Getting it wrong on "sustainability"

By now it has become all-to-familiar, with outrageous claims of portending disasters, followed by tyrannical edicts from the aloof, unaffected and hypocritical elite, followed then by 'expert' opinions posing as science and anecdotes posing as patterns, next to be followed by efforts to silence, smear or cancel those who provide evidence counter to the elite narrative, then to be followed by hard data rejecting those extreme predictions, and concluding with the politicians, bureaucrats and media moguls shrugging off any accountability for their failed predictions and disastrous policies.

Covid and climate change have both followed these patterns. Amidst all of this, we get insane examples of the insincerity, hypocrisy and disconnection of the elite, such as Joe Biden's 85-vehicle motorcade to visit the pope for a discussion of climate change actions needed to save the planet. Then Biden claims the pope told him that he is a "good Catholic" and that he should continue to receive communion, only the pope and the Vatican have not confirmed any of these claims, and they prohibited any public coverage of their private 75-minute meeting. On top of this, the media claimed that the huge motorcade was caused by Covid policies prohibiting more than three non-family members in a vehicle, meaning there must have been about 2450 people to accompany Biden to a meeting that two people attended -- Biden and Pope Francis.

Equally troubling is the pope's insistence that climate change and Covid are acts of Mother Nature's revenge and that sinful man is responsible for abusing the planet, while the pope declines to admonish or punish Biden for his pro-abortion stance, leaving the other 'good Catholics' aghast and the fawning press eager to spread Joe's assertions of his own goodness and faith practices.

On climate, the combination of incompetence has created a narrative that has a life of its own, the "97% consensus," the disgraced "hockey stick" temperature forecast, and the ignorance of history and data prior to the life of the self-proclaimed expert, and the willingness to change history and data to fit the preconceived conceit of the 'climate scientist.' Highs become lows, lows become highs, and data start sometime after 1975.

When Scott Adams mocks you, consider yourself outed....

And yes, fire acreage burn looks pretty bad, if you use 1973 to 1982 as your baseline....