard free markets and consumer preferences. Environmentalists routinely condemn consumer choices they deem “wasteful” or “unsustainable” and push policies that force compliance rather than encourage voluntary participation. Likewise, state oil companies reject competition at home and collude internationally to manipulate oil production when it increases their profits.

Both groups enrich themselves at others’ expense. Taxpayers, not attendees, fund COP29. National delegations draw from public budgets, while global NGOs like the United Nations and World Bank use funds from member nations to support the conference.

Oil barons in the UAE and Azerbaijan exploit natural resources for personal gain. Officials use state power to secure private wealth while denying citizens their rights. These oil-rich nations exemplify extractive institutions, where elites monopolize resources and leave the public to bear the cost.

The environmental agenda seeks to do the same — transferring hundreds of billions of dollars from taxpayers to narrowly owned wind, solar, and other green projects. Rather than serving customers and receiving voluntary payment, both environmentalists and government oil barons would rather extract resources from people by force.

COP29 participants explicitly demand that wealthy nations’ taxpayers “pay up” through climate reparations. These funds will likely enrich corrupt officials instead of benefiting the poor and vulnerable who are supposed to receive them. Decades of foreign aid being diverted into government officials’ pockets provide ample reason to reject this policy.

The irony of hosting the U.N. climate change conference in oil-producing countries runs deep. Participants create massive carbon footprints through air travel, food and goods consumption, and electricity use. Their activities rely on the very oil production they criticize, in countries they now place at the forefront of climate planning.

Climate alarmism remains a luxury belief held predominantly by wealthy elites, not ordinary people. These elites can more easily handle the higher costs created by environmental restrictions, unlike the poor and middle class. Moreover, elites are more likely to profit from net-zero policies, which subsidize solar panels, electric vehicles, and billion-dollar carbon offset and green energy schemes.

It’s time to end the self-serving theatrics of U.N. climate conferences pretending to save the planet. Expanding fossil fuel exploration and development in the United States offers a far better path. Cheap energy means greater freedom and prosperity for all.

Next time someone cries about 'climate change,' put them to shame with THESE historical facts



If there’s one thing the left and the right can agree on, it’s that the string of disasters occurring recently across the globe is tragic.

Between the Maui fires, the hurricane in Florida, the earthquake in Morocco, and the flooding in Libya, far too many people have lost their lives.

However, the left and right clash when it comes to the origins of these catastrophes.

“The goofballs on the left are screaming, ‘See? Climate change! Climate change!’” mocks Pat Gray.

“But you know what?” he continues. “Natural disasters are not new.”

The truth is, “fewer people die from them now than ever before in world history.”

And if you don’t believe us, here are the numbers to prove it:

  • “Four million people died in China in floods” in 1931.
  • “Two million [died] in the 1887 Yellow River flood” in China.
  • In “1976, 655,000 Chinese people died in the Tangshan earthquake.”
  • “500,000 died from an earthquake in 1970 in Bangladesh.”
  • 9,500 people died as a result of “the eastern United States heat wave of 1901.”
  • “The French heat wave ... killed 41,000 people in 1911.”
  • “5,000+ died in a North American heat wave" in 1936.
  • “100,000 people died in a landslide in 1786” in China.

“These natural disasters go on and on and on,” says Pat, “and you can break it down by century, by decade.”


Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

160 people arrested on arson charges for Greek wildfires that the media previously said climate change was to blame



Greek officials arrested 160 people on arson charges for the wildfires that ravaged Greece this summer. Previously, the media almost exclusively blamed the Greek wildfires on climate change.

Wildfires have scorched Greece this summer. In the past week, at least 21 people – including two children – lost their lives in connection with the wildfires.

Fire department spokesman Ioannis Artopios said 60 firefighters had been injured attempting to extinguish the blaze as of Thursday.

Firefighters battled 99 separate wildfires across the country on Wednesday.

The wildfires have forced numerous evacuations during the summer months, including the main hospital of Alexandroupolis in northeast Greece.

The European Union's Commissioner for Crisis Management Janez Lenarcic said that more than 180,400 acres burned in the port city of Alexandroupolis – making it the largest wildfire ever recorded among European Union countries, according to CNN.

Government spokesperson Pavlos Marinakis said that 160 people had been arrested across the country on arson charges, 42 of them accused of intentional arson and the remainder accused of setting fires through neglect, according to the New York Times.

Marinakis declared, "The culprits will face justice."

The Associated Press reported, police searched the home of one alleged arsonist suspected of setting at least fires and found kindling, a fire torch gun, and pine needles.

Climate Crisis and Civil Protection Minister Vassilis Kikilias torched the fire-starting suspects as "arsonist scum."

"You are committing a crime against the country,” Kikilias said during an emergency briefing on Thursday. "Arsonist scum are setting fires that threaten forests, property, and, most of all, human lives."

He declared, "You will not get away with it, we will find you, you will be held accountable."

Kikilias warned that the arsonists attempted to start new fires on Mount Parnitha – a densely forested mountain range roughly 30 miles north of Athens.

The media previously blamed climate change for the wildfires devastating Greece.

Only a few weeks ago, CNN ran an article titled: "Why wildfires happen: Debunking the myth that arson is to blame more than climate change."

The BBC declared, "Summer wildfires are common in Greece and scientists have linked the increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, including heatwaves, to climate change."

The following articles prominently mention climate change, but do not use the word "arson" at all in the articles.

Earlier this month, NBC News published an article with the headline: "Greek wildfires are the 'harsh reality of climate change,' experts warn."

Politico Europe proclaimed in July, "Hundreds of people have been evacuated as wildfires rage in Greece, and Southern Europe faces another week of sweltering, above-40C temperatures in a heat wave that experts say is linked to climate change."

In an opinion piece in The Guardian titled: "The lesson from the Greece wildfires? The climate crisis is coming for us all," the writer claimed that a video of the Greek wildfires "could easily pass for a TV climate crisis awareness-raising campaign."

The New York Times wrote in July, "The fiercest wildfires have hit only parts of a few islands. But the effects of climate change pose a far wider threat to Greece’s tourism industry."

Last month, Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis told parliament: "The climate crisis is already here, it will manifest itself everywhere in the Mediterranean with greater disasters."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

CNN blames 'heat wave' for high gas prices instead of Joe Biden's failed policies



If you needed more reason to believe that mainstream media outlets like CNN are covering for Joe Biden, then you’re in luck.

CNN not only ran a segment but also an article about how the current “heat wave” is the reason why your wallet is getting slammed at the gas pumps.

Matt Egan told his fellow CNN reporters that an “unexpected consequence of this summer’s historic heat wave, it’s making life more expensive for drivers. Extreme heat has actually increased the price of gasoline, which has surged to nine-month highs.”

Pat Gray believes this is an attempt to distract Americans from Biden’s failed policies.

“I don’t want to hear you starting to blame our beloved, sharp as a tack president of the United States, Joe Biden. Don’t you dare try to blame him for it because it’s not his fault,” Gray mocks.

“This is absolutely mindless buffoonery,” he adds.

According to the media, when temperatures soar to 100 or even 110 degrees Fahrenheit, facilities aren't able to churn out all the gasoline needed to consumers.

However, they begrudgingly admit that there are other factors involved besides global warming.

“Like, I don’t know, the sun. You know that two-million-degree burning orb in the sky? That might have something to do with our temperatures,” Gray says.


Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Extremists deface $110 million Monet painting and King Charles' likeness in latest instances of eco-iconoclasm, funded by Beverly Hills-based climate alarmism group



Anti-oil extremists' defacements of a Claude Monet painting in Germany and a waxwork of King Charles in London are the latest two in a string of attacks on famous works of art. The vandals responsible, like others before them, demanded an end to oil discovery and production amid an energy crisis in Europe, which is prompting some to hoard wood and burn manure to survive the coming winter.

The groups responsible have both been funded by the Beverly Hills-based Climate Emergency Fund, which is cultivating an army of "climate activists."

German iconoclasm

On Sunday, two German vandals threw mashed potatoes at a painting in the Barberini Museum in Potsdam, southeast of Berlin.

The oil painting they targeted was Monet's "Grainstacks," an impressionist work depicting the stacks of hay that stood near the artist's house in Giverny. Reuters reported that the painting sold at auction in 2019 for $110.7 million. It is on permanent display in the Museum Barberini, on loan from the Hasso Plattner Foundation.

The vandals glued their hands to the wall beneath the painting after having thrown the food.

\u201cWe make this #Monet the stage and the public the audience.\n\nIf it takes a painting \u2013 with #MashedPotatoes or #TomatoSoup thrown at it \u2013 to make society remember that the fossil fuel course is killing us all:\n\nThen we'll give you #MashedPotatoes on a painting!\u201d
— Letzte Generation (@Letzte Generation) 1666534275

The National Post reported that four people were involved in the attack and that those responsible were subsequently arrested.

The Museum Barberini noted on Twitter that an "immediate conservation investigation showed that [the painting] was not damaged in any way," since it had been set behind protective glass.

Museum director Ortrud Westheider responded in a statement saying, "While I understand the activists’ urgent concern in the face of the climate catastrophe, I am shocked by the means with which they are trying to lend weight to their demands."

Concerning a previous incident, the German Cultural Council's managing director, Olaf Zimmermann, said, "The works put in danger are part of world cultural heritage and deserve to be protected as well as our climate."

Zimmermann also noted that the risk of "damaging the artworks is very high."

Letzte Generation

The vandals who claimed responsibility for the attack on Monet's 132-year-old painting are affiliated with the extremist group called "Last Generation." They claimed the vandalism was a reminder "that the fossil fuel course is killing us all."

Last Generation claims on its website, "We still have two to three years in which we can still leave the fossil path of annihilation."

The climate extremist group Last Generation also had two of its members recently glue themselves to the frame of Raffael's "Sistine Madonna" painting at the Gemaldegalerie Museum in Dresden, Germany, on Aug. 23.

The extremists responsible for the Sunday art attack in Germany stated, "People are starving, people are freezing, people are dying. We are in a climate catastrophe and all you are afraid of is tomato soup or mashed potatoes on a painting. You know what I'm afraid of? I’m afraid because science tells us that we won’t be able to feed our families in 2050."

In his recent book "How the World Really Works," scientist and policy analyst Vaclav Smil noted how fossil fuels are absolutely critical when it comes to feeding, warming, and nurturing humanity.

Ending oil production, as the vandals demand, would have profound consequences, not the least on all those who may no longer be able to heat their homes in the winter or cool them in the summer.

Although elsewhere advocating for a gradual transition off of oil, Smil noted, "Our food supply — be it staple grains, clucking birds, favorite vegetables, or seafood praised for its nutritious quality — has become increasingly dependent on fossil fuels."

Smil also indicated that "after adding the energy requirements of food processing and marketing, packaging, transportation, wholesale and retail services, household food storage and preparation, and away-from-home food and marketing services, the grand total in the US [of the direct energy use in food production] reached nearly 16 percent of the nation's energy supply in 2007 and now it is approaching 20 percent."

British iconoclasm

On Monday morning, Just Stop Oil extremists went to Madame Tussauds in London and smashed a chocolate cake into the wax likeness of King Charles.

The vandals responsible, 20-year-old Eilidh McFadden from Glasgow, Scotland, and 29-year-old Tom Johnson from Sunderland, England, stated, "The demand is simple: Just stop new oil and gas. It's a piece of cake."

The extremist group Just Stop Oil is committed to taking part in "NonViolent Direct Action targeting the UK's oil and gas infrastructure should the Government fail to meet our demand by 14 March 2022."

The Mirror reported that four people were arrested for criminal damage, including McFadden and Johnson.

\u201c\ud83c\udf82 BREAKING: JUST STOP OIL CAKES THE KING \ud83c\udf82\n\n\ud83d\udc51 Two supporters of Just Stop Oil have covered a Madame Tussauds waxwork model of King Charles III with chocolate cake, demanding that the Government halts all new oil and gas licences and consents.\n\n#FreeLouis #FreeJosh #A22Network\u201d
— Just Stop Oil \u2696\ufe0f\ud83d\udc80\ud83d\udee2 (@Just Stop Oil \u2696\ufe0f\ud83d\udc80\ud83d\udee2) 1666607115

Wasting food and glue

These attacks resemble several others committed in recent weeks.

On Oct. 14, two female climate extremists belonging to the group called Just Stop Oil were arrested for throwing tomato soup at a Vincent van Gogh painting "Sunflowers") in the National Gallery in London. After defacing the artwork, they glued themselves to the wall.

Both extremists demanded that the British government cease all new oil and gas projects.

Just Stop Oil Supporters throw Soup over Van Gogh’s Sunflowers | 14 October 2022 #shorts youtu.be

On October 19, anti-oil extremists affiliated with "Scientist Rebellion" glued their hands to the floor of a Volkswagen exhibit in Wolfsburg, Germany.

\u201cTogether with 15 other members of @ScientistRebel1 I have occupied the Porsche pavillion at @Autostadt, 9 of us glued to the floor and some of us on hunger strike until our demands to decarbonise the German transport sector are met\ud83d\udc49 https://t.co/Y5uo5IicXb @ClimateHuman\u201d
— gianluca grimalda (@gianluca grimalda) 1666201623

One of the climate extremists suggested that so-called climate change was leading to floods and storms, rendering some regions of the world uninhabitable.

Climate Emergency Fund

Both Just Stop Oil and the Last Generation receive funding from the Climate Emergency Fund, on whose board sits Adam McKay, a Hollywood director and screenwriter; Aileen Getty, the American actress from the ultra-rich Getty oil family; Rory Kennedy, the youngest child of U.S. Senator Robert F. Kennedy; and other wealthy climate alarmists.

The CEF has indicated that so far this year it has "made $4 million in grants to 30 brave, ultra-ambitious groups."

It is unclear whether the CEF could be held partly responsible if any of its grantees were to irreparably damage energy infrastructure or beloved artwork.

Though Steven Spielberg is 'terrified' of global warming, his private jet has emitted 4,465 tons of CO2 in 2022



Hollywood director Steven Spielberg is the owner of a Gulfstream G650, a private jet that has a minimum price tag of $38.9 million but can cost up to $60 million. The annual budget for flying the G650 is reportedly in the neighborhood of $2.9 million. Spielberg's private jet consumes 500 gallons of fuel per hour. The American driver, by way of comparison, uses on average 656 gallons of fuel a year.

The Yard Group analyzed flight data from the ADS-B Exchange compiled by Jack H. Sweeney's Celebrity Jets and determined that Spielberg's plane has burned at least $116,159 worth of jet fuel during the 16 trips across 17,000 miles it has flown since June 23. This figure is reportedly a gross underestimate, as fuel and distance metrics for an additional three trips have not been included in the final tally.

Spielberg's expulsion of exhaust — 4,465 tons of CO2 in 2022 alone — has prompted some criticism, especially as the Hollywood director has long been an outspoken climate critic and global warming fretter.

When promoting his film "Ready Player One" in 2018, Spielberg claimed global warming "terrified" him.

Steven Spielberg: "Global Warming is not a Political Trick" YouTube

Spielberg noted that "global warming is a scientific reality. It's not a political trick. It's a true piece of real, measurable, quantifiable science." He suggested that when it comes to global warming, "everybody has to be held responsible," particularly those who "go blithely through life" without concerning themselves with their impact on the environment.

Including flights from Westhampton to Van Nuys, California, and from Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, to Teterboro, New Jersey, the Hollywood director's jet has emitted over 179 tons of carbon dioxide since late June. The average yearly carbon footprint for an American is 16 tons.

Spielberg is not the only climate-conscious celebrity who recently generated a great deal of carbon emissions.

For the 170 flights her jet has embarked on since January, totaling 15.9 days in the air, Taylor Swift was named "biggest celebrity CO2e polluter of the year." Her flight emissions for the year are an estimated 8,293.54 tons.

According to the Yard Group, Floyd Mayweather and Jay-Z are runners-up for biggest celebrity polluters, with 7,076.8 and 6,981.3 tons of CO2 emissions, respectively.

Kim Kardashian and Oprah Winfrey also make the top ten list of celebrity polluters. Kardashian's 4,268.5 tons of emissions from 57 flights constitute 609.8 times more than the average person emits in a year. Winfrey's 68 flights generated 499 times more carbon emissions than the average person produces in a year.

Celebrities are not only leaving large carbon footprints by their air travel.

Leonardo DiCaprio, alleged to be "one of the world's top climate change champions," chartered and vacations on a $150 million superyacht, which costs $293,897.50 to fuel up and produces an estimated 524.7 pounds of C02 per mile.

Steve Milloy, a former energy official on former President Donald Trump's transition team, spoke to Fox News about the disconnect between celebrities' climate rhetoric and their actions: "There's not a single climate activist who is not a complete hypocrite about all this. ... Everything they do is just total hypocrisy. I would say they have no self-awareness, but they just don't care. All this is really meant to control us."

CBS gets savaged for pushing study blaming climate change for childhood obesity: 'May be one of the dumbest things I've read in a while'



A recent segment from CBS promoting a study that linked childhood obesity to climate change was widely hammered and the TV network was accused of spreading "propaganda."

CBS Morning cited a study published in the journal Temperature. The study said that children are now 30% less aerobic fitness than their parents at the same age. The study's author argued that warming temperatures are making children less active – thus making them more obese.

The author of the study claimed, "As the Earth’s warming continues to accelerate, children are set to bear the health risk brunt of rising global temperatures."

The official Twitter account for CBS Mornings posted a video clip with the caption: "Today’s children are 30% less aerobically fit than their parents were at their age, a new study found. The study points to climate change and rising temperatures adversely affecting childhood obesity, as children spend less time exercising outdoors."

Even one of the hosts of CBS Mornings called out the study for being severely flawed.

Host Nate Burleson conceded that children are less likely to go outside because of technology that allows them to "be social without having to go outside to be social." However, he also stressed, "It has been a lot hotter and the weather has been crazy."

\u201cToday\u2019s children are 30% less aerobically fit than their parents were at their age, a new study found.\n\nThe study points to climate change and rising temperatures adversely affecting childhood obesity, as children spend less time exercising outdoors.\u201d
— CBS Mornings (@CBS Mornings) 1660423500

The thousands of Twitter reactions to the segment pushing a study linking childhood obesity to climate change were brutal for CBS Mornings.

Many commentators noted that children nowadays are consumed with screens that may prevent them from going outside to exercise. Others pointed out that diets are probably not as healthy as they used to be. There were some who blamed Democrats and blue states for closing schools, playgrounds, sports leagues, and beaches – which led to a more sedentary lifestyle for children. Others questioned the study as to why obesity isn't more prevalent in hotter climates than in colder ones.

BlazeTV personality Sara Gonzales: "Or! Their parents are fat and lazy. And bad parents. Didn’t even need a study to give you that truth."

Stanford professor Jay Bhattacharya: "Public health bureaucrats closed playgrounds, limited kid's sports, and made a virtue of extended screen time. They closed schools and PE classes. In some places this went on for years. Maybe this headline writer lives in Florida or Sweden and missed the lockdowns?"

Writer Pradheep J. Shanker: "This may be one of the dumbest things I've read in a while."

Former Congresswoman Nan Hayworth: "NO. NO. NO. Many factors contribute to children's lack of fitness, but climate change is NOT one of them. This is propaganda that CBS, as with all 'mainstream' media, pushes to scare Americans into accepting Government intervention--at any cost!!--against climate *apocalypse*."

Author Matt Walsh: "Yes, climate change is causing childhood obesity and not the fact that parents feed their kids sh**ty food and let them sit around staring at screens all day. Great piece of reporting here."

Writer Kyle Becker: "How much fraud can you put into a report? I exercised for hours in 100 degree+ weather in 90% humidity when I was growing up in South Carolina over thirty years ago. Maybe it's the screen time? Or your idiotic Covid hysteria? No, it couldn't be. You con artists."

Columnist Stacey Lennox: "Bulls**t. You locked them at home for two years & there is an epidemic of helicopter parents who don’t let them engage in unsupervised play. Give me a break. I played outside in upper 90 & 100 degree heat because I was allowed to."

Commentator Ken Gardner: “'Climate change' is a damn cult. And these 'studies' are junk science at best, a fraud at worst. Childhood obesity, in most cases, begins with crap parents who spoil their children and allow them to form bad eating habits."

Physician Nicole Saphier: "Blaming rising childhood obesity on climate change is next level absurd. How about the fact we have generated a lazy society with electronics and the cancellation of activities from nonsensical Covid policy?"

Editor Spencer Brown: "This has nothing to do with kids and everything to do with pushing an agenda. If they cared about the health of kids they would have blasted Dems for spending two years dismantling playgrounds and keeping kids locked indoors learning through computer screens."

Writer Inez Stepman: "Climate change is responsible for wars and storms and now obesity."

Podcast host Jedediah Bila: "Newsflash: kids don’t care about hot weather. It’s not climate change’s fault that kids are fat and out of shape. They’re fat and out of shape because they eat garbage food and bury their heads in phones and iPads all day while eating that garbage."

Editor-in-chief Jonah Goldberg: "Seriously, the idea that American kids are more obese because they’re spending less time outdoors because of climate change is the dumbest, most intelligence-insulting, science and sociology-denying bulls**t I’ve heard in long time."

Former national champion gymnast Jennifer Sey: "As a kid I trained in 90* heat, no air conditioning, 7+ hours a day & needing water every 5 min wasn’t a thing. Maybe it’s screens+coddling+school/sports/playground closures. Not every issue is climate change."

Writer David Angelo: "Lol climate change. That's why kids in Connecticut are more out of shape than kids by the equator? You ever listen to yourselves?"

Commentator Joey Jones: "Then the study is nothing more than propaganda."

Talk show host Erick Erickson: "The media that cannot tell you what a woman is can tell you with certain that climate change is causing childhood obesity. Is it any wonder so few people trust the press these days?"

Data analyst Kyle Lamb: "And you thought it was already ridiculous how much they blamed COVID for their own failed policies. Now if you break a nail it’s climate change."

Journalist Erielle Davidson: "Kids are playing video games and are attached to their phones. Problem compounded by living in a city where parents might be worried about crime. But sure, climate change."

Former Texas political candidate Patrick McGuinness: "Not sedentary lifestyles, not kids' videogames, not rise of fast food, not COVID-era closing playgrounds, forcing kids to stay inside & making kids more obese and less fit ... no, a tiny increase in CO2 and tiny rise in temps drove kids indoors."

Canadian political candidate Roman Baber: "Children are 30% less fit than their parents were at the same age. Not because kids are on their devices or lockdowns, but because of climate change! Don't be a science denier. If you pay the government a carbon tax your kids will be fitter."

Commentator Hans Mahncke: "They made kids fat by shutting schools, playgrounds, parks and beaches. Predictably, they're now blaming 'climate change.' If there aren't severe penalties for the fraudsters who pushed lockdowns, it'll happen again."

Bodybuilder Marc Lobliner: "Being lazy and eating crappy food is child abuse, not climate change. You lying pieces of garbage. The media is evil."

Radio host Colin Dunlap: "'Kids are out of shape because of the weather' is top 3 dumb s**t I’ve ever heard in my life. And I’ve heard — and said — a whole lot of dumb s**t."

Two-thirds of Great Barrier Reef boast highest coral cover ever recorded despite previous reports of looming extinction of Australia's natural wonder



Australia’s Great Barrier Reef is flourishing despite previous reports sounding the alarm about the looming extinction of Australia's natural wonder.

According to new findings reported on Thursday, a majority of the thriving Great Barrier Reef boasted the highest coral cover ever recorded. Two-thirds of the Great Barrier Reef had the largest amount of coral cover in the 36 years that it has been monitored.

The northern and central areas of the Great Barrier reef experienced growth, according to surveys conducted between August 2021 and May 2022 by the Australian Institute of Marine Sciences. The northern section soared from an all-time low of 13% coral coverage in 2017 to 36% in the most recent report. The central region jumped from a low of 12% in 2019 to 33% coverage in the latest AIMS annual report.

The coral coverage in the southern section fell by 4% – from 38% in the previous year to 34% in the latest report. The environmental experts believe the decrease stems from outbreaks of crown-of-thorns starfish.

AIMS considers a hard coral cover of more than 30% as "high value."

AIMS CEO Paul Hardisty downplayed the positive news in a statement: "This shows how vulnerable the Reef is to the continued acute and severe disturbances that are occurring more often and are longer-lasting."

“Every summer the Reef is at risk of temperature stress, bleaching and potentially mortality and our understanding of how the ecosystem responds to that is still developing," Hardisty said.

"What we're seeing is that the Great Barrier Reef is still a resilient system. It still maintains that ability to recover from disturbances," AIMS Long-Term Monitoring Program leader Mike Emslie told Reuters, but he cautioned, "But the worrying thing is that the frequency of these disturbance events are increasing, particularly the mass coral bleaching events."

For nearly 40 years, AIMS has examined the status of the Great Barrier Reef through its Long-Term Monitoring Program – which claims to have conducted the "most comprehensive and extensive record of coral status on any reef ecosystem in the world." Each year, marine scientists from the Australian Institute of Marine Sciences survey between 80 and 130 reefs on the GBR.

Despite the promising report from the respected environmental organization, it wasn't long ago that there were experts claiming that the Great Barrier Reef could soon die off completely.

The New York Times has published several articles foretelling doomsday scenarios for the Great Barrier Reef.

In December 2016, the Times ran an article titled: "The Great and Dying Barrier Reef."

In March 2017, the outlet said, "Large Sections of Australia's Great Reef Are Now Dead."

In April 2018, the New York Times published an article titled: "Damage to Great Barrier Reef From Global Warming Is Irreversible, Scientists Say."

The Washington Post also claimed that climate change was killing the Great Barrier Reef, and it "might never recover."

In April 2019, the paper declared, "The Great Barrier Reef is being battered by climate change, it might only get worse."

In October 2020, the Washington Post published an article titled: "Half of the Great Barrier Reef's coral is gone. It might never recover."

Just in March, the Washington Post reported, "Climate warming deals yet another blow to the Great Barrier."

PBS News Hour featured a segment in March 2017 titled: "Climate change is killing the Great Barrier Reef."

In November 2020, Business Insider asserted, "Experts say the time to take action is now, and if nothing is done, this world wonder as we know it today could be gone by 2050."

The website Outside wrote an obituary for the Great Barrier Reef in October 2016.

In March, UNESCO considered labeling the Reef as "in danger" after the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority reported "low to moderate bleaching" of the natural wonder. UNESCO confirmed that two scientists would examine the Reef for 10 days, according to The Guardian.

A World Heritage Committee meeting on determining the status of the Great Barrier Reef was scheduled to happen in June in Russia, but it was postponed after the invasion of Ukraine.

The Great Barrier Reef was designated as a UNESCO World Heritage site in 1981.

Continued coral recovery leads to 36-year highs across two-thirds of the Great Barrier Reef www.youtube.com

Roth: We are in a reality emergency



We are having a climate emergency. I am sure it’s true because important people have said so. These are the same people who have been wrong about everything of late: solving crime, COVID, printing money, and energy transitions, to name a few. They have pushed a half-century’s worth of climate predictions — all of which I have managed to live through — from acid rain to Manhattan being underwater by 2015. They also travel around on private jets and yachts when they are not living in their massive waterfront properties, because they are the safest places to live in an emergency, obviously.

Yes, I am sure there’s an emergency, but it’s an emergency of indulging people entirely uncoupled with reality.

The "boy who cried wolf" routine isn’t cute, it’s destructive. People who are in charge of major decisions have bullied their ways into having their fantasy narratives accepted and acted upon. Large cities and even non-urban locales are experiencing outbreaks of crime because the fantasy crowd said it was mean to enforce laws. They wanted to defund the police and go easy on criminals, which, entirely unpredictably, has empowered the criminals. Stores are being robbed, people are getting attacked and car jacked, and overall, violence is increasing. Even Starbucks is closing stores in formerly desirable locales like Santa Monica, California, and Union Station in Washington D.C., for Pete’s sake!

We were told that printing trillions of dollars and injecting trillions of dollars more of stimulus money into a supply-constrained economy — one that was supply-constrained because those who shut it down didn’t realize there would be consequences — wasn’t going to produce any inflation. Then, we were told inflation was going to be transitory. Then, it was the consumer’s fault and greedy businesses’ fault, all before blaming Vladimir Putin even when inflation hit a 40-year high the month prior to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Now, individuals and small businesses alike have to contend with labor shortages, supply chain disruptions, and massive inflation that are all threatening their financial security.

We were told that we have to transition to “green” energy and start to execute a full-scale plan when there was no “green” replacement available at scale or at a viable cost. They said this without a plan and without any consideration of the most clean energy source widely available: nuclear energy. This has led to not only sky-high energy costs in the U.S. but to our president begging countries like Saudi Arabia to produce more oil. This is the “green” equivalent of believing that an unpartitioned smoking section works. And, given that global demand for energy will only increase, this is also not a transition to “green” energy, it’s a transition of our economic and national security into the hands of bad actors around the globe.

You can be a good steward of the planet and its resources and still be in touch with reality.

Now, because they have put everything else in disarray and have nothing to fall back on for their power and money grab, the climate emergency has come out of the playbook. I know preppers — people who are actually concerned about outcomes — and they act accordingly. Riding on a private jet, vacationing in your oceanside mega-mansion, or taking a yacht cruise with friends is not the action of anyone who is concerned about anything other than their own money and power.

The lunatics are running the asylum. This needs to stop. They need to be held accountable for everything that they have gotten wrong. Those areas that they have destroyed and impaired need to be fixed and restored. And it needs to be clear that they don’t get to dictate and bully us anymore. We cannot afford, financially and for the sake of our safety and quality of life, to indulge one more minute of their fantasies.