“I deeply believe that COP27 is an opportunity to showcase unity against an existential threat that we can only overcome through concerted action and effective implementation.”
Thus President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi of Egypt on the occasion of his country throwing away unreported millions Egyptian pounds. Hosting 2,000+ speakers, 35,000+ expected participants to debate 300+ topics at a venue that covers 150,000+ m² isn’t a cheap proposition.
The Sharm El Sheikh International Airport is the third-busiest airport in Egypt after Cairo International and Hurghada International airports. Ophira International Airport originally, it is capable of about 9 million passengers annual throughput.
Still, both of its runways (about 3 km long each, both asphalt) have hardly seen such onslaught of touchdowns (and subsequent take-offs) ever before.
More than 35,000 arriving people put the immigration and customs officials under heavy strain.
But the runways must have groaned the most: the defenders of pure air arrived in 400+ private jets.
Yes. Those who speak the loudest of preventing carbon print arrived using vehicles that leave the most carbon print in the air this side of military aircraft.
Whether the Sharm el-Sheikh airport required any renovations right now became irrelevant. The airport belongs to Egyptian government, the country’s President has been all gaga about the event and so, the renovations happened, whether they were going to be needed after the climate change hypocrites leave or not.
For the record: a regular private jet can emit two tons of carbon dioxide in one hour. Compare this figure to commercial aircraft, and the result is shocking beyond belief: measured per passenger, a private jet’s pollution is 14 times as high as that of your typical airliner.
The entire agenda of the so-called environmentalist movement is based on ideology rather than on facts.
First, we had new Ice Age, then we had Global Warming. This was awkward: how can you be seen changing your slogans so often and still remain believable?
Climate change would come to the rescue. As brilliant as brilliant can get. Cooling-shmooling, or warming-shwarming, who cares, they both indicate change.
Except, if the proponents of these hysterics paid any attention in their high school science classes, or, worse still, if their curricula included any basic facts, they would have known about solar cycles and shifts in earth axis tilts.
Sure, we ought to respect nature and leave it in better shape than what it used to be upon our arrival, but environmental pollution quotas (tradeable between nations) may make those who trade in them happy and filthy rich, yet, they won’t make our planet any cleaner.
The verbiage (and amount of hot air) coming out of gatherings such as COP27 shock, to say the least.
A couple of verbatim examples:
“The hope is that COP27 will be the turning point where the world came together and demonstrated the requisite political will to take on the climate challenge through concerted, collaborative and impactful action.
“Where agreements and pledges were translated to projects and programs, where the world showed that we are serious in working together and in rising to the occasion, where climate change seized (HUH?) to be a zero sum equation and there is no more ‘us and them’ but one international community working for the common good of our shared planet and humanity.”
Seized? They must have meant ceased.
“We must unite to limit global warming to well below 2c and work hard to keep the 1.5 c target alive. This requires bold and immediate actions and raising ambition from all parties in particular those who are in a position to do so and those who can and do lead by example.”
It would only take $100 billion (U.S.) annually to “build more trust between developed and developing countries.”
Who’ll pay the piper?
We, the taxpayers will. Whether we agree or not. Nobody’s going to ask us. Especially not those busybodies who are flying around in private jets, drumming up custom for their schemes.
A logical question: just as they are exempt from flying with the hoi-polloi to attend those various “great-cause” events, will they be exempt from rules some countries have begun implementing on private homes, trying to meet their own agenda?
How about going to jail for three years for heating your home or business?
That may be new reality in Switzerland soon: heating your home above 19 Celsius (66.2 F) would be excessive, a punishable offence. Boiling water? Are you kidding? Anything above 60 Celsius (140F) is verboten. So are private saunas and hot tubs powered by radiant heaters. And swimming in cold water in your own indoor swimming pool is better for your health, anyway.
Some media say flight trackers have been coming up with lower private jet arrival numbers for the Sharm el-Sheikh airport. Which media? Mainstream (a.k.a. legacy) media who never checked how many of those private jet flights were logged into the monitoring services in the first place.
While we’re at it: Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s flights aboard Canada’s Air Force aircraft have been monitored very rarely lately, too. Upon his own office’s request.
Yes, there was one misleading post in Spanish that claimed there were as many as 1,500 private jets.
In order to improve on this shocking image, an unnamed official with the Egyptian aviation authorities told the Agence France Presse (AFP): “More than 400 private jets landed in the past few days in Egypt.
“There was a meeting ahead of COP27, and officials were expecting those jets and made some arrangements in Sharm el-Sheikh airport to welcome those planes,” that official would corroborate.
People in the know call the current movement “Green fascism” or “ecofascism.”
What’s that? “A totalitarian government that requires individuals to sacrifice their interests to the well-being of the ‘land,’ understood as the splendid web of life, or the organic whole of nature, including peoples and their states.”
Thus Michael E. Zimmerman, retired Professor of Philosophy and former Director of the Center for Humanities and the Arts at Colorado University Boulder, known best for such works as Contesting Earth’s Future: Radical Ecology and Postmodernity, University of California Press, 1994.
He’s too generous: most of the participants in these movements are simply naïve and less-than-educated (read: illiterate) simpletons whose enthusiasm is fed by brochures.
Their leaders are a band of hypocritically cynical thieves who had formed a cushy bandwagon to jump on, and live comfortably off it, as long as other humans allow them.