Why do Democrats call their policies 'progressive' when they clearly harm the poor?

The radical leftists who control the Democrats claim they care about all lives but their policies on climate are dooming people in underdeveloped countries to extreme poverty, environmental degradation, and increased risk of early deaths, according to scientists.

Here is the story from the Daily Signal:

Millions in Africa Being Sacrificed to Extreme Poverty, Premature Death on Altar of 'Green Energy'

Obama-era policies that favor so-called green energy over coal-fired electricity are dooming millions of Africans to lives of extreme poverty, environmental degradation, and increased risk of early death, according to a new analysis by the CO2 Coalition.

The study by the Arlington, Virginia-based coalition of 60 climate scientists and energy engineers contends that inadequate access to electricity is one of the key reasons for Africa's grinding poverty.

Economic growth in a competitive, global market requires reliable, universal electrification. Without sufficient electricity for heating and cooking, Africans are exposed to high levels of indoor pollution from dirty fuels, the world's greatest environmental health risk, according to the World Health Organization.

Globally, the WHO estimates that 3 billion people still cook and heat and illuminate their homes with solid fuels — wood, charcoal, and dried animal dung.

This story will be buried by almost all media outlets because it does not speak well for their agenda and their agenda is clearly more important than helping the poor of all races. Social media outlets will blackball these truths.

Some people are clearly expendable, as these radicals falsely claim they can control the climate when what they really want to control is the people.

If journalists truly cared about facts instead of spewing forth Democrat talking points, they would ask politicians and supposed experts lots of questions before they allowed the destruction of the economy, tens of millions of jobs, thousands of industries and the lives of all the people. The poor, middle class and small businesses are especially vulnerable.

The main question that is never asked, but should be, of all journalists, scientists, entertainers, professors, politicians, and all others seeking to infect and destroy everyone with their policy of outlawing oil and coal is:

Can you provide the scientific data that shows that human activity, oil and coal cause temperatures, sea levels and storm activity to rise and that is an existential threat to the Earth?

Hints: A consensus and inaccurate, manipulated computer models are not factual scientific data.  Computer models have been completely wrong on all their previous dire predictions.

If anyone wants to see that the talking points we see are a load of bunk, all he needs to do is look at the first Earth Day in 1970, over fifty years ago.

The narrative at the time was this: after 100 years of exponential crude oil production growth, from around zero to 50 million barrels per day, the world population more than doubling from 1.5 billion to 3.7 billion, and CO2 going up 13% from an estimated 288 PPM to 326 PPM, we had almost a quarter century of...global cooling.

The cooling was so much that scientists gave dire predictions of a coming ice age where billions would die from starvation, most species would disappear, and we would soon run out of crude oil and other natural resources.  Their predictions were as close as all the doom-and-gloom predictions of disaster from global warming the last hundred years.  Here are a few more:

18 spectacularly wrong predictions made around the time of first Earth Day in 1970, expect more this year

1. Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that "civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind."

3. The day after the first Earth Day, the New York Times editorial page warned, "Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction."

6. Ehrlich sketched out his most alarmist scenario for the 1970 Earth Day issue of The Progressive, assuring readers that between 1980 and 1989, some 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in the "Great Die-Off."

10. Ecologist Kenneth Watt told Time that, "At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it's only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable."

11. Barry Commoner predicted that decaying organic pollutants would use up all of the oxygen in America's rivers, causing freshwater fish to suffocate.

13. Paul Ehrlich warned in the May 1970  that life expectancy would reach 42 years by 1980, when it might level out. (Note: According to the most recent CDC report, life expectancy in the US is 78.8 years).

14. Ecologist Kenneth Watt declared, "By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won't be any more crude oil.

15. Harrison Brown, a scientist at the National Academy of Sciences, published a chart in Scientific American that looked at metal reserves and estimated the humanity would totally run out of copper shortly after 2000. Lead, zinc, tin, gold, and silver would be gone before 1990.

16. Sen. Gaylord Nelson wrote in Look that, "Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct."

18. Kenneth Watt warned about a pending Ice Age in a speech. "The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years," he declared. "If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age."

If journalists truly cared about facts and science, instead of an agenda, they would ask Joe Biden, John Kerry, President Obama, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and all the other leftist politicians a series of easy questions.  I am sure they have all studied the issue endlessly and worked with experts and scientists as they have designed their policies to destroy the economy.

Here is a sample:

Has the Earth experienced many long warming and cooling periods before humans and fossil fuels could have affected the climate?

Have California and other arid areas had long droughts before cars, fossil fuels, and humans?

Has the climate always fluctuated?

Has the temperature fluctuated both up and down the last 150 years with only a minor one- to two-degree increase overall?  Would it be normal for the Earth to warm up a little after the Little Ice Age ended in 1950?

Have the scientists moved temperature stations from rural areas to urban areas the last 150 years?  Doesn't that skew the comparable results since areas with cement and buildings are clearly warmer than areas with grass and trees?  

How will we defend ourselves against Russia, China, and Iran if we give up our oil and they don't?  Will we use swords against their ships, planes, and tanks?

How will we mine, produce, transport, and install solar panels and wind turbines without machines powered by fossil fuels?

Is it environmentally sound to promote the flammable pollutant Lithium while seeking to control the clear, innocuous, non-pollutant gas CO2 that makes plants thrive?

Do we have enough lithium to build all the batteries? Where will we dispose of the lithium?

How will you handle all the bankruptcies of farmers, airlines, banks, trucking companies etc when you make all the gas operating machines worthless? Where will you dispose of all the junk?

How will you replace all the worthless cars for the poor and middle class and pay to make their houses green?

Where will you dispose of all the junk that comes about because of your policies?

What will you do for Jamaica, Hawaii and other travel destinations when people can no longer get there?

And the big question for journalists is why the heck don't you care about the facts, the science or the massive destruction that will occur if your chosen ones get their way?

Image credit: Pixabay public domain.