Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Heartland Institute’s Donald Kendal, Jim Lakely, Chris Talgo and special guest Steve Milloy of JunkScience.com discuss the latest alarmist climate report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The so-called “AR6 Report” is getting a ton of attention in the media, and all the coverage is gloom and doom. But is that really the case? What does the report really say, and is there a climate crisis caused by human activity? And, if there is, what can/should we do about it?
Alex Epstein Twitter Thread
I’ll be as upfront as I can: this is not going to be a sophisticated analysis of the budget deficit, the national debt, and its implications on the economy going forward. What it is going to be, is the perception of ordinary people who know full well that all that stuff is way over their heads, and only have what they see and how their lives are going to judge the state of things by.
But first, a divergence into the seemingly unrelated issue of climate change. Why are initiatives such as the Green New Deal failing to catch on outside the most politically connected circles on the coasts? Sure, in the case of the GND specifically, you could argue it’s poorly written with highly impractical and arguably counterproductive goals. But I’m speaking in the general sense. Why is the hysteria of impending climate doom not having a whole lot of impact with any but the most politically aware voters?
The Heartland Institute’s Donald Kendal, Jim Lakely, and Chris Talgo present episode 365 of the In The Tank Podcast. There have been a couple stories that have popped up recently that might point to the fact that the climate cult is falling apart. From Al Gore calling out corporations for “greenwashing” to Rashida Tlaib lashing out at bankers for not cutting off fossil fuel financing, it seems like the “greenies” are turning on each other. Also, YouTube denied our attempt at monetizing our channel, claiming our content is “harmful.”
OPENING CHIT CHAT
The Heartland Institute’s Donald Kendal, Jim Lakely, and Chris Talgo present episode 356 of the In The Tank Podcast. Why is it that all the climate change solutions coming from any one of consequence on the left are terrible? From over-reliance on wind and solar to destroying our agricultural sectors, they never seem to run out of terrible ideas. Also, a new report from the World Economic Forum seems to bolster the globalist claim that “in the future, you will own nothing.” The ITT crew talks about these topics and more.
OPENING CHIT CHAT – REDEFINING TERMS
The Heartland Institute’s Donald Kendal, Jim Lakely, Linnea Lueken, and JunkScience.com’s Steve Milloy present episode 337 of the In The Tank Podcast. On this episode, the ITT crew discusses the question “is the climate change agenda dead?” In light of rising gas and energy prices, it looks as though the climate change agenda is being put on the back burner.
The Heartland Institute’s Donald Kendal, Jim Lakely, and Linnea Lueken are joined by Isaac Orr in episode 329 of the In The Tank Podcast. On this episode, the ITT crew talks about the unfolding energy crisis in Europe, the global rebound of coal, and what we should expect in the U.S. if our leaders continue down the path of unreliable energy.
OPENING CHIT CHAT – COVID/AUTHORITARIAN POLL UPDATE
This past week, the Biden administration doubled down in its campaign against climate change with the release of a suite of four reports, on national defense, financial risk, homeland security, and migration. These reports all start with the common premise that the climate crisis is now upon us in full fury. Moreover, they also all insist that the issues at hand are nonpolitical, and that the objective at all times is “to be guided by the best available science and data.” To say the least, however, the claim looks hollow, given that none of these reports offers any data whatsoever to support its major contentions.
The reports never address contrary views or even acknowledge that on some points the science is, to use the much-mooted phrase from Steven Koonin, “unsettled” on such key questions as the size of the Greenland ice sheet, the patterns of sea level rise, or the impact of expected temperature increases on economic growth over time. The reports are also dead silent on the role that technological improvements will play in reducing the raw materials or carbon dioxide output needed for any given output of energy, agriculture, or machinery. Nor do they ask whether human decisions, like poor forest management, account for increases in fires and air pollution, or whether a shift to nuclear power, natural gas, or clean coal might change the arc of history. Finally, they never acknowledge the complex interactions between American actions, international treaties, and the actions of key players, like China and the European Union.
Sadly, instead of asking any hard questions, these reports just take the worst-case scenario for granted and move on. The financial risk report summarizes this basic orientation by wrongly claiming that the report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “concluded with high confidence that the climate crisis is ‘code red for humanity.’ ” The quoted words were not, however, from the IPCC report but rather from a florid press release by the secretary-general of the United Nations, António Guterres, which unwisely went well beyond the IPCC report.
The Heartland Institute’s Donald Kendal, Justin Haskins, Jim Lakely, and Nate Myers present episode #312 of the In The Tank Podcast. This week, the ITT crew talks about General Milley’s secret calls to China, the Vaccine Mandates in the U.S., COVID Authoritarianism in Australia, and Europe’s self-inflicted energy crisis. Its been a busy week.
OPENING CHIT CHAT
A huge fraction of the Biden administration’s regulatory policy is driven by its persistent fear of climate change. Chief among its initiatives are ambitious programs to reduce the United States’ dependence on fossil fuels by pushing for an increase in wind and solar energy reliance.
There are two paths for achieving that goal: direct regulation and disclosure. The former includes the decision made shortly after President Biden’s inauguration to pull the federal permits for the Keystone XL pipeline, which led TC Energy, its Canadian developer, to kill the project some months later. Soon thereafter, the Biden team made its dubious decision to “pause” oil and gas leasing on public lands and waters, only to be blocked judicially for encroaching on Congress’s power to set national policy. Ironically, there was no explanation given of how these actions would help the environment. In my view, Keystone’s removal probably increased climate-change risk by preventing the efficient shipment of fossil fuels, which are still used by over 80 percent of the energy market, notwithstanding the heavily subsidized production of wind and solar energy. Piously claiming to follow “best science” hardly serves as an adequate justification.