The Democrats recently held a House hearing manned by four young climate alarmism activists. The very title of the hearing is multiply false: “Voices Leading the Next Generation on the Global Warming Crisis.”
These young alarmists are not leading their generation, any more that the old alarmists are leading mine (and there is no crisis). Thankfully a large fraction of both generations, and the ones in between, are skeptical of alarmism.
However, the hearing did showcase some of the questionable tactics and ideologies being used to promote this bogus crisis. That show is worth the price of admission.
First up was Greta Thunberg, the teen queen of climate alarmism. We were all waiting to hear what she had to say, so she wisely said almost nothing. She merely tabled the October 2018 IPCC report looking at the small differences between future warming of 0.5 degrees and 1.0 degrees C.
Thunberg tersely told Congress that they should read this report and that they were not doing enough. She never said what was important in the report, if anything, or what Congress should be doing that it is not already doing. It was really rather insulting, but I am sure she did not want to be cross examined on specific statements.
The really funny thing is that there is nothing in this IPCC report to support the crisis narrative. By coincidence I had just written an article to this effect, titled “Is the climate crisis a cruel hoax or a tragic blunder?” So in a very real sense she made a tragic blunder.
Another witness of interest was Vic Barrett from the so-called Alliance for Climate Education (with the zippy acronym ACE). He too was somewhat insulting in that he wore a baseball cap, but I digress.
I happen to have an education effort going, the Climate Change Debate Education (CCDE) project, so I looked into ACE. It turns out their idea of education is to train more activists! Their motto is “Get Educated, Take Action.” They boast of having trained 4,000. This is indoctrination, not education.
Their sole education looking resource is a lengthy video with the usual alarmist narrative: science (questionable), then impacts (adverse) followed by solutions (the usual green dreams). In contrast my CCDE project offers about 350 videos on the science, ranging from one minute long to one hour, plus class handouts on specific scientific issues like hurricanes, the little ice age, etc. This is science education.
ACE is clearly well funded, certainly to the tune of millions, maybe a year. There is no disclosure, but there is a hint. They have a three member Board, which is very small as these things usually go. One of the three members is a wind industry company executive. My bet is the wind industry funds ACE, whose number one goal is to end fossil fuel use.
The other two activist groups represented are more joke-like. Benji (I am not making this up) Backer (still not making it up) is president of something called the American Conservation Coalition. These folks pretend to be conservatives who back the climate change crisis program. Multiple sources report, however, that they are a front for left wing green groups. So they are making it up.
Then there is Jamie Margolin, co-founder of This is Zero Hour, which is alarmist activism personified. Their website says “Zero Hour is a youth-led movement creating entry points, training, and resources for new young activists and organizers (and adults who support our vision) wanting to take concrete action around climate change.”
They are so-called “climate justice” warriors. One of their Guiding Principles says:
“On the frontlines of climate change is the Global South, People Of Color, Indigenous Peoples, Youth, People with Disabilities, Poor People, Women, Queer and Trans People, and People belonging to marginalized faiths.”
Not a lot of science or policy here. Another Principle demands this:
“The elected officials must comply with the demands of the youth, therefore they must pass and enforce legislation and support policies that protect life and our future on this planet.”
So much for democracy. The Principles end with:
“This is a revolution.”
Which is at least succinct. These folks would be funny if they were not dangerous. But apparently the Democrats in Congress love them, which is something to keep in mind come Election Day.
So as I said at the beginning, these young extremists are not leading their generation, although they would like to. They are outliers, in more ways than one: policy, science, etc. As such they are not to be taken lightly, on the contrary they should be watched closely, lest they do great harm to America.
In this sense the Democrats are to be thanked for presenting them, but they should be ashamed of endorsing them.