Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton proclaimed during her nomination acceptance speech that she believes in “science,” which translates from liberal into English as “I believe in junk science that furthers our agenda.”
The New York Times, popular purveyors of this junk science, published an article with the claim that reducing crime could contribute to global warming. The Times cited a study done by the Center for Environmental Strategy at the University of Surrey in England and published in The Journal of Industrial Ecology.
The study is titled, “Addressing the Carbon-Crime Blind Spot: A Carbon Footprint Alert.”
I didn’t realize my eyes could roll that far into the back of my head. Interesting.
Researchers estimated the annual carbon footprint of crime in England and Wales and found that reducing crime increases the overall carbon footprint in what they call the “rebound effect.”
They claim that reducing emissions in one area can increase emissions overall, either directly or indirectly.
I’m guessing this translates to, “we need more government funding to put out more inane studies like this.”
The best of the worst of this article: “While there is an energy cost to operating prisons, the study notes, inmates generally consume less than an average citizen in the country, so fewer prisoners might mean higher overall energy consumption.”
They go on to add that a reduction of crime would give more money to the government’s budget and to the people who would then spend it on activities that increase greenhouse gas emissions.
This is seriously what people are spending money to research.
Studies like this, aside from being a massive waste of time, play right into the big-government liberal agenda.
They’ve decided that global warming is a serious threat based on their junk science, and now they produce a study they say shows that people spend their money in ways that hurt the environment.
Since prisoners are clearly kinder to the environment — not to other human beings, but who cares about them — the left-wing climate change nuts are surely thinking of ways to turn greater society into an enviro-prison; because of the earth and stuff.
Sorry climate change wackadoos, but I’m going to go with reducing crime and living in a free society over living in a bizzaro communist enviro-prison based on junk science and created by people with entirely too much time on their hands.