A bold claim perhaps - I will say that humans are clearly responsible for damaging ecosystems with things like deforestation, oil spills, fracking, Fukushima radiation, chemtrails, bee colony collapse disorder etc. And this is not a good path to be on, it's not sustainable and we need to change. But the real solutions will never be put forward by our politicians, for the reasons I explain below.
The climate change movement led by the UN has a very specific narrative that our use of fossil fuels and specifically rising CO2 emissions is the primary reason for the Earth's rising temperatures and erratic weather changes, and therefore the obvious solution is to tax carbon to reduce consumption.
This is a very convenient conclusion at a time when governments are desperate for more money, and so I've always been skeptical but recently a few more pieces of the puzzle came together for me.
Firstly, the climate is always changing so it's a very vague and intellectually lazy statement, and there are many natural cycles that are arguably a bigger factor but are ignored because they don't fit the narrative.
For example, the Earth's magnetic field has been weakening for decades, leaving the Earth more exposed to cosmic rays and solar radiation than ever before in recent history. We don't fully understand the reasons for this, but there is research that shows the atmosphere is directly affected by cosmic rays and solar radiation, leading to more cloud cover and precipitation: http://viewzone.com/magnetic.weather.html
Historically solar radiation and volcanic activity have had a much higher impact on the natural warming and cooling cycles, and this is going on long before we started burning fossil fuels - our current cycle is just a blip, hardly outside the norm:
Secondly, if CO2 emissions do play a part (and I think it does contribute somewhat), it would be disingenuous to not examine the causes and trends behind our energy and oil consumption.
Our discovery of cheap energy led to a population explosion, but the rate of population growth is actually falling in developed countries, and is in outright decline in countries like Japan, that have not used immigration to make up the difference. And because of this falling population growth and demand, oil consumption has already peaked as a result:
As you can see the oil consumption peaks correlate closely with falling rate of population growth, which happened at different times in different countries, so the decline in oil consumption is not due to increasing technology efficiencies as some would argue.
In developing countries like China where oil consumption is still rising, the rate of population growth is also declining so the end is the same. Also much of their oil consumption comes from manufacturing exports to sell to developed countries, so their oil consumption will fall even faster as the Western population and demand for exports fall off a cliff, and we head into deflation.
Thirdly, CO2 emissions and oil consumption would already have declined much sooner and faster if it had not been propped up by debt. Since Japan, every government including China has copied the model of using more debt to stimulate borrowing and consumption, to compensate for a declining population growth and falling demand. You can see this in the charts above.
This is because our debt based monetary system demands growth at all costs or it collapses.
This monetary system is actually the biggest problem in our world today, because it leads to unsustainable consumption habits and rewards greed and short term thinking, that is behind most of the damage we are doing to our planet as mentioned above. China is building ghost cities and massive retail spaces when their population is about to fall off a cliff, and there is a huge shift to online shopping, it's madness.
But instead of an honest balanced discussion of the natural factors or the causes of our excessive consumption, these facts are completely suppressed in Leo DiCaprio's latest feel good documentary, because it doesn't fit their agenda:
If you don't believe in their official narrative then you are immediately labeled a 'climate change denier' - another sign of intellectual laziness using emotion over reason to polarise and marginalise dissenters. They did the same thing after WW2 if you questioned the 6 million number, you were labeled a 'Holocaust denier' - it's the exact same language pattern, very easy to recognise and it's powerful because it works.
So we have all these useless bureaucrats, flying around on our tax money in carbon guzzling planes to sign climate change agreements, and when CO2 emissions inevitably fall anyways they can pat themselves on the back for their hard work. Great job guys.
So what's the real agenda? Well the carbon tax angle is pretty obvious, and the fear porn is a great distraction from what they are really up to, but I think there are several other motives and I'll leave that to another post..