A senior official at the UN says that the term ‘Net-Zero’ has now become a PR problem for the climate alarm religion, according to a report at the UK Guardian.
A guy named [checks notes] Chris Stark, the chief executive of the [checks notes] Climate Change Committee (CCC) says, “Net zero has definitely become a slogan that I feel occasionally is now unhelpful, because it’s so associated with the campaigns against it. That wasn’t something I expected.”
LOL. Seriously, you didn’t expect a term used to promote the most massive transfer of wealth in world history based on a global fraud would become “unhelpful” at some point? Really?
Yes, really. Here is an unintentionally hilarious excerpt from this Guardian story:
Politicians on all sides are now wary of associating themselves with the term, he said, which was inhibiting progress. Rishi Sunak, the prime minister, made several policy U-turns last year, including delaying the changeover to electric vehicles, while the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, watered down a promise to invest £28bn a year in a green economy.
Politicians on all sides are now wary of associating themselves with the term, he said, which was inhibiting progress. Rishi Sunak, the prime minister, made several policy U-turns last year, including delaying the changeover to electric vehicles, while the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, watered down a promise to invest £28bn a year in a green economy.
Chris Stark has been chief executive of the CCC since 2018 and is moving to the Carbon Trust. Photograph: Climate Change Committee/PA
“It’s the culture warriors who have really taken against it,” said Stark. “A small group of politicians or political voices has moved in to say that net zero is something that you can’t afford, net zero is something that you should be afraid of … But we’ve still got to reduce emissions. In the end, that’s all that matters.”
[End]
Yeah, sure, it’s all because of those darn “culture warriors” who insist upon dealing with multi-trillion-dollar, government subsidized “solutions” based on facts and actual observations instead of the outcomes of easily manipulated models designed to reach predetermined outcomes. Such nasty people, those culture warriors!
So, if “net-zero” is a PR problem now, what is Stark’s solution? Is it maybe to advocate everyone take a step back from this mad rush into energy reliability oblivion and maybe reconsider the public policy actions that are in the process of bankrupting entire nations?
Oh, hell, no. Are you kidding?
No, the solution advanced by Mr. Stark is to…wait for it…change the propaganda behind the slogan. Just shift the narrative one more time and keep doubling-down on disastrous, ruinous failure.
No, I’m not making that up. Here’s another excerpt from the story:
Policymakers should focus instead on what lies behind net zero – investment in the UK’s economy, in ways that would not only reduce greenhouse gas emissions but cut energy use, improve national security, clean up the air and protect nature and the countryside, he added.
“We are talking about cleaning up the economy and making it more productive – you can call that anything you like,” Stark said.
[End]
Ok, well, instead of calling it “net zero,” here are some catchy alternative suggestions that would actually fit:
- Total Tomfoolery
- Shameful Shenanigans
- Bankrupting Boondoggle
- Grotesque Grift
If none of those work, just get back to me, Mr. Stark. I got a million of ‘em.
[UPDATE: Tammy Nemeth suggests adding “Stone Age” to the list of alternatives, which is just absolutely PERFECT. LOL!]
That is all.
