John Kerry says US farmers must radically transform food production to meet 'net zero' emissions goals by 2030

[multivita-man]

This is why we have you here, to explain why it is that the poorer we all are, the less carbon emissions result.

The only way we have less emissions and less ecological destruction is to collectively produce and consume less. Period. The simplest way I know to achieve that is to have a lot fewer people who consume a lot less per capita than we do now.

There is no easy way to achieve this even if everyone buys in to this idea, and I'm not expecting anyone buying into it anytime soon.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

This is why I think we're fucked. Even the people who are concerned about "climate change"* don't truly understand the magnitude of the problem and the degree of danger it represents.

And even if they did, all of civilization has this massive amount of construction that it has built and our system functions by attaching value to the land and its use.

There's no practical way to undo all of this without trashing the current economic and political systems that we have and starting over.

*I put climate change in quotes because the problem is bigger than that; the underlying problem is overuse of resources and the waste from it. Nothing "sustainable" can come from it, and pretending that there is just mischaracterizes the situation.

There is no MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE. It is a farce that makes fools give up their monies so the religious leaders of the GW cult can get very rich and powerful, while making the GW zealots weak and poor. See it every day when energy prices necessarily skyrocket, then food prices soar, and then shortages of said food. Not because of Climate Change but because of the Marxists/Dictators who are punishing those who voted for them.

Why is it okay for John F'ing Kerry's wife who is a Heinz, make billions of dollars creating millions of tons of CO2 a year on her Mustard and Ketchup, but all you can do is harp on the rest of US. Go over and tell Melissa Heinz to shut her business down or else, burn it down. That is what a true environmental whacko would do.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

The only way we have less emissions and less ecological destruction is to collectively produce and consume less. Period. The simplest way I know to achieve that is to have a lot fewer people who consume a lot less per capita than we do now.

There is no easy way to achieve this even if everyone buys in to this idea, and I'm not expecting anyone buying into it anytime soon.

to collectively produce

Collectively - Communism....

 

[DudleySmith]

The U.S.'s white population was doing the right thing, and still is; they reduced having lots of children as their affluence increased and technology, food security, and productivity skyrocketed, kept their population stable and even declining somewhat, and now a bunch of morons are determined to overload the lifeboat with a bunch of greedy halfwit savages and atavistic dumbasses via wide open borders and collapsing the infrastructure and 1st world safety nets.

It is ludicrous that we should be shipping food aid to Africa and Red China or anywhere else, given their land masses and available population, for just one example. None of these regions would do the same for us if we were in trouble, outside of maybe Germany, who has sent aid in the past to American auto-workers, at least. That was decades ago, so I doubt they would repeat that act of selflessness now.

 

[multivita-man]

There is no MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE.

Lots of scientific data says you're wrong, but let's ask a question: why do you believe humans are not causing climate change? What is the basis of your belief?

Why is it okay for John F'ing Kerry's wife who is a Heinz, make billions of dollars creating millions of tons of CO2 a year on her Mustard and Ketchup, but all you can do is harp on the rest of US.

Well, it would seem that John Kerry actually believes people are toxifying the environment and consequently changing the biosphere, which in turn changes our climate, making it warmer. So the fact that he actually accepts scientific convention is a start. He's also urging for more substantive action, so he's got that going for him as well. I still don't think he and others who accept manmade climate change theory truly understand the scale of the problem.

Go over and tell Melissa Heinz to shut her business down or else, burn it down. That is what a true environmental whacko would do.

Well I think it's now called Kraft-Heinz and based in Chicago, so I don't know what her/their interests in it are now.

 

[multivita-man]

The U.S.'s white population was doing the right thing, and still is; they reduced having lots of children as their affluence increased and technology, food security, and productivity skyrocketed, kept their population stable and even declining somewhat, and now a bunch of morons are determined to overload the lifeboat with a bunch of greedy halfwit savages and atavistic dumbasses via wide open borders and collapsing the infrastructure and 1st world safety nets.

It is ludicrous that we should be shipping food aid to Africa and Red China or anywhere else, given their land masses and available population, for just one example. None of these regions would do the same for us if we were in trouble, outside of maybe Germany, who has sent aid in the past to American auto-workers, at least. That was decades ago, so I doubt they would repeat that act of selflessness now.

I suspect that as the impacts of climate change worsen, we're going to see a lot more agriculture protectionism. That presents an existential crisis for China, as last time I looked, they're a net importer of food, whereas the US and Brazil are exporters.

Given the ever-increasing tensions between China and the US (and others), things like food and water security are going to become major flashpoints.

 

[Votto]

The only way we have less emissions and less ecological destruction is to collectively produce and consume less. Period. The simplest way I know to achieve that is to have a lot fewer people who consume a lot less per capita than we do now.

There is no easy way to achieve this even if everyone buys in to this idea, and I'm not expecting anyone buying into it anytime soon.

In other words, the only way to curb carbon emissions is to either eradicate the population or throw them all into poverty and make them all wish there were dead

Call it, the DNC final solution.

 

[multivita-man]

In other words, the only way to curb carbon emissions is to either eradicate the population or throw them all into poverty

* Managed population decline (that would take some time)
* Managed economic distribution (that would take willing sacrifices by the wealthy)
* Geopolitical cooperation (unicorn-ish thinking but that's one of the requirements)

None of these are likely going to be acceptable to anyone, not even the AOC wing of the Democratic party. I'm guessing she lives a pretty standard modern lifestyle like the rest of us, and probably above-standard now that she's got fame. Bernie had something like 3 houses last I looked. I don't think anyone really takes this issue as seriously as they should.

So that leads us to a likely outcome: lots of political and economic instability, probably lots of domestic and international conflict, and ultimately, collapse. The warm-up to end-anthropocene climate destruction won't be recognized as climate change. We'll confuse it with other human problems.

 

[Votto]

* Managed population decline (that would take some time)
* Managed economic distribution (that would take willing sacrifices by the wealthy)
* Geopolitical cooperation (unicorn-ish thinking but that's one of the requirements)

None of these are likely going to be acceptable to anyone, not even the AOC wing of the Democratic party. I'm guessing she lives a pretty standard modern lifestyle like the rest of us, and probably above-standard now that she's got fame. Bernie had something like 3 houses last I looked. I don't think anyone really takes this issue as seriously as they should.

So that leads us to a likely outcome: lots of political and economic instability, probably lots of domestic and international conflict, and ultimately, collapse. The warm-up to end-anthropocene climate destruction won't be recognized as climate change. We'll confuse it with other human problems.

No one will agree to the climate agenda if they only knew what it was?

No kidding.

Yea, the Nazis had to keep their agenda hidden as well.

 

[multivita-man]

The warm-up to end-anthropocene climate destruction won't be recognized as climate change. We'll confuse it with other human problems.

Following up on this a bit, here's a good example of how our climate problem is going to be recognized first and foremost as just another human problem, an economics problem. Economics studies human behavior, specifically human buying/selling and production/consumption. There's now decades of really, really technical data and probably centuries of less accurate but still useful data that helps understand (most times) our behavioral tendencies under certain conditions.

The environment, however, tends to be treated as an externality or force majeure, that either can't or shouldn't be factored in economics modeling and risk forecasting. Insurance companies, though, are a bit different. It's their job to assess risk of financial losses in the future. When an insurance company decides it's done selling insurance premiums, it's both a calculation of past impacts, and then recognizing data trends using multiple sets across different disciplines to assess future risk.

State Farm stops writing California property, cites exposure & reinsurance challenges - Reinsurance News

US primary insurance giant State Farm is ceasing to underwrite commercial and residential property in the State of California, citing exposure related

www.reinsurancene.ws

In addition, State Farm said that “rapidly growing catastrophe exposure” is another driver for its choice to cease writing property insurance in California.

In other words, they're worried the property they insure is going to go up in smoke. Not a matter of if, but when, and they can't really price that easily.

The insurer did acknowledge efforts to enhance “wildfire loss mitigation” by the Governor’s administration, legislators, and the California Department of Insurance (CDI).

But it seems these have not been enough, or effective enough, in the insurer’s view and catastrophe exposure is outrunning any efforts to mitigate it in California.

In other words, thanks for trying, Gavin, but you guys need to get serious. In the meantime, we're out.

Finally, State Farm cited the “challenging reinsurance market,” which has been making it difficult for insurers to secure sufficient reinsurance at an affordable cost in heavily wildfire exposed areas.

And this is what a lot of people don't realize. It's the reinsurance market that is starting to really take note of climate change, and people living in the path of a climate risk (California, Florida, Texas, Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, etc) are going to start paying a lot more in premiums and in some cases, property will be uninsurable. The taxpayer will have to step in.

 

[percysunshine]

John Kerry, let them eat bugs.

​

Biden's Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, former Senator John Kerry, made a stunning revelation earlier this month when he spoke about the need to transform the way food is produced in order to lower emissions. The new crusade for climate activists is to reduce emissions that are a result of food production.​

​

"A lot of people have no clue that agriculture contributes about 33 percent of all the emissions of the world," Kerry said, "depending a little bit on how you count it, but it's anywhere from 26 to 33. And we can't get to net zero, we don't get this job done, unless agriculture is front and center as part of the solution. So all of us understand here. The depths of this mission."​

​

First they came for fossil fuels and the energy sector, now they are coming for our sustenance. "The largest source of anthropogenic methane emissions is agriculture, responsible for around one quarter of emissions, closely followed by the energy sector, which includes emissions from coal, oil, natural gas and biofuels," the IEA states.​

​

Reductions in fertlizer, land use, and cows are a big push by the activists who seek to reduce emissions created by food production. One idea that has been put forth to reduce methane emissions caused by cows is to shift to eating bugs, instead. Another idea is to feed cows bugs to reduce fertilizer emissions generated by growing food for cows.​

​

...​

John Kerry says US farmers must radically transform food production to meet ‘net zero’ emissions goals by 2030

“We can’t get to net zero, we don’t get this job done, unless agriculture is front and center as part of the solution.”

thepostmillennial.com

The end game has always been to kill people.

 

[jackflash]

Less food production = more carbon producing people starving to death around the world

It's a win/win

Power & Control the breakfast of narcissists!

 

[jackflash]

Don't allow the Climate Cult to mess with the food supply.
They are dangerous fanatics.
Humanity has seen this horror before.
View attachment 789950

Amen Trog, Amen on that one!

 

[jackflash]

A brilliant man. Yes, let's stop food production to fight Climate Change. Who would have ever thought of that?

"Insanity resides in the mind of the individual." Didn't some artist a long time ago make a tribute song to 'Big John'?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Let them eat bugs... as long as they are doing exactly as told.
If not, you get nothing & starve.
Food control/scarcity is a whip to totalitarians looking for absolute control of the serfs.

They want a [population reduction & famine will be a major weapon.

Proof That in 2016 Trump Interrupted the Hilladomor

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Don't forget 'grass'!

Munch, Munch, Munch on a Biden Lunch

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

You're not impressing me... maybe your little leftist friends..but not me

In Their Bubble, All Is Babble