Top politician Friedrich Merz of Angela Merkel’s CDU party told German daily Die Welt the climate movement “ultimately gets down to our freedom-based lifestyle”.
CDU’s Friedrich Merz. Image: https://www.friedrich-merz.de/
Reacting to the harsh criticism launched by the German Greens, the media and Fridays for Future who claim that the German government’s recent proposal to combat CO2 emissions doesn’t go far enough, Merz said: “The alternative would be an unprecedented deindustrialization of our country.”
He added: “Even the introduction of a CO2 tax would not have been enough, nor would a series of bans on everything from SUVs to meat and air travel.“
The reality is that Germany’s share of global greenhouse gas emissions is just too puny (<3%) to make any perceptible difference. So what is behind the draconian decarbonization drive?
Germany’s industry has been reeling from the attacks launched by radical environmentalists, the very industries that are at the heart of freedom. Merz Told Welt: “On the other hand, behind the vociferous criticism and the demands for radical solutions, much is hidden and there is not the desire for more environmental protection. One or the other of you is saying it quite openly: It’s about overcoming the system, about destroying our market economy.”
Criticism from Merkel, Macron
So vocal and aggressive have the green radicals have become that even some of the world’s most high profile proponents of climate protection proponents have grown wary of the radical greens.
Recently the online Epoch Times reported on the reactions from European leaders:
French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel distanced themselves from Thunberg over her speech to the United Nations and a legal complaint Thunberg filed that accuses France and Germany, among other nations, of a lack of action on climate change. Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison faulted Thunberg for subjecting Australian children to “needless anxiety.”
“They’ve got enough things to be anxious about,” Morrison said of his own daughters. “We’ve got to let kids be kids. We can’t have them growing up as mushrooms, but we’ve got to get a bit of context into this.”
Macron criticized Thunberg for taking a radical and antagonistic position. “All the movements among our youth, or the less young, are useful,” Macron told French broadcaster Europe 1. “But now they must concentrate on the people who are further away, those who are trying to block [sustainable initiatives]. These radical positions will naturally antagonize our societies.”
“French Ecology Minister Brune Poirson also criticized Thunberg for creating divisions that may prove irreparable,” The Epoch times wrote.
“I do not believe that we can mobilize the population with despair, with almost hatred, setting people against one another,” Poirson told Radio France. “It’s important, she mobilizes. But what are the solutions she puts on the table? I do not know.”
Merkel took a subtler approach to criticize the teenage climate activist: “I would like to take the opportunity to strongly contradict her in one matter,” Merkel said, according to The Times of London. “She did not adequately address the way technology and innovation, especially in the energy sector but also in energy conservation, raise possibilities for reaching our goals.”
7 responses to “Top German Politician Criticizes Climate Movement’s Gloominess, Anger… “Against Our Freedom-Based Lifestyle””
Dr Tim Ball – Historical Climatologist
Book ‘The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science’.
Book “Human Caused Global Wa rming”, ‘The Biggest Deception in History’.
BREAKING – Dr. Tim Ball wins @MichaelEMann lawsuit – Mann has to pay
Apparently Europe’s leaders don’t like being lectured to by a privileged child.
There they go again. lol
Draconian Decarbonization Drive = Dark Ages
It ain’t the car, it’s the driver.
It ain’t the carbon, it’s the gone bonkers greenies who don’t mind driving everything into the ground.
Sow the wind, reap a whirlwind.
“Macron criticized Thunberg for taking a radical and antagonistic position. “
Taking a radical and antagonistic position was the whole point. Of all people Macron the radical should understand that. If Pearl Toonberg had taken any other approach, the anti-social screwballs at the UN wouldn’t have had any reason to give her a venue for her (actually their) nonsense.
Science by mob rule.
None of this is anything new. Meteorological theories on atmospheric flow and storms have always maintained three superstitious and half-baked notions: 1) Convection. This is the superstition that evaporation makes air buoyant enough to power strong updrafts in the atmosphere (included in this is the belief that H2O in the atmosphere becomes gaseous at temperatures/pressures that have never been detected in a laboratory); 2) Dry layer capping. This is a superstition that imagines dry layers having structural properties that explain the how/why convection does not constantly produce storms and uplift; 3) Latent heat. This is the superstition that phase changes from a gaseous phase of H2O (which are purported to exist despite never having been detected and being inconsistent with what is indicated in the H2O phase table) to a liquid phase releases “latent heat” which itself has never been confirmed/verified.
In accordance with which, the current meteorological paradigm assumes hurricanes are caused by warm water. Actually the energy of hurricanes and all storms comes from jet streams and is delivered through vortices in the form of low pressure. Wind shear at low altitudes is the most important predictor of severe weather. This is because wind shear is the mechanism underlying growth of the vortices that are the transport mechanism of the low pressure energy. Warm moist air/water is not the source of the energy of storms, it’s the target of vortice growth.
The ‘Missing Link’ of Meteorology’s Theory of Storms
James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
You are right, these people are reaping what they did sow before. Greta and her brainwashed followers are like modern day versions of Dr Frankenstein creature.
“The reality is that Germany’s share of global greenhouse gas emissions is just too puny (<3%) to make any perceptible difference."
Yes indeed. Coupled to that, CO2 does not by any empirical measure significantly affect the climate. In the long term CO2 encourages more green growth which tends to moderate temperature extremes, and encourage rain in drought prone ares.