Here is an utterly crazy story about the US Democrat called lovingly AOC, to save breath and hence carbon emissions from over-talking, who thanked a possibly trolling audience question, based upon Jonathan Swiftian philosophy, about eating babies (A Modest Proposal (1729)):
“Prank or no, my take away from the eat-the-babies episode is Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-CA) repeatedly thanking the woman who said we need to eat babies to save the planet. Watch the video for yourself, but this time pay special attention to Ocasio-Crazy’s demonic and demented reaction to some crazy woman howling about how eating dead people is not enough. By the way, the idea of eating dead people to save the world from Climate Change is no joke. Just last month at something called the Gastro Summit, Swedish behavioral scientist Magnus Söderlund did a whole PowerPoint presentation arguing we must “overcome our taboo against cannibalism” and eat our own dead to reduce carbon emissions and promote sustainability. The woman at Ocasio-Crazy’s town hall was only taking this idea to the next logical step, a step that combines cannibalism with the Democrats’ utter disregard for newborn babies. The Democrat party is now openly pro-infanticide, openly okay with slaughtering a child post-birth, so why not go for the two-fer? Hey, eating the baby not only aborts it, it’s one less carbon-emitting feast for the whole family!”
I tend to think that the questioner was serious, being very pinko-like. Thus, how about these sorts of radical environmentalists supporting global nuclear war?
“Pakistan and India may have 400 to 500 nuclear weapons by 2025 with yields from tested 12- to 45-kt values to a few hundred kilotons. If India uses 100 strategic weapons to attack urban centers and Pakistan uses 150, fatalities could reach 50 to 125 million people, and nuclear-ignited fires could release 16 to 36 Tg of black carbon in smoke, depending on yield. The smoke will rise into the upper troposphere, be self-lofted into the stratosphere, and spread globally within weeks. Surface sunlight will decline by 20 to 35%, cooling the global surface by 2° to 5°C and reducing precipitation by 15 to 30%, with larger regional impacts. Recovery takes more than 10 years. Net primary productivity declines 15 to 30% on land and 5 to 15% in oceans threatening mass starvation and additional worldwide collateral fatalities.”
Millions of dead, global cooling, what is there for the Greenie crazies not to like? Then, to put icing on the carbon cake, let’s ban private jets too, which would be truly delicious:
“The top 50 countries in the world in terms of private jet ownership have a total fleet of nearly 18,000 jets. According to Statista, private jet ownership is soaring in most countries (as wealth inequality accelerates thanks to central bank interventions and 10 years of Cantillon Effects). A Cessna Citation XLS burns approximately 6,030kg of CO2 per three hour flight. It’s back-of-the-napkin, but let’s say a typical jet does 4 legs per week, at 3 hour legs. We get: 17,947 jets X 6,030 kg CO2/flight X 4 flights/week X 52 weeks = 22,509,845,280 kilograms of Co2. Over 22 billion kilos of C02. Per year. But if we banned private jets, with immediate effect, no exceptions, very few working class and middle class people would be affected. In fact even upper class, low-tier wealthy would be unaffected, it would only affect the tiny sliver at the top of the wealth pyramid, the same ones who seem most vociferously adamant on drastic climate action now and who could best afford to make alternate arrangements for attending climate summits or other important events. Davos could be held via Skype, for example. Taking the important step now will set the tone for the coming, rapid and drastic restructuring of every aspect of our lives, and it will be an easier pill to swallow when the elitists driving this change are leading the charge by example. Be the change you wish to see! #BanPrivateJets.”
A great idea! If we deplorables are not going to be able to eat meat, then let the elites go without their private jets! Why, young Queen Greta went to the UN talkfest in a ship, I think, but there would still be a carbon footprint from that, because even if there were zero emissions of the trip, the thing still had to be built. Couldn’t she have swum? Or, hitched a ride with a friendly rainbow dolphin?