In a stunning threat to individual freedom, a powerful international body is eying coronavirus restrictions as an instructive lesson for climate change restrictions.

In an address for Extinction Rebellion about coronavirus and climate change, Michael Marmot, a commission chairman at the World Health Organization (WHO), praised massive government programs that will “socialize the economy.”

According to Marmot, “What the Covid crisis exposes is that we can do things differently. We must not go back to the status quo, we cannot do that,” said Marmot, according to the March 28 UK Independent.

According to the March 28 UK Guardian, Marmot said in his remarks that the coronavirus “has revealed what governments are capable of doing” responding to asserted crises like coronavirus and the asserted climate crisis. Moreover, “The urgency with which the government had acted showed that the response to an emergency could be swift and decisive.”

Marmot described government intervention in the economy as a means for socialism, asserting that government should maintain such a socialist model even after the coronavirus wanes. “Coronavirus exposes that we can do things differently,” Marmot said. “We must not go back to the status quo ante.”

For most people, onerous government restrictions responding to the coronavirus and budget-busting plans to compensate for those restrictions are a necessary (or not) evil. For climate activists and international bodies, onerous government restrictions and budget-busting plans are an inspirational guide for how to permanently transform society in the name of the so-called climate crisis.

James Taylor is Director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center for Climate and Environmental Policy at The Heartland Institute. Taylor is the former managing editor (2001-2014) of Environment & Climate News, a national monthly publication devoted to sound science and free-market environmentalism.

6 COMMENTS

  1. I won’t speak for any other country other than my own. In the U.S, what I am cautiously optimistic about is every American will get a good lesson in “Federalism.” Yes, COVID-19 is a national emergency within our borders, but the fact we are a REPUBLIC will ultimately prove to our unique advantage. I don’t think there is any doubt we got off to a slow start in addressing the virus on testing & then our social distancing. Much like Pearl Harbor and the first 6 months of WWII. Historically, we seem to make that a habit. However, I believe what we are beginning to witness is the real STRENGTH of our political & free market systems. Rather than a “top down” approach from a central planning authority as the socialists crave, we have a “blended” approach. The U.S government (FEMA) is the supply coordinator & financial engine and State & local governments take the lead to make detailed strategic decisions at a more micro level to meet their unique needs. The private sector has it’s role in the public/private partnership in the supply chain and in providing innovative responses to the crisis as it evolves. Plenty of evidence this is the case. Coordination of the logistical effort & timely allocation of resources will determine success or failure. Right now, it would appear many in the media are (already) looking to “shovel dirt” in on our ongoing response & healthcare system. I have confidence in this critical next month the U.S will, in fact, respond admirably to this great societal challenge, just as we always have throughout our history. Despite being behind early, we have the components in place and an adaptive system that can manage this. When the “After Action Review” is completed on this pandemic, I think our system of government & private industry response will prove very favorable with any on the globe. This is just America’s latest chance to show it’s character and be a beacon of FREEDOM…

  2. The crass manner in which this is being touted as “an answer/model” towards the socialization of the world should be instructive to the masses to wake up to the very real danger these people pose to everyone. Because, like covid 19, the cost will be ginormous and the death toll much, much higher.

  3. Our climate is significantly influenced by cycles of sun activity which determines the level of cloud coverage. Cloud coverage, in turn, dictates how much sun radiation reaches the earth’s surface and that leads to both global coolings and warmings. Increasing CO2 level is a separate issue and has little or no impact on our climate. Mother Nature is in charge of our climate so the best we can do is adapt.

    More than two decades ago Henrik Svensmark, a Danish physicist, and his associates proposed a new theory which, incidentally, did not involve CO2. Svensmark claimed that warmings and coolings were brought on by variation in sun activity. Sun activity has an impact on an otherwise relatively stable level of incoming cosmic rays which otherwise would penetrate the lower atmosphere. More cosmic ray entry leads to more cloud coverage. (CERN has confirmed that cosmic rays can influence cloud coverage.)

    The level of cloud coverage determines the amount of sun radiation which reaches the earth surface. Higher levels of cloud coverage result in less sun reaching the earth’s surface, so it’s cooler. Lower cloud coverage permits more sun radiation to reach the earth’s surface, so it’s warmer. Until very recently the current sun activity cycle has been high, and so we’ve experienced a warming period. However, sun activity has recently (Dec 2019) dropped significantly. If this new inactive sun cycle persists, it will result in an increase in the average cloud coverage which, according to Svensmark, should bring on a cooling period.

    Recently Easterbrook, a geologist, came out with a comprehensive study (an entire book) which makes use of available data over the past 800,000 years. (That extended duration includes a few ice ages, each now referred to as a “glaciation”. The new definition of ice age apparently covers about the past 65 million years.) Easterbrooks’s book title says it all: “The Solar Magnetic Cause of Climate Changes and Origin of the Ice Ages”. Easterbrook’s study rules out the likelihood of CO2 playing any significant role in influencing climate.

    The conclusion on page 176 of Easterbrook’s book is clear. ” EVERY cool period was characterized by low sunspot numbers, indicating low strength of the sun’s magnetic field, and high production rates of beryllium-10 and radiocarbon, indicating a high intensity of cosmic rays.”

    “EVERY warm period was coincident with high sunspot numbers and low production rates of beryllium-10 and radiocarbon. Thus, it is unequivocally clear that climate changes, large and small, are driven by fluctuations of the sun’s magnetic field.”
    While Easterbrook claims that his study stands, whether or not Svensmark’s theory survives, his results certainly appear to further validate Svensmark’s work.

    It is also clear that at least some of the earlier warmings during this interglacial were also global and at least as warm as it is now, the Medieval Warming Period in particular. Alarmists, instead of taking advantage of this historical data, chose to deny it and instead speculate about CO2 impact on global temperature. There is no evidence supporting that hypothesis. Alarmists also claim that they knew that sun activity caused earlier warmings. But when earth’s climate is dictated by sun activity that is, by definition, a global event.

    There are other conflicts with the alarmist position, including a mild cooling from 1945-1975 as CO2 was increasing, and the IPCC acknowledged a “hiatus” in temperature during the 2000s as CO2 continued increasing

    CO2 has little to do with our warmings and probably should be left to health authorities and botanists rather than climatologists.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here