Bringing Al Gore back to Earth: Goldstein

Good thing we all don't use as much energy as global warming's high-flying guru or we might be dead
Writing recently in the Op-Ed section of the New York Times, Al Gore said: “I, for one, genuinely wish that the climate crisis were an illusion.”

Funny, that’s exactly what I wish about Al Gore.
Now reduced to preaching climate hysteria to the converted in the echo chamber of the liberal, warmist Times, the paper at least identified Gore thusly: “As a businessman, he is an investor in alternative energy companies.”
Bingo! Gore, our would-be carbon billionaire, has a dog in this hunt, dressed in the colour of money — green.
This is a major reason I haven’t been able to take him seriously on man-made global warming since the first time I saw An Inconvenient Truth.
If the science of catastrophic anthropogenic climate change a la Gore is correct, and if we all lived as obscenely high-energy consumption lifestyles as Gore does, it’s quite possible we would already be dead.
Killed by either too much snow, or not enough, or cold snaps, or heat waves, or droughts, or floods, all of which and more have been blamed on global warming by the increasingly demoralized and petulant-sounding Al Gore Nation and its warmist media shills.
Gore — who doesn’t tolerate much questioning by non-sycophantic media — always dances around the key point made by British warmist George Monbiot in his book, Heat: How to Stop the Planet From Burning.
That is, that the campaign to fight man-made global warming — such as it is — is a campaign for austerity. A rapidly decarbonized world will be a poorer one.
For you, that is. But not, alas, for Gore.
Think of Gore and his celebrity pals jetting around the world, hopping between their large and luxurious homes, attending never-ending global warming conferences and giving interminable high-priced speeches, while buying carbon offsets (the greatest scam since religious indulgences) to claim they’ve reduced their carbon footprint to zero.
Flying is particularly bad for the environment, according to the science of global warming, because it injects greenhouse gases (GHGs) high into the atmosphere, multiplying their effect.
What hypocrisy! Especially given that renewable energy projects like wind and solar power, prolific generators of carbon credits and offsets, need fossil fuel energy to back them up due to their intermittent nature, and only last for as long as the huge public subsidies it takes to keep them financially afloat.
To anyone who understands the science of man-made global warming, a carbon offset is as big a farce as, well, a carbon credit — the backbone of the world’s biggest cap-and-trade market in Europe, which is now embroiled in multi-billion-dollar frauds. Read more.