From CLIMATE DEPOT

By Marc Morano

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2024/08/whatever-will-climateers-cook-up-next/

Whatever Will Climateers Cook Up Next?

By Tony Thomas

Among the inspirational spokesfolk sermonising about saving the planet from fossil fuels are actress Jane Fonda and ex-husband Ted Turner (2024 net worth $US2.5 billion). Jane ditched Ted in 2001 after 10 years marriage, leaving Ted so heart-broken that he needed a quartet of girlfriends for consolation. He rotated each for one week per month.

Jane extracted $US40 million from Ted as a divorce settlement. This helped keep the wolf from her door as she turned author in 2020 to write “What Can I Do?” about arresting the planet’s imminent death from CO2. The same year, with other Hollywood A-listers, she also signed a petition against excessive consumerism, which demanded that governments fiercely crack down on emissions:

The ongoing ecological catastrophe is a meta-crisis: the massive extinction of life on Earth is no longer in doubt, and all indicators point to a direct existential threat … The pursuit of consumerism [see here] and an obsession with productivity have led us to deny the value of life itself …

For Leigh Sales at ABCTV’s 7.30, the combination of celebrity Jane and more touting of global warming was irresistible. The interview was a classic. Fonda literally wept on camera about emissions “trashing our home” (in her case an $US5.4 million Los Angeles townhouse):

All these wonderful species are going to go and life is going to be very, very difficult to live and eventually possibly the human species will go as well because we are trashing our home and I just, I wouldn’t be able to live with myself or die with myself if I don’t do something.

She grieved with Sales (herself on something north of $400,000) about the cost of living:

Do I need money? There’s that. People forget that we are working people. I belong to three unions. I have to earn a living. I have a bottom line that I’ve got, that I have to meet and its tough right now. I mean, not that tough, I have a roof over my head and a very nice home that’s paid for and food and I have an assistant with me and I’m very, very lucky, but I’m worried. We will have gone almost a year without working and that’s scary…. I have to keep working.

You might by now be asking, “So what? Got anything new to say about celebrities?” Well, yes I have. This essay is about how celebs warn that global warming will turn us into cannibals, maybe you’re not up with that prospect yet? Jane’s ex-husband Ted is a leading public intellectual on this cannibalism forecast. He’s influential too – in 2017 he donated $US1 billion to the United Nations.

By 2038, he believes, the last survivors of the world’s heat-stricken masses will turn on each other for food. His prediction in 2008 was taken up by the conservative Washington Free Beacon online newspaper:

In order to help people prepare for what is coming, the Free Beacon created the Countdown to Cannibalism Clock, which will let you know exactly how much time is left until you must engage in the practice for basic sustenance.

Apr 2, 2008 – From the Charlie Rose Show: TED TURNER: Not doing it will be catastrophic. We’ll be eight degrees hotter in ten, not ten but 30 or 40 years and basically none of the crops will grow. Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals. Civilization will have broken down. The few people left will be living in a failed state — like Somalia or Sudan — and living conditions will be intolerable. The droughts will be so bad there’ll be no more corn grown. Not doing it is suicide. Just like dropping bombs on each other, nuclear weapons is suicide. We’ve got to stop doing the suicidal two things, which are hanging on to our nuclear weapons and after that we’ve got to stabilize the population. When I was born- CHARLIE ROSE: So what’s wrong with the population? TURNER: We’re too many people. That’s why we have global warming. We have global warming because too many people are using too much stuff. If there were less people, they’d be using less stuff.

On my calculations, the Cannibalism Clock now stands at 28 minutes to midnight, but I can’t find the clock online. It must be somewhere. The Washington Free Beacon, by the way, is no lightweight . Not part of regime media, this year it disclosed the plagiarisms by Harvard’s diversity President Claudine Gay, forcing her resignation.

Ted Turner forecast temps would be 8 degrees hotter (he was talking Fahrenheit) by 2038, frizzling the world’s crops.  “Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals. Civilization will have broken down. The few people left will be living in a failed state — like Somalia or Sudan — and living conditions will be intolerable.” Who’s to blame? “Too many people are using too much stuff,” replied the billionaire. As he put it, “I lost Jane [Fonda]. I lost my job here. I lost my fortune, most of it, got a billion or two left. You can get by on that if you economise.”

Some say Turner’s cannibalism prediction is already coming true, others claim the cases are just random:

♦ In Pakistan, two brothers were caught digging up corpses and grinding them into curries, forcing the government to bring in new laws against such ingredients.

♦ In Russia in 2010, a couple not only killed and ate from more than 30 people, but put leftovers into meat pies which the wife sold to the military trainees and student pilots at the academy where she worked. Police found they’d also made a least one jar of human pickles.

♦ In Bangkok in 2018, a restaurant owner killed a patron after a row, and tried to disappear the evidence by adding small pieces of his victim to his menu items. As it was a vegetarian restaurant, diners quickly complained and his scheme unravelled.

♦ Also in 2018, a 22-year-old Russian literally axed his landlord, and with his 12-year-old girlfriend Valeria, microwaved and ate him. Valeria, who also cooked parts in a frying pan, told police the heart was too sweet but “the brains turned out to be much more tasty.” Her adult boyfriend killed himself and Valeria was sent to a school in southern Russia, but she bragged so much to classmates about tasty brains that she got transferred to a one-teacher orphanage.

Ted Turner might have got his cannibal inspiration from the cli-fi MGM movie Soylent Green of 1973, which foresaw global warming turning New York City in 2022 (yes, 2022) into a downmarket version of Mumbai and, by the look of it, run by Democrats. The usual odd pair of detectives comprises Robert Thorn (handsome tough guy Charlton Heston, after he got into his Moses robes) and Edward G, Robinson as his clapped-out pal Sol Roth, who complains, ” How can anyone survive in a climate like this, a heatwave all year long, the greenhouse effect, everything is burning up!” [1]

In Soylent Green the usual evil corporation has monopolised half the world’s food supply and provides the masses with edible Soylent Red and Soylent Yellow wafers about the size of domino tiles, made from lentils and soybeans. It has introduced a Soylent Green chip which everyone finds so delicious they riot to get a share each Tuesday.

Without wanting to spoil the plot, Soylent Green is not made from tasty plankton as labelled, but from humans scooped off the streets by riot trucks. Today (2024) human ready-to-eat chips have not eventuated, but the 1973 film’s forecast was spot on about New York’s imperilled electricity. Sol Roth says he has to pedal a stationary bike “half way around the world” to power the pair’s sole light bulb and charge up their room’s battery . Rusted petrol-powered cars litter the streets  Havana-style (but I didn’t detect any EVs).

With uncanny prescience the film also foretells the inflation from President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, with a few vegetables and two jars of sauce on offer for $US279.15. A smoker’s fantasy goes, “If I had the money I’d smoke two or three of these every day!” The film also flunks computer-ology, with the heroine 50 years out from 1973 enjoying an arcade Computer Space tussle on a little screen. She chortles, “I demolished five saucers with one rock!”[2]

On the downside, beautiful young women have become “Furniture” for toxic male apartment owners. One owner says, “We give them a day off every month, you would think they would be grateful.” To seduce Charlton Heston, another Furniture Lady promises “to turn that air conditioning up all the way, I will make it cold like winter used to be.” Heston replies, “You are a hell of a piece of furniture.”

For some reason all the corpses on Dr Evil’s conveyor belt remain in cloth shrouds as they’re processed into wafers, which must give Soylent Green, however delicious, a cottony taint.

Reviewers were scathing: the New Yorker said the “pompously prophetic thing of a film hasn’t a brain in its beanbag.”

While New York human-sourced wafers circa 2022 are interesting, my editor is always keen on local angles on cannibalism. There does happen to be one involving the Western Sydney University PhD thesis of Jungian psychotherapist Dr Sally Gillespie, stalwart of the Melbourne-founded Psychology for a Safe Climate band of sisters. It’s titled Mapping Myths, Dreams and Conversations in the Era of Global Warming but sadly is no longer publicly accessible.

For scholarly purposes she created a seven-member group of mainly excitable women, some 50-plus, to share their climate-apocalypse dreams – “fellow crew members sailing a vessel of inquiry.” It’s thrilling to discover what makes climate feminists tick. By their second meeting they’re fantasising about surviving “systemic collapse.” They suspect their present core values might alter. For example, “stories of cannibalism are shared” (p106).

Dr Sally: I wonder what those stories are serving for us at the moment, in teasing us into these questions. Not only the literal question: would I eat someone else or not? [but] what’s the value of human life and culture and society?

As I wrote at the time, if you’re on the plump side and walking up Alexandra Parade, Fitzroy, cross the median strip if Sally’s team’s is coming. You just never know!

That reminds me of another academic, a Swedish professor asking a conference audience about their willingness to eat human corpses. What precisely went on there is in dispute, and I’ll do my best below to get you the facts.

The professor is  behavioural scientist and marketer with the Stockholm School of Economics. He allegedly told a Gastro Summit in Stockholm on September 3, 2019, that we could combat global warming by eating corpses. This could help save the human race if only people would “awaken the idea”. Using a Powerpoint display, he acknowledged that the project would need to overcome many taboos, and said it could be more plausible to eat insects and your pet cats and dogs.

Tackled in the international hullaballoo, he said he’d been misquoted. He told Swedish TV4 in an interview the same day that he had merely been gauging how far consumers would go in terms of breaking taboos in the context of global warming.[3] Just a marketing man’s hypothetical, in other words, and what’s more, the google-translate of his Swedish was rough.[4]

Well, said the sceptics, let’s see your notes, your Powerpoint and that video of your talk, and we’ll get them translated. But the video is unavailable and Professor Soderlund had no notes to provide. His Powerpoint was not readily available “for technical reasons,” he said. I can’t imagine what those technical reasons might be. The conference people might have deleted their electronic copy and he might have lost his USB stick, but wouldn’t the file still be on a home or office computer where he created it?

The left-wing oracle for exposing urban myths is snopes.com. You can bet your life they wanted to debunk the mockery of climate alarmists. Söderlund emailed snopes:

I believe that the issue has somehow been hijacked by people who do not believe that global warming and other climate issues should be taken seriously — and, given this, it may indeed be useful to refer to events indicating that climate activists have completely crazy ideas (such as that we should eat each other). Just for the record: I do not want to eat human meat, I do not want to be eaten, I do not think that eating humans influences the climate, I am not an activist, I am just a researcher who thinks that it must be possible to ask questions about also the dark sides of what we humans do and do not do.

But without the video and Powerpoint, and given Soderlund’s denials, snopes’ reluctant verdict on true-or-false was, “Mixture”. Snopes notwithstanding, the reporter for the right-of-centre Epoch Times, Swedish-speaking Celia Farber,[5] who broke the story, had clearly seen Soderlund’s video presentation. She wrote

In his talk, Soderlund asks the audience how many would be open to the idea. Not many hands go up. Some groaning is heard. When interviewed after his talk, he reports brightly that 8 percent of conference participants said they would be open to trying it. When asked if he himself would try it, he replies, “I feel somewhat hesitant but to not appear overly conservative … I‘d have to say … I’d be open to at least tasting it.”

The logo for the talk, titled “Food of the Future: Worms, Grasshoppers, or Human Flesh,” featured a splash of blood as part of the graphic design. Marketing blurbs were

Are we humans too selfish to live sustainably? Is cannibalism the solution to food sustainability in the future? At GastroSummit, you will get some answers to these questions…”

In any event, Soderlund’s premise was that global food supply was on the brink of disaster, which like most or all previous climate predictions is baloney. Food output and yields continue to feed population growth. Output can keep rising (even without greater land use) through better harvest logistics, “smart” targeted use of water and fertilisers, innovation spread among peasants via mobile phones and AI, and so on.

I’d like to say this is the last word on cannibalism and climate, but it ain’t. There’s a veritable industry of academics out there specialising in alarm about how global warming will accelerate cannibalism among a vast variety of non-homo sapien species. This industry’s motto should be “All warming is bad, even in Melbourne” (top temp today: 12degC).

Without even trying I’ve turned up dire climate cannibalism papers about lobsters (aka “Attack of the cannibal lobsters”), six unfortunate Neaderthals, glaucos-winged seagulls ($US300,000 grant and two PhD dissertations), Arizona tiger salamanders (water lizards), damselflies (little dragonfly lookalikes), polar bears, caddisflies (“very hairy”), wolf spiders, Alaskan snow crabs, Arctic foxes and, last but not least, wind farms (when they eat up each others’ downstream windiness).

Well , enough on cannibalism. I call out to my wife, “Plenty of potatoes with the roast tonight!” Wife replies, “No need, I’ve got Swedes”.

Tony Thomas’s latest book from Connor Court is Anthem of the Unwoke – Yep! The other lot’s gone bonkers. $34.95 from Connor Court here

[1] A curiosity is that in 1973 the climate science hive-mind was in fear of global cooling. If you doubt that, see here.

[2] This was the 1970s era’s first depiction on screen of a computer game.

Dr Gillespie’s book ‘Climate Crisis and Consciousness: Re-imagining our world and ourselves’ “draws upon my professional background as a Jungian psychotherapist and my doctoral research into the psychological terrain of ongoing engagement with climate crisis.”

[3] Soderlund, asked in the interview if he’d eat human flesh himself, replied that he’d “be open to at least tasting it.”

[4] In snopes‘ translation of Soderlund’s TV4 interview, the interviewer asked how likely he thought it was that eating human flesh would catch on, in the same way that eating insects has been touted as a possible means to lower carbon emissions and combat food shortages. He thought cannibalism was unlikely to become appealing, having an even greater “yuck” factor than eating insects. He added: “But if we need to turn over every stone when it comes to climate and sustainability, it’s still worth raising this question.”

[5] Celia Farber is a Swedish-American writer with a background in magazine reportage and investigative reporting. She has written for Harper’s Magazine, Esquire, Rolling Stone, and others.

---

This will get added to our Failed Prediction Timeline. Check out the timeline for a long list of other failed predictions.

Yang has it all to do now and she looks disappointed by the judges scoring in the last round.

Khelif knows a knockout is unlikely as the Chinese fighter doesn’t have huge power, and the Algerian beckons her on.

Khelif lands with a great right hand and follows it up with a left hook. Yang is having to look for an opening and she catches Khelif with a big left as she presses forward.

The Algerian has her hands down at her hips, wanting Yang to attack. She shakes her head as Yang misses some shots.

The bell goes and Khelif is delighted, while Yang looks resigned to defeat.

Khelif was just too good for her.

Khelif vs Yang: Round two

By Jo Nova

So you hit “Reply All” and ten years later the heatwaves begin. You know it makes sense — the global cloud is full of cat videos, and storing the code that made Socks sing Bohemian Catsody in a million emails requires another data centre. And as the old copies accumulate the “dark data” that no one looks at piles up. And those servers need electricity.

If only we had cheap reliable, renewable energy sources that worked 24 hours a day, we wouldn’t have to worry, would we? But data centers that only work when the wind blows are not much use to anyone (except maybe Hillary and Hunter). But the awful truth is that the more data we store the more  CO2 we produce. Thus in the cult of climate change, the O-so-human quest to connect needs to be suppressed so we can cool the world by a thousandth of a degree in 2143.

Anyone who liked humans would just say “build a nuclear plant”. (Anyone who liked plants would say “build a coal one”). That would solve it. But here we are in the modern era and professors are effectively telling us that our emails are killing koalas.

Most data stored on power-hungry servers is used once then never looked at again

By Helena Horton, The Guardian

… research has now found that the vast majority of data stored in the cloud is “dark data”, meaning it is used once then never visited again. That means that all the memes and jokes and films that we love to share with friends and family – from “All your base are belong to us”, through Ryan Gosling saying “Hey Girl”, to Tim Walz with a piglet – are out there somewhere, sitting in a datacentre, using up energy. By 2030, the National Grid anticipates that datacentres will account for just under 6% of the UK’s total electricity consumption, so tackling junk data is an important part of tackling the climate crisis.

Ian Hodgkinson, a professor of strategy at Loughborough University has been studying the climate impact of dark data and how it can be reduced. He discovered that 68% of data used by companies is never used again, and estimates that personal data tells the same story.

Hodgkinson said: “If we think about individuals and society more broadly, what we found is that many still assume that data is carbon neutral, but every piece of data whether it be an image, whether it be an Instagram post, whatever it is, there’s a carbon footprint attached to it.

Send less emails, and save the world!

One thing people can do to stop the data juggernaut, he said, is to send fewer pointless emails: “One [figure] that often does the rounds is that for every standard email, that equates to about 4g of carbon.

Think of all the days you wake up saying to yourself, I’d like to send 100 pointless emails. Well, those days are over.

Imagine how much better our quality of life will be if we have a struggle session and self-assess every SMS, every message, wondering if we deserve to share a funny story when it might inundate the nursing home in fifty years? The Green philosophy is so uplifting.

Good luck to any EcoWorrier who has to convince their teenage daughter not to share memes to save the planet. What are they going to do, drive their offspring in a car to visit their friends instead — Lordy, think, of the carbon penance! Not that it would be a bad thing if we spent more time visiting real people instead of “sharing” with electric gadgets, but that’s the thing about the carbon religion, it’s not giving us more freedom to do anything.

First they came for the cars, and then they came for the emails. It only ends when we make them stop.