The tea leaves are beginning to turn out. This may well be the year in which the climate change movement begins to go off the rails.
It started off great, as elites and climatistas descended on Davos to press home what looked to be the final mile in ramming through the adoption of some form of global Green New Deal by year’s end.
Their secret weapon: a Swedish teen who was primed, locked, and loaded.
Their cause was then handed another gift in the Coronavirus lockdowns. Climate campaigners were over the moon with excitement over the lockdown and boasted with claims of lower CO2 levels due to the economic shutdown.
In just two months, COVID lockdown policies had achieved what climate campaigners had been working for years to realize.
Or so they thought. It was later revealed that lockdowns had little or no impact on overall CO2 concentration. But since when did a little science get in the way of an apocalyptic juggernaut.
But something strange happened on the way to Wuhan.
One of the key components of the intergovernmental fear campaign to promote COVID lockdowns – was dubious computer modeling.
Initially, these were referred to as “The Science” by cock-sure politicians and public health officials. The press quickly fell in line with this groupthink. Any dissenters were roundly attacked and de-platformed.
As their mission crept on, it became clear that these models were ever only masquerading as ‘science’.
The fictional doomsday scenarios being created by technocrats were then snapped up by the mainstream media and then used them to hound political officials into implementing a one-size-fits-all centralized policy of de-industrialization and mass travel bans.
Perhaps it’s no coincidence that this is exactly what climatistas and Green New Deal campaigners have been hoping for.
Prior to COVID, few dared to publicly challenge the intellectual primacy of computer modeling, especially in the field of climate science.
Skeptics were simply told, “Shut up! They are experts!” Only, it turns out the skeptics were right.
It was regarded as infallible, even though just like Neil Ferguson and Imperial College’s erroneous modeling of pandemics – these glorified SIM City simulations were not scientific at all.
The fall-out in both the UK and US over these wild computer-generated predictions that were used by governments to adopt lockdown policies has also exposed these crude devices as pseudo-science used to paint an unlikely Armageddon.
Now, a scorned public is starting to question the assumed authority of computer modeling. People are beginning to look more cautiously at climate modelers from the IPCC, and serial data masseuses like Michael Mann – all of whom are being questioned with renewed skepticism.
No doubt, this will continue to erode away at the foundations of once-sacred climate dogma which has enjoyed its place on the throne of consensus reality ever since Al Gore released his now-discredited documentary film An Inconvenient Truth in 2005.
Adding more insult to injury, this year also saw the release of Michael Moore’s documentary Planet of Humans which completely destroyed the received green wisdom regarding stalwart solutions for ‘green’ energy being touted by environmental activists over the last 30 years.
For their blasphemy, both Moore and director Jeff Gibbs were branded heretics by the progressive left and irate green campaigners for breaking rank on the green new gospel.
This incident was then followed by the release of the new book, Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All, by green policy expert Michael Shellenberg.
The book quickly shot up to number #3 top seller on Amazon and has since drawn fire from activists who claim that like Moore, the author has stabbed the climate movement in the back by revealing some of the trade secrets of green activism.
But Shellenberger is merely pointed out the obvious – that humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction,” that climate change is not making natural disasters worse, and that CO2 emissions are actually plateaued in most developed nations.
For this, he has been mercilessly attacked by climate clerics.
And that brings us back to Generation X, Y, Z’s (and liberal Boomers too) latter-day Joan of Arch, the mercurial Swede, Greta Thunberg.
Before coronavirus, her stock was riding high – halfway into a glorious gap year and transatlantic carbon-neutral sailing excursion, leading to an appearance at COP25 Climate Summit in Spain, and then on to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where she rubbed elbows with Charles, the Prince of Wales.
At Davos, it was clear that Greta’s physical appearance had changed. She had lost a lot of weight in a very short space of time – a far cry from her jovial, bouncy self.
This was a new mini-adult, a darker and much more cynical Greta. Clearly, the miles, the media, and the green glitterati life were wearing on her. And her disdain for the great and the good was manifest.
From there, she would have been looking forward to a spring season was meant to culminate in a series of youth ‘climate actions’ spanning into summer, maybe an appearance at Glastonbury festival next to some supergroup, and then leading towards COP26 in Glasgow this November.
That was the plan. But unfortunately, with the west’s student body all but grounded at home by a new more impressive Project Fear, Greta could not expect to rally any of her legions of angry adolescents.
Now donning masks and plastic visors, the angry youth have other more pressing issues to contend with now; fears of the plague, school closures, oppressive social distancing regimes, and mass unemployment – all of which will trump fears that sea levels mightrise a few meters in 200 years time.
Even COP26 might end up being done on Zoom due to COVID concerns. Greta’s gravitas doesn’t translate as well in desktop avatar form.
As painful as that might sound to any hardcore climatistas reading this, we’re sorry, that’s just where things are at now.
But Greta is a very sharp customer, and will eventually cop on to the game. Greta has begun to hit out at world leaders – who she claims has been using her to “look good.”
Certainly, turnabout is fair play, but we should point out that Greta was a minor through her mercurial rise to fame, therefore, it is her parents, father and actor Svante Thunberg and mother and opera singer Malena Ernman – who have allowed their daughter to be used as a glorified mascot for political parties, multiple globalist organizations, NGOs, and corporate media consortiums.
In a recent interview on Swedish radio during the COVID crisis, she accused German chancellor, Angela Merkel, of using her for cheap “selfie” at a UN event in New York.
“Presidents, prime ministers, kings, and princesses came and wanted to talk to me,” said Greta.
“They saw me and suddenly saw the chance that they could take a photo with me for their Instagram account. Then the hashtag #savetheplanet … They can post it on social media and it makes them look good, it makes them seem like they care.”
Her handlers should take heed: she’s getting savvier.
For those who have actually followed her story, you will know that from day one, Greta Thunberg’s supposed ‘grassroots’ rise was a well-financed and carefully choreographed public relations campaign, complete with road managers, scriptwriters, security and a gaggle of support staff.
As time progresses, and as the holes in the climate narrative start to expand, it’s increasingly likely that Greta herself, now 17 years old, will realize the extent of the operation in which she’s been used as a tool to wind-up and set in motion.
At that point, she will be a full-fledged adult, and thus harder to manage by her handlers working to ferry around this Green New Deal mascot. Sooner or later, she may want to reclaim her childhood.
By that time, the wheels may have already fallen off the climate change bandwagon. The information berm has now burst. With each passing month, you will see more green realists going off-script. More Moore’s and more Shellenberger’s.
But that doesn’t mean it will stop. If COVID showed us anything, it’s globalists organizations and their cadres in government are determined to advance their Great Resetagenda in preparation for their Fourth Industrial Revolution and UBI utopia.
Shades of Huxley’s Brave New World. That’s no exaggeration.
US Presidential Election beckons, and there’s more at stake than ever. Many believe a Trump victory could set the climate change agenda back a further ten years.
So in terms of expediting this agenda, 2020 is really a do-or-die year.
Read more at 21st Century Wire