Individuals of a skeptical persuasion may have noticed some cognitive dissonance in terms of self-professed climate change activists with an alleged deep and abiding interest in preventing the climate catastrophe they are always on about, and their prolific use of private jets. These ferry them to and from important meetings like Davos, Bilderberg, etc., where they discuss their strategies for installing a multinational technocratic regime, complete with “carbon apps” to track and limit the peasants’ access to resources.
Some of us have noticed the glaring hypocrisy. So has The Wall Street Journal, along with a select few corporate and independent media outlets.
A World Economic Forum paper recommends reducing cars by 75% by 2050. How about the Davos crowd first give up private jets?https://t.co/IfUMZyfmak
— Wall Street Journal Opinion (@WSJopinion) June 18, 2023
This means that the elite climate change technocrats have a public relations problem on their hands. The talking point that at least one of the private jet apologists is running with is the deflection that your dog is the real problem here.
Via Luxurylaunches:
Can pets be as bad as jets? That’s what Patrick Hansen, boss of a luxury airline firm, claimed. As astonishing as it sounds, the chief executive of Luxaviation based in Luxembourg told the Financial Times that one of his company’s customers produces around 2.1 tonnes of CO2 yearly or about the same amount as three dogs. The estimates are based on carbon footprint consultant Mike Berners-Lee’s book, which states a labrador has an annual carbon footprint of around 770kg. The bigger the dog, the bigger the carbon footprint; Great Danes emit as much as 2,500kg of carbon dioxide annually.
Climate change activists have a hell of a way with manipulating statistics. Claiming three dogs could produce more carbon than Bill Gates’ fossil fuel-burning private jet as he gallivants across the planet is highly dubious.
But this is the most salient point that everyone should fully digest when considering the arguments offered by climate change propagandists: all animals — human, canine, and otherwise — are made primarily of carbon. Plants breathe carbon dioxide. Animals exhale carbon dioxide. It’s a beautiful give-and-take. Carbon is the single most important element to life on Earth.
So what they really mean when they demonize carbon as part of their religious rite is that you, Fluffy, and the tree in your backyard are the carbon the technocrats want to eliminate.
Sometimes they say the silent part out loud, like when the chimp lady, Jane Goodall, let it slip at the WEF that she’d be satisfied with reducing the global population to levels from 500 years ago.
As I reported last year, CNN demanded recently that pet owners force-feed their pets an artificial diet of Klaus Schwab’s ze bugs so as to protect Mother Earth from the ravages of the furry little domestic terrorists.
Via CNN:
Researchers have showed that pets play a significant role in the climate crisis… Their meat-heavy diet is the biggest contributor to their carbon pawprints, which requires an abundance of energy, land and water to produce. And the production of pet food emits huge amounts of planet-warming gases.
Bloomberg, similarly, encouraged pet owners to let their animals die last year as a means to counter the Brandon regime’s inflation problem.