Monday, April 5, 2021

Mother Gaia Gone Wild

Frederick R Smith has moved to Frederick R. Smith Speaks (substack.com)

Foreword

Today the government, media, and education proclaim a constant gloom and doom narrative about the ecosystem. Even some mainstream churches bloviate about the plight of Mother Gaia. [1] Together, these entities engage in gaslighting to program this narrative into the brains of the citizenry. [2] It is all about the environment and the plight of creatures great and small.

With the above backdrop, it seems we have lost the ability to remember and learn from our history. Scientists have discovered the A1 Mutation, a defect affecting people’s ability to learn from the past. [3] Therefore, we must take a spin back in time from the 1970s up to the turn of the century to see the roots of the current environmental/species movement.

Forest for the Trees

With all the forest fires in recent years, common sense would need to be applied to reduce fires. What is the solution? To selectively cut the trees and right on queue, the radical environmental zealots go into ballistic launch mode. The typical manta was and continues to be “Fred is selling out to the corporations.” If truly about the environment, it would, in a pure sense, be a noble thing. However, uncut forests burn, plain and simple. So why do we keep our hands off the forests to let them burn? 

Let us place all of this in another perspective by saying it is perfectly acceptable for nature to pollute. What else is the answer? One response is that a small number of the radical environmental zealots are pantheists that knowingly or unknowingly worship Mother Gaia. How dare we the modern people (the scourge of the earth) defile mother planet to do things like cut trees to make houses. However, do these worshippers even consider the program whereby most of the corporations that harvest trees plant more than harvest? Currently, on an annual basis growth outpaces harvesting.

If people want to worship the earth, this is perfectly acceptable as the First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees participation in a religion (or non-religion) of one’s choice without interference from the government. So, shall we play the same game as those who invoke the “Wall of Separation” to prevent certain people from publicly expressing their Christian religion? Therefore, the people who worship the earth should not receive any help from the government to aid them with their pantheistic environmental causes. It is now appropriate to ask an environmentalist how they like it when we say that they cannot publicly express their earth worship.

In 2002, radical environmental zealot William Meadows, president of the Wilderness Society, chided then-President W. Bush for an “irresponsible anti-environmental agenda ...The truth is that waiving environmental laws will not protect homes and lives from wildfire ... history, and science clearly demonstrate that clearing fuels away from the immediate area around homes is the best protection.” Mr. Meadows affirmed a truth - cutting does protect homes! It stops fires. Oh my, oh my indeed. One of sound mind must then conclude that selective cutting throughout the forest will help to protect the rest of the forest.

The above shows some of the illogic spewing forth from some of the radical environmental zealots. However, it does not matter what this author, or for that matter those with a Ph.D. in science say to counter the radical environmental zealots. The media offers nothing of what true science has to offer about the environment. It is clear as a glass eyeball that the establishment will project the mantra of the silliest of the radical environmental zealots. A particular mainstream reporter some years ago said that left-wing environmental zealot Theodore Kazinski (the Unabomber) was a “nice guy.”

Does it get any worse? Surely, as your author remembers the reports about the four firefighters who lost their lives in 2001. At the Okanogan National Forest in Winthrop, Washington, firefighters perished because of the inability to pluck water by aircraft from a river. The environmental zealots said the firefighters “should have not been there.” Not been there? The real story is the fact that the environmentalists delayed the plucking of water to save the firefighters because of concerns about the fish. The fish may have been picked up in the water used to fight the fire. So, the firefighters perished because the radical environmental zealots refused to allow selective logging.

Forest fires are indeed natural occurrences and are nature’s way of thinning the underbrush. Enter humanity, who can be a good steward of the earth by using nature’s bounty to make life better and healthier. Does it not make sense to use the material rather than to let it burn? Not to the radical environmental zealots. Of course, abuse of natural resources can be destructive. It also can be unequivocally said that people can coexist with nature. With forests declared off-limits to people, intense fires occur. As a result, we get smoke (nature’s pollution) spewing forth into the atmosphere. As far as this author is concerned, the radical environmental zealots cannot see the forest for the trees. Or could it be that they have another agenda?

Unquestionably a good environment is an absolute necessity. However, rest assured we have a hijacked movement with feel-good platitudes for covert purposes (green on the outside and red on the inside). But for now, let us focus on another example of the duplicity of this movement. Many of the same people who deplore “corporate welfare” such as subsidies for ranching, mining, logging, etc. are the same ones who are active in the environmental movement. Some may say, “OK Fred what’s your point?” The same ones who cry about corporate welfare are active in a movement that itself receives a copious amount of subsidy from the coffers to tout their environmental issues. Today corporate welfare is a gold mine for woke causes such as the environmental movement.

The radical environmental zealots or their handlers aside, it is possible to allow selective cutting or thinning of trees to 1) reduce wildfires and 2) provide lumber to build such things as houses (the same places that environmental zealots live in most of the year).  The environmental zealots believe that the logging of the dead burnt wood from the forests should not be allowed. They believe that Mother Nature should fend for itself. If so, then let us stop all farming and let nature take care of itself to supply our food. Surely this would finally secure a Utopia on earth by significantly reducing the population. Think this is a joke? Enter one Mr. Jaques Ives Cousteau (RIP) who once said “In order to stabilize world population, it is necessary to eliminate 350,000 people a day”

Endangered Species Act Up

In 1973, President Richard Nixon signed the Endangered Species Act (ESA) into law. The ESA gives the Federal government overarching power over “endangered” species, subspecies, or distinct regional populations of creatures from a four-legged mammal down to a microscopic insect. It is a wonder how they choose certain creatures to be “extinct.” In addition to the work of politically motivated scientists that work for the government, private lawsuits occur to make the government include a particular creature on the endangered list. And, certainly, their motives are pure — it is all about the creatures. Just like it is “all about the children.” If so, then there is some swampland for sale in Texas.

As the government acts to protect a particular creature, it can and does limit the use of private property that may be “critical.” Our good “Little Wiley” friends are the quintessential critical habitat example. The ESA, a powerful act, takes precedence over the taking clause of the Constitution. There are a copious number of examples where people lost their jobs due to the halting of a construction project because of an accident that killed a particular garter snake (oh the horrors).

The government spends billions under the ESA cult because the Commerce Clause makes it “Constitutional.” If not, how about the General Welfare clause to take care of that unfortunate obstacle? Another fine example of the living breathing Constitution.

Remember the northern spotted owl? That creature is one of many ESA tools that the radical environmental zealots continue to invoke to thwart human rights. A particularly salient example from back in 2002 is the case of Marsha Seier from Linn County, Oregon. She lost $300,000 in marketable timber because of sightings of a particular critter on her property. This loss was solely due to a pair of owls named “Little Wiley” that was on her property nine years before the controversy and not seen since. Because these two birds have a “potential” to come around once again, the government prohibited Marsha from cutting good harvestable (renewable) timber on 40 acres of her property.

Considering “Little Wiley,” what about the Fourth Amendment? Since the government must supply just compensation for the taking of property, should the government compensate Marsha? Some will say, how did the government take? The environmental laws prohibit people to “take” an endangered species. Some will say: “So what, people should not be rewarded for cutting trees.” Excuse me, but this is property owned by a citizen and as such it is Marsha’s for her use as desired. Does this mean she should destroy the environment? Good citizens will act accordingly and there is nothing wrong with selective cutting and keeping the property in good shape. Private property owners typically do this better than the government. Most forest fires occur on government property.

While it is unpopular to do it, we must consider some very poignant questions concerning some of the radical environmental zealots. For example, do they live in houses? Virtually all houses have wood products. Do they read any printed material or distribute propaganda? Certainly, and some will say that environmentally conscious people tout biodegradable packaging. Agreed, but boxes and paper bags are paper products (read trees). This is like the campaign to demonize SUV owners, as the elitists who peddle this mantra have large homes and multiple vehicles. This, along with the environmental-social-gospel, constitutes two quintessential examples of hyper hypocrisy.

Some will say, “Hold on Fred, this is about the owls as they need their trees!” While the argument is about giving the owls more rights than people, we must point out that there are plenty of trees for these critters and many others, even with harvesting. At this point in our history, we already know growth outpaces cutting. We must also ask our environmental friends about the plight of the critters when the forest burns due to a lack of harvesting. I can only imagine the answer to this puzzling quiz. The above aside, the radical environmental zealots still want a significant amount of the land in this country to be devoid of a particular creature that they believe to be detestable — humans.

Conclusion

Do not expect the young people of today to grow up and reverse this totalitarian thought process. Our wonderful schools indoctrinate the children in earth worship – plain and simple. How do we know? Here is a particularly poignant personal experience. Some years ago, your author was taking part in a community walk to advance cancer research. Walking along the river in our community, the daughter of my friend vilified the anglers. They were enjoying a day out catching the newly stocked trout. She said, “Oh those fishermen are destroying the environment.” This was from a girl in the second grade! Where did she get brainwashed – school. If still skeptical of Fred’s claims, check out Ark of Hope.

Friends, today we are subjected to gaslighting (pun intended). A never-ending storyline framed in a 24-7 projection with a 1984-like setting proclaiming that carbon dioxide gas (a necessary ingredient of life) is a pollutant. [4] Dare one raise a simple question? Here comes the Pavlov’s Dog response: “You’re a climate denier.” Worse than a Holocaust denier, or we might, dare we say, face hate speech charges against the New Normal’s god, Mother Nature. That’s right, for example, when questioning the Covid doom narrative or environmental mania, you could face charges of hate speech as demonstrated by the Center for Countering the Digital Hate. After all, SARS-Cov-2 is a natural thing. Or is it?

We all know about the onslaught of environmental madness by the indisputable fruits of things such as the Green New Deal. It is called Socialism. Nowadays, the trifecta consisting of government, media, and big business have toned down the Green New Deal rhetoric. Do not worry, my debased woke folk friends, that this is all hidden in the multi-trillion-dollar (and growing) congressional bills (and growing) that address Corona-doom and the supposed rebuilding of the infrastructure. Congress creates fiat money to fund this largess. [5]

Notes

  1. https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/god-make-way-for-gaia-a-deity-even-atheists-can-believe-in-1.4265949 “Step forward Gaia: a god that even militant atheists can respect, if not revere. Unlike the God of the Bible, Gaia is one of those lustful, irritable, and contrary gods that populate Greek mythology. As ‘Mother Earth,’ she was the second element in the evolution of the cosmos after Chaos the primordial void, according to ancient lore.”
  2. Frederick R. Smith, Ghastly Gaslighting, September 27, 2020.
  3. Operation Dragon: Inside the Kremlin’s Secret War on America (Encounter Books New York – London 2021) p. 175. “Soon after the Soviet bloc collapsed, researchers at Germany’s Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in the now liberated Leipzig discovered a genetic factor, the A1 mutation, which affects the ability to learn from past mistakes. On April 12, 2003, thousands of Americans, presumably infected by the A1 mutation, began sermonizing that capitalism was America’s real enemy and that it should be replaced with socialism by redistributing the country’s wealth. Quite a few young Americans cheered. They were, of course, galvanized by the prospect that a Democratic administration would force rich Americans to pay for young people’s own health care, mortgages, loans, and school tuition.”
  4. William M. Briggs April 15, 2021, The Looming Decarbocalypse — Guest Post by Uncle Mike. “It goes without saying, but must be said anyway, that Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is the fundamental building block of all life. Every atom of carbon in your body (we are all carbon-based lifeforms) was once atmospheric CO2. Every molecule of Oxygen (O2) that you breathe (without which we would rapidly expire) was once atmospheric CO2. . . . In their quest for power and money, the authoritarians and totalitarians seek to eliminate CO2 from our atmosphere. It may be a scam to justify world domination and mass enslavement, but if their plans are acceded to, they will generate the Decarbocalypse: the End of Life on Planet Earth. Their madness has escalated beyond genocide and total war to the death of our planet. Instead of “saving the environment”, they will kill us all and the rest of nature to boot.”
  5. Frederick R. Smith Speaks, Creature from Jekyll Island, July 17, 2021. “The basic reality of inflation is the fact that it is a hidden tax. It is the result of the increase in the supply of money and credit. The value of the 1940-dollar, compared to the purchasing power of today, is now only about 50 cents or less (and counting). Another salient point to consider is the fact that inflation has nothing to do with supply and demand (rising wages and prices). These are the symptoms of the damaging effects of pumping money without backing into the economy. This is the fiat currency backed by nothing more than the faith of the people.”

Sources

###

Cogent Author and Publisher, Frederick R. Smith
Cogent Editor, Sean Tinney

Fred Smith’s clipped news items

Recommended Websites (bold is top shelf)

    Recommend (serious) Humor
    Recommended Videos (all top shelf)

    Posted by at
    Labels: , ,

    No comments:

    Post a Comment

    Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)