The Great Climate Con Alex Epstein 312

Author:

Video Creator’s Channel Jordan B Peterson

author link

So The Hebrews Created History As We Know It

you don’t get away with anything and so you might think you can bend the fabric of reality and that you can treat people instrumentally and that you can bow to the Tyrant and violate your conscience without cost. You will pay the piper it’s going to call you out of that slavery into Freedom. Even if that pulls you into the desert and we’re going to see that there’s something else going on here that is far more Cosmic and deeper than what you can imagine the highest ethical Spirit to which we’re beholden is presented precisely as that spirit that allies itself with the cause of Freedom against Tyranny. I want villains to get punished, but do you want the villains to learn before they have to pay the ultimate price that’s such a Christian question you’re optimizing for minimal impact and I think that is really the core of the modern environmental movement. It’s not this just blanket Collective desire for as much life as possible and we’re somehow getting in the way of that it’s specifically against us that when they discovered the greenhouse effect They said this is going to on its own make the earth a much more Lush a much more Lush place there that you know they speculated like the fruits are going to be bigger and everything is going to be Lush because we’re going to have more farmland and more biological, and it’s kind of obvious if you have a warmer world with more UK.

Its A More Tropical World With.

More life it’s a more green world in the Life sense of green and yet the green movement hates it because we caused it so they can see no good in anything we caused even when it leads to more biological productivity. It’s fundamentally an anti–human movement not a pro-life of any kind movement. The ineluctable conclusion that has to be drawn from that proposition is that any human activity whatsoever is to be regarded as evil, even if it increases total biological flourishing in terms of like let’s say the net metric tonnage of of biological life on the planet and so that’s also perverse because that is definitely a game that none of us can win. If the a prior rule is no matter what you do you’re evil.

Then The Only Solution To That

is well how about a hell of a lot fewer of you. Hello Everyone watching and listening onNK] or the associated podcast platforms I have with Me today? Alex Epstein I’m looking forward to this discussion. He’s a philosopher and energy expert who argues that human flourishing should be the guiding principle and the appropriate metric for our energy and environmental policy and our determination of its progress. He’s the author of the new book Fossil Future as well as the New York Times bestseller the Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, which was published in 2014. .

Hes Also The Creator Of Energytalkingpoints.

com a source of powerful well-referenced talking points on energy, environmental and climate issues. Epstein began his work in 2011 with the founding of the Center for Industrial Progress, a for-profit think tank offering insights into the world of fossil fuels and fighting back against the mainstream Narrative of So-called environmentalism widely recognized as a master of persuasion and debate. issues, Alex has spoken to dozens of Fortune 500 companies and at dozens of prominent universities including Harvard Yale, Stanford and Duke, his alma mater. He’s also a highly sought after consultant on messaging, working with dozens of major political offices on pro-energy PRo Freedom messaging we’re here today to talk about the moral necessity of an energy-rich future one that both must and should rely on the Abundant provision of the petro-based fuels so carelessly currently demonized so welcome to all of you who are watching or listening and welcome to Alex so maybe we could just start by having you walk through the book.

One Of The Things I Found Interesting To

begin with was your discussion of the motivations. Let’s say of some of the more radical people that are pushing what is purported to be a pro-environment Stance. People like Paul Ehrlich, who clearly have an agenda that could be more accurately conceptualized as anti–human certainly anti-industrial rather than pro-environment and and I think that’s something that’s worthwhile alerting everyone too especially given the current state of energy price increase in Europe let’s say and the consequences that’s going to have for the poor around the world. Let’s start with that though you you wrote this book in 2014. let’s talk about why you wrote it and and how you think your prognostications have fared in what’s almost an intervening decade well.

I Think One Thing Thats Relevant Im

not sure if you know this but there’s a new book 2022 called fossil Future, which is the successor or replacement to the moral case for fossil fuels. so I talk a Bunch in that about what how the moral case for fossil fuels has fared and I think in terms of a predictive book? It’s not primarily a predictive book, but it has been extremely accurate because if you look at what people have said in the last eight or so years, the main narratives have been We’re not going to need fossil fuels as much as we used to they’re going to be rapidly replaced by solar and wind primarily and that climate impact the climate impact of fossil fuels is going to be increasingly catastrophic so we’re going to see more and more suffering and death from climate related disasters and in the book I talk about that’s not going to happen because one fossil fuels will remain uniquely cost effective, particularly in a world that needs far more energy, which is something that was not stressed in the past and is not stressed enough. Today people are starting to realize most of the world doesn’t have enough energy so replacing fossil. Fuels is almost impossible given that you’re not talking about just replacing it for the people who use it but for the people who need it. So I’ve been very Vindicated on the continuing cost effectiveness of fossil fuels and then on the climate disaster point.

  • christian question optimizing minimal impact
  • tyrant violate conscience cost pay
  • hebrews created history
  • fighting mainstream narrative called environmentalism
  • want villains punished want

We Have Documented That Climate-Related Disaster

deaths are down 98 percent in the last 100 years and they’ve continued to decline and the basic reason is because whatever impact we have on climate that is negative. It is far outweighed by our ability to master climate to neutralize all sorts of climate dangers and so we’re much better off overall climate wise than we were 50 years ago and certainly 100 years ago. So so with regards to let’s start with the second one there the climate disaster so the biophilic types and so those would be people like Ehrlich they seem to make. case that metrics that involve human flourishing or even human death aren’t relevant because the primary issue is to restore the biosphere to something approximating what it hypothetically was before there were human beings, which is a rather strange notion. All Things Considered and so they might object to the fact that you’re using the mere decrease in number of deaths say associated with climate trouble with weather events as a metric because the metric should be something like the purity of the planet and so what do you think about what do you think about that argument what metric should we be using to determine whether or not a climate emergency actually exists well.

I Definitely Think We Should Be Using A

human flourishing metric but in a broad sense so the climate disaster deaths are not the only aspect of that, but they’re a very important aspect. We. Can also see that damages are flat or down. We can see that life overall is much better and actually our ability to preserve the most valuable parts of nature Is better generally when you’re not dependent on the land and dependent on wood. Depending on your local environment.

For Your Fuel And Youre Wealthy.

You can be much better at preserving the parts of nature that you want to preserve if you look at places in Africa and Asia and even now Europe because they’re now energy poor like cutting down their forests. It’s because they don’t have better sources of fuel. So but I would I would challenge the idea that Ehrlich is really using this. I think you called it biophilic standard because if you look at his public rhetoric, he’s always appealing to a human flourishing standard, so how did Ehrlich become famous he became famous.

  • hebrews
  • environmentalism
  • villains
  • tyranny
  • consequences

Through The 1968 Book The Population

Bomb, where he’s telling human beings not hey the planet is going to become more impacted and that’s intrinsically bad. He’s saying You’re all going to Starve and his close colleague Sean Holdren, who was OBama’s Chief science advisor no he predicted in the 80s that we’d have up to a billion climate related disaster deaths from famine by 2020, which has come and gone and the world is better fed than ever. So what I find is that people who I think it internally they don’t really care about human flourishing and they’re really optimizing for eliminating our impact as much as possible, but they appeal to human flourishing to win over converts because if they really said the best possible. Earth is the one that would exist had we never existed and our goal is to eliminate as much human impact as possible as an end in itself, they would not win many converts well. The lack of a red wave during the midterms lead to more Reckless spending by a more emboldened ADministration higher taxes deeper inflation.

If Youre Unsure How The Next Two Years

will unfold talk to Birch gold group about protecting your savings with gold. Birch gold makes it easy to convert your UK or UK into an UK in Precious Metals so you can own gold and silver in a tax sheltered account. Gold is the world’s oldest most proven form of currency. When inflation soars and all other assets go sideways gold is still there. This month you can get a free gold back with every five thousand dollar purchase when you convert an.

Existing Ira Or Uk Into A Precious Metals

IRa with Birch gold by December 22nd. Just text Jordan to 989898. Birch gold will help you own gold and silver in a tax-sheltered account text Jordan to 989898 to claim your free info kit on gold then talk to one of their precious metals. Specialists with every purchase you make before December 22nd.

You Youll Get A Free Gold

back. This is a great stocking stuffer just in time for Christmas text Jordan to 989898 and protect yourself with gold today okay so the case that you’re making in some sense is that the argument on the radical pro-environmental side actually varies sometimes so so to speak in secret or behind the scenes sort of voce. I suppose Suppose the argument is made that the planet would be better off. It was returned to some natural and unspoiled condition and but then public facing.

The Arguments Are Essentially Predicated On

the argument that if we don’t do something drastic about let’s say climate change we’re going to cause a radical radical increase in actual human suffering okay so that all has to be straightened out conceptually before we as a species let’s say can move forward intelligently on this front. I think the most powerful point you made. However, and I think this is where the rubber really hits the road in more modern times is that even if you use the metrics that are put.

Summary

The Green movement hates it because we caused it so they can see no good in anything we caused even when it leads to more biological productivity . It’s fundamentally an anti–human movement not a pro-life of any kind movement. The ineluctable conclusion that has to be drawn from that proposition is that any human activity whatsoever is to be regarded as evil. Even if it increases total biological flourishing in terms of like let’s say the net met.& It’s a more Tropical World with.& More life it’s a . more green world in the Life sense of green and yet . yet the green movement hate it because . we caused . it so much of the green . movement so they . see no . good in . anything we . caused even though it leads . to more . biological productivity. It’s an anti-human movement. Not a pro–human . movement. But it’s not a . pro–life of . any kind of movement. It is not a…. Click here to read more and watch the full video