Why Evangelical Elites Get Climate Change Wrong

We are now live on the Conversations That Matter podcast. I'm your host, John Harris. This is an afternoon podcast. It's probably lunch time for some of you on maybe the West Coast and certainly in the mountain states.

Why This Climate Change Series Matters

But we have a good discussion today that I think you're all gonna enjoy. It's actually part of what I'm really figuring out now is gonna be a series on this issue of climate change and environmentalism and global warming.

And let me just briefly explain to everyone since this is the first installment why I'm doing this. Of course, you know that I've talked a lot about social justice. I've written some books on it, especially how it's infiltrated evangelical institutions.

And I knew that there were some climate change related compromises going on, but not something that I focused on too much. One of the reasons was during 2020 when everything was taking place, that wasn't at least the thing that was taking up a screen time on our televisions and it wasn't the thing that we were focusing on as much.

But I think it's time for me to focus a little bit more on this. And one of the reasons is someone had sent me, and I knew about this, but someone reminded me that the seminary that I went to, Southeastern, had done a conference or colloquium on this issue of the environment.

And I started watching some of the presentations and it was, I was shocked actually. I mean, I expect leftist stuff, some leftist stuff, at least coming out of Southeastern because I went there and I could see that there were certain quarters of the seminary that had this, but I was just shocked at how far left the needle was being pushed by people like Jonathan Moo and Catherine Hayhoe.

And so anyway, I've contacted a number of people who are willing to kind of walk through this with me for your sake so that those in the audience know what's going on so they can be informed, but also how to refute it, how to talk about it, how to think about it.

Introducing Brian Sussman and His Book *Climate Cult*

And so the first person that was recommended to me and that I've enjoyed talking with and looking through his material is Brian Sussman. And Brian Sussman is a talk show host, he's an author,.

But maybe more importantly,.

He was a meteorologist for 20 years. And he has a book coming out called Climate Cult. And so without further ado, Brian Sussman, you can go to briansussman .com. Thank you, Brian.

Great to be with you, John.

Well, I appreciate it. I appreciate you giving of your time and I don't know if you have a hard copy of the book. I have the picture you sent me, but people can pre-order your book as I understand it.

Climate Cult by going to Amazon and that's what it looks like.

Yeah, Climate Cult, exposing and defeating their war on life, liberty, and property. This climate change agenda, John, is much bigger than weather. It's much bigger than blizzards. It's much bigger than droughts.

This is a tool that's being used to draw us into a philosophy that is straight out of the book of Marx. And that's what I do. And in fact, my previous books, first book was Climate Gate, where I start to unpack this.

Next one was Eco-tyranny. And the third in this series is now Climate Cult. But I'm really concerned as you are, John, Christians are getting sucked into this. They're getting sucked into this climate change thing in the name of creation care.

They're getting sucked into this whole idea of social justice and social equity. These are terms that are brand new, crafted by the United Nations, and unfurled to the world to draw people into a Marxist philosophy.

And Christians are just going along with the program all too often in the name of being, they wanna be nice guys. They wanna make friends. No one likes to be on the other side of an argument when it seems like you've got the entire world coming up against you.

Politicians, people in media, the school system. So I'm really glad that you're tackling these issues because it's super important to keep people from going into what I claim to be a cult.

Why the Climate Change Agenda Looks Like a Cult

Well, yeah, and that is a strong claim. That's what I wanted to ask you first. You call it a cult, and that's gonna raise some alarm bells with people who are at maybe some of these evangelical institutions that they're starting to hear this language.

In fact, you just talked about one of the terms that I heard an awful lot. And I heard this in ethics class when I was at seminary, creation care. I think Mark Liederbach, he was my ethics professor at Southeastern.

This was a term I think that he even used. And it seems so good. It seems like who wouldn't wanna care for creation, right? But you're framing it as kind of a negative, which I think is appropriate, but I'd like for people to understand why that might be a buzzword to look out for.

Yeah, well, creation care. What's happening is, here's why I call it climate cult. And I realized that's an attention-grabbing title. And I did that purposefully. I want people to read this book. But the bottom line is the climate change agenda has all the markings of a traditional cult.

The first thing they do is they throw fear at you. The world is gonna end. I mean, you have all of these high priests and high priestesses from this climate change agenda, everybody from Al Gore to AOC to Greta Thunberg.

They're preaching fear. They're preaching gloom and doom. So there's this overall theme of despair, which cults oftentimes use to draw people in. But then they point a finger at you. They say, no, but you're an energy sinner.

Your carbon footprint is too big. You've gotta get this under control. And there is repentance. You can do that by buying carbon offsets, by driving a Tesla, by reducing your personal carbon footprint, by going vegan.

So they've got all these ways that you repent of your carbon sin. But then it goes beyond that. They've got an entire catechism that is being preached in all the schools. From K through 12 and on into college, you are told that climate change is an absolute fact.

It's ascended from hypothesis to law, like the law of thermodynamics or the law of gravity. And just like all cults, there's a utopia. They're planning this future world that looks like the Garden of Eden.

And in fact, the future world is so good that the climate agenda is neatly tied to social justice, social equity, universal basic income. In fact, one of the leaders of the movement has expressed this point very well.

You will own nothing when the utopia comes. You will own nothing and you will be happy. That's the world they envisioned for us. So it has all the trappings of a cult.

I think one of the questions that I have just on a practical level, after reparations and after we pay all the lawsuit costs to the Me Too accusers, do we have anything left for carbon credits? That's what I wanna know.

Man, it's like there's a price tag on all these things and it's not cheap.

Climate Change, Marxism, and World Government

Well, the truth of the matter is, John, I mean, think about this. This is a totalitarian movement. It's the antithesis of what the founders of this country saw and envisioned for the United States of America.

This is a world government, so to speak, a world order, was probably a better way to describe it, run by the elites of this world. And they really do have a plan for the rest of us, and that is basically just control us, squelch the way we live, because they believe, just as Marx did, that left to our own devices, as the lesser minded, as those who were not born with a leap of intelligence like they have, we'll destroy the planet, we'll kill one another.

Therefore, we have to be controlled.

Right.

So one of the slides that you had sent me, and you sent me a number of quotes that I put into a slideshow, and maybe I'm going out of order here, but I thought it was relevant to what you were just saying.

We've heard this story before, and I know my dad, he would talk about this, during, well, I guess when Al Gore started to become popular, I remember this when I was young, because he went to college and studied science in the 80s, and he said, well, they were talking about, in high school in the 70s and in the 80s, climate cooling, and that this was going to be the thing that ended the world.

And you have a few quotes here, Fortune Magazine in 1974, as for the present cooling trend, a number of leading climatologists have concluded that it's very bad news indeed. And then you have Time Magazine and the New York Times, all predicting this terrible fate of the world because of climate cooling.

And now it seems like it became global warming, and now it's just climate change, like any change, I guess, is just bad news.

Right.

These people are very slick. John, they're slick with their rhetoric. They're amazingly devious.

Yeah.

You're a climatologist, right? Say it again.

You're a meteorologist.

Yes, yeah.

So, I mean, were you, I don't know if you were involved during when this narrative was kind of the main narrative, but like, you've seen this. And, I mean, are you telling us as a meteorologist, this just wasn't ever data-driven, this is just narratives that are being impressed upon us?

I think people will be shocked when they realize that the temperature record that we have really only goes back to the 1800s.

That's it. That's the temperature record.

I mean, in terms of thermometers taking the temperature, the records really only go back to the 1800s. The best records are in the United States and in China, because in those particular locations, they've been maintained rather securely, as opposed to other parts of the world that are always being taken over by other countries,.

Et cetera.

So, when you look at the two most established temperature records, which again, are just a little over a hundred years old, there's no significant warming. I'll give you a case in point. If you go to New York City's temperature records have been in place since I think about 1880.

So, you go to downtown New York City, and then you go to West Point Academy, which is 60 miles away. Temperature records have been maintained very, very well, 60 miles apart. But what's happened to New York City since then?

They've gone from 200 ,000 people to I think 6 million people or something like that. They've got subways, they've got streets, they've got infrastructure, they've got the tallest buildings in the world.

The temperature record because of this urban heat island, all of this infrastructure, the temperature in New York City over the last 120, 140 years has gone up six degrees. Six degrees warmer. You go to West Point, 60 miles away, the grounds have not changed very much at all.

That temperature since the late 1800s has only gone up one half degree.

Wow.

You look at, there's a place in Lake Tahoe, beautiful, pristine Lake Tahoe. They show that over the last 100 years, the temperature has gone up five degrees. Well, yeah, I guess so, because since they established that temperature location, they put a tennis court right next to where the thermometer lies.

They built a parking lot next to where the temperature lies. They had a burn bin in the 1980s and 1990s where trash was burned right by it. So yeah, temperatures have spiked. But if you go away from that location, not very far, temperatures have only gone up about a half degree.

So there's no real significant warming, but I think the thing that's, and then we've known that in the past there have been warmer times than this. You can go to, for example, you can go to the Alps and you'll notice a tree line 1 ,500 feet higher than the current tree line.

That means some time ago, temperatures were warm enough that the forest was growing 1 ,500 feet higher than today. You can go to parts of England and you'll learn the stories of how England grew wonderful grapes that rivaled Italy and rivaled Germany during the medieval years.

You couldn't grow wine grapes in England to save your life now, it's just too cold. So there have been warmer periods, there have been colder periods, there have been swings in temperature, but that doesn't fit their narrative because they wanna pin the change in climate on you.

And this is something that Karl Marx and his writing partner, Frederick Engels talked about in the 1800s. They wanted to utilize the environment, they called it ecology back then. They wanted to use the ecology as a tool to draw people in to be against capitalism, against industrialization and go for their new philosophy of organized collectivism, which was also known as socialism and communism.

There's Frederick Engels, you've got this quote from him. This is from 1883. Where he talks about the declining warmth of the sun. And he's blaming all of this on industrialization and capitalism.

Al Gore, Climate Fear, and Failed Predictions

Yeah, which is, that's interesting to me because I didn't know about this angle that there was a direct tie here. And that maybe Marxists have always been kind of interested in this topic of utilizing changes in weather and climate patterns to sell their whole agenda.

But I mean, everyone's I think familiar, the person who has perhaps made more of a dent in this topic than anyone else is of course, Al Gore. And you sent me some stuff. I mean, that he talks about that the climate deniers are really in some ways similar to all of those almost 400 law enforcement officers in Uvalde, Texas, who are waiting outside an unlocked door while the children were being massacred.

They heard the screams, they heard the gunshots and nobody stepped forward. And so is that, that's you and me, I guess. We just, we know that people that are dying because the oceans are rising. And I mean, I don't know where, but maybe the way he's referencing here is, I've heard this several times that extreme weather patterns.

So if you have a bad hurricane come through or a bad storm or a blizzard, that means it's climate change because it's more extreme. If it was a hundred years ago, it wouldn't have been as bad, but the destruction is worse because of that.

I think that's what he's talking about. What do you make of that?

Yeah, I think when people are losing an argument, they get reckless with wild statements, the kind that he makes, the kind that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez makes, the kind that others make, just these radical, scary, frightening statements.

And the truth of the matter is this, when you look at, I have a, you know, I have my own podcast, John. It doesn't have the audience yours does, I will admit. You've got a great audience. But my audience has recently heard two episodes with a guy named Dr. Neil Frank.

And Dr. Neil Frank has endorsed my book, Climate Cult. Dr. Neil Frank is 92. He's a wonderful Christian brother. And he ran the National Hurricane Center for 13 years. He is a scientist's scientist. He forecasts the biggest storms on earth.

He said in the eighties when this global warming thing was just starting to ramp up, that he figured, well, there's a lot of scientists, a lot of my colleagues who say there's global warming. So I just believe their research.

I've never looked into it, but I'm forecasting hurricanes. So I'm focusing on my thing. He had another friend of his, who was also a friend of mine, Dr. Bill Gray. Dr. Bill Gray was also a hurricane forecasting pioneer.

Bill Gray came to Dr. Neil and said, Neil, have you researched this global warming thing at all? Neil said, no, no, I'll leave that to those guys. No, you need to research it, Neil, because this temperature record that they're going off of has been so manipulated and has been so tarnished.

That's how they're getting this global warming. They're doing this on purpose. So Dr. Neil looked into it himself and he came away. And I remember him telling the Washington Post this in 2009, finally, he said, global warming is a hoax.

And here's a guy forecasting the biggest storms on the planet saying it's a hoax. The temperature record doesn't hold up. There are two guys who run the satellite record. We've only been measuring the temperature via satellite since 1979.

There are two guys that run this system, which the entire world uses. They're at the University of Alabama Huntsville. And they say that global warming is a hoax. Now they're running the entire temperature record for the entire world.

They've been doing this since 1979. They say it's a hoax. A gentleman who won the Nobel Prize in physics in 2022, John Clauser, he's come out saying this global warming climate change narrative is nothing but pseudoscience.

So that's why they come out with these reckless claims because they're just trying to scare everybody into the temple.

Sea Level, Ice Ages, and the Limits of Climate Alarmism

Well, I remember, I don't know if you remember this one, Rush Limbaugh had like on his website, a countdown to the day of doom. I forget when it was, but Al Gore had predicted that everything, that the oceans were gonna cover New York City or something like that.

And we keep getting those predictions that, we don't have long and we gotta do something now. If we don't do something now, then we're in trouble. But if you look at, you're in the Bay Area, I'm not far from New York City.

If you look at those areas, the buildings aren't being flooded. The Statue of Liberty is not underwater. I don't know how they get away with this. Like if you just go outside and you look, am I missing something?

No, you're spot on. You're spot on. We had an ice age. I know some people listening are probably young earth, people from a theological standpoint, and I have no problem with that. But if we just look at the geological record as we know it today, there was an ice age 10 ,000 years ago.

And since that ice age, temperatures have been steadily warming on planet earth, which has been a good thing. And if you, and I denote this in detail in Climate Cult, but every year sea level rises, take your index finger and your thumb, put them as close together as you can.

That's about how much sea level rises every year. And it's been rising to that degree every year for about 10 ,000 years. It's not scary. If Al Gore really believed all of his scenarios in terms of the areas that are gonna be swamped, he wouldn't own a beautiful condo in San Francisco, which when he draws out the map of San Francisco and how it's gonna be flooded, his condo is in the flood zone.

So he didn't even take his own advice.

Yeah, that's not the place you'd wanna invest in property, if you believe that. Let me ask you a question, because it seems like this is all tied to fossil fuels. And I don't know the science well enough.

I've certainly read things in high school about this, but what's the argument? Because is it just correlation that, look, it seems like it started getting warming around the time automobiles started and factories started doing their thing?

Or what's the actual chemistry of this? Why do they believe that this is the only culprit really for causing this?

It's really amazing. So we had a mini ice age that lasted the better part of 300 years. It ended in 1850. So you've probably read the accounts of William Bradford and the pilgrims who came to America.

And their first winter was just, it was hellacious.

It was awful.

And half of the Mayflower Company, of the 200 people that came across, half of them died the first year because of cold. This was a cold wave that was impacting the entire planet. The River Thames in England, they would have frost fairs on the River Thames every winter.

Winter carnivals on the Thames River. It was about a foot thick. They can't do that any longer. This was a global event, this cooling. It ended about 1850. And since then, we've been steadily warming.

Well, isn't it interesting that coincided with the beginning really of the Industrial Revolution. Marx so loathed capitalism and he so loathed industry. And he felt that capitalism and industry were something that were just plagues upon the masses.

And so this was just a convenient opportunity for them to take fossil fuels. The wealthiest people in the planet were oil barons.

They were the oil barons.

Some of them were really good and benevolent and some were probably were greedy. But nonetheless, all of this coincides with the Industrial Revolution, which I mean, you can understand the basic theory, which doesn't hold up.

Carbon fuels, when burned, emit carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. So using fossil fuels creates CO2. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. It artificially, it warms the atmosphere. That's what they're saying.

And this is where we are today. Temperatures are warming, climate's changing. It's all because of fossil fuels. Now, let me just give you one more little statistic because I know there are some bright folks listening.

Carbon dioxide is a trace gas. It's only 0 .04 of the atmosphere. Four hundredths of the atmosphere is carbon dioxide. And yet it's necessary for all life. Without carbon dioxide, all the plants die, we die.

We need carbon dioxide. God set this up so beautifully, 0 .04 carbon dioxide. Only 4 of that is caused or generated by the human use of fossil fuels. So now we're gonna get into a really tiny number.

What it means is for every 62 ,000 molecules in the atmosphere, only one has been created by the use of fossil fuels. One out of 62 ,000. Now there's no way that miniscule amount of gas could possibly control the whole atmosphere.

There's no way. Then the other thing you have to realize, John, and this is what most people don't get, the climate models being used to predict all of this gloom and doom. And generally speaking, the gloom and doomers, the climate gloom and doomers with PhDs after their name are usually very liberal, anti-God scientists.

They're out to prove global warming. They're out to prove climate change. That's not what you do in science. You take a theory and you attack it, you try to disprove it. They're trying to prove all of this.

And so what have they done? They've come up with climate models that have these gloom and doom scenarios, the ones that Al Gore refers to. But those climate models can't even properly, you can't input cloud cover into those models.

You can't input water vapor, which is the largest greenhouse gas. The climate models can't comprehend clouds or water vapor. And that's why John Clauser, the 2022 physicist who won the Nobel Prize, when he looked at the models they're using to forecast the climate, he said, this is ridiculous.

These aren't complete models. They require estimation. They require guesses. And you don't do science with estimation and guesses like that.

And yet the whole world economy is now supposed to bow to this.

Yes.

According to the World Economic Forum and United Nations, et cetera. That's so fascinating to me. You wonder, do the people running things know or are they ignorant of this? Well-meaning. I guess my skepticism says maybe they might know, but it's a useful lie to then foist on everyone to gain control.

That's what it seems like is going on in my mind.

Natural Rights, Private Property, and the Logic of Marxism

Yeah. And I think you're right. I think there's a lot of that, but we have to realize there are truly, there always have been on planet earth, truly evil people. And this was the difference between, the United States is a unique country.

No form of government like ours has ever been attempted. And it was John Locke, the English philosopher, a wonderful Christian man who came up with the theory of how a government could possibly work without a king or a queen or an oligarch or a strong man or a dictator.

We were the first country to ever be set up like that. And our country was founded on natural law and natural rights. Natural law would be the 10 commandments. And it boils down to this, do unto others as you would have them do unto yourself.

Love thy neighbor as yourself. That's the 10 commandments in a nutshell. So we were formed on natural law and natural rights, God-given rights, life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness. The pursuit of happiness, John Locke explained, comes about through property ownership.

Now, Karl Marx had a philosophy that came forth after we had been founded for a little while, came forth in the late 1800s. Marx was looking at America and says, the pursuit of happiness is bogus, that's a joke.

First of all, natural rights are a joke. There's no God, he can't proclaim rights. Only government can give forth rights. But the whole idea of property, Marx's whole philosophy is the abolition of private property.

And so you have all these elites today, they look at what Marx had to say and they say, you're right, I mean, all these people, they own all this property and these greedy sons of guns and they're just use slavery and they're usurping people's will.

And on top of that, all of these people, they've got lesser minds than we, the elites, with a more gifted mind, is we've got to control them. So this brings about evil people who want to control the world.

They've always been there, they're prolific today. And it's not just the George Soros's of the world and the Klaus Schwab's of the world, but there are so many who look down upon us. They look down upon us for our lifestyles.

They look down upon us for the fact that it's just not fair that you have this four bedroom home and you've got two cars in the garage and there are people in Africa that don't have anything. That's not fair.

That's how they look at the world and they want to do something about it.

Evangelicals, Wokeness, and the Climate Change Weak Spot

Yeah, before we get to this next question, I just want to let everyone know that we will be taking questions of Brian Sussman here. And if you are in the chat on YouTube or Facebook, feel free to leave a comment there and I will get to it.

And then if you are a patron and you went to patreon .com, I think it's forward slash worldview conversation, you can be part of the show. And so I noticed that Sharon, William and Shannon are all in the private streaming area.

And if any of you has a question, you can private chat me or turn on your microphone. If you want to turn on your camera, you can, and we'll get to you as well. A question before we get to some questions.

Why do you think evangelicals might have a weak spot for this? And do you know of examples? I'm curious. I'm thinking Rick Warren might be one, but do you have people in mind in the church who have made this bridge between what you call the climate cult and then evangelical Christians?

Yeah, I think it's kind of like what we're seeing. And you talk a lot about this. I really appreciate you taking a stand for the topics that you discuss. But a lot of this is just this woke-ism, this whole idea of we don't want to offend anybody.

You know, we want to get as many people into these pews as possible. We want to get as many people into this building as we can in the name of reaching them for Christ. We don't want to offend them in any way, shape or form.

So we won't talk about abortion. We won't talk about transsexuality. We won't talk about any of these issues. And of course we're not going to talk about the climate. So I think that is where a lot of it comes from.

But again, it's simple science. It's just going back and doing the research and looking what thousands, literally thousands and thousands of climate scientists, atmospheric scientists have stated. They don't buy the theory.

They're at the least skeptics. They're at the most deniers and some are somewhere in between. So I think that's a part of the problem. But this is the other thing that I really appreciate about you. You talk so much about social justice and the new form of social justice, not love thy neighbor, but this imposed government sanction form of social justice and social equity.

And John, these are tied at the hip, the climate change agenda as written by the United Nations and now proclaimed by the World Economic Forum and practiced in so many developed nations. This is where it's going.

They've tied climate into social justice and social equity. And this isn't the kind of social justice and social equity that Jesus preached. I got news for you.

Sustainable Development, Redistribution, and Global Equity

Well, there's some questions coming in. I wanna get to them. And then if we have time, I'd like to talk about sustainable development a little bit. So Sharon, who is one of the patrons in the private chat, she writes, hi, John, while I don't think we are getting warmer in a general sense, I do think that our seasons have shifted a bit, meaning that I think summer starts later and lasts well into October.

My scientific theory that I learned in eighth grade earth science class was that our seasons are controlled by the degree the earth sits on its axis. Is it possible we have simply shifted on our axis and our weather is just different on the calendar rather than the thermometer?

So I've heard this from people who live in my area, actually, that, hey, boy, when I was a kid, it was, you know, we still had winter in February and now it's, or we still had winter in March and now it's starting to become spring or something like that.

I mean, is there something like that going on maybe?

Well, there are cycles. I mean, God set this up beautifully, the way our earth sits on its axis and the way we turn so wonderfully. And it's, you really did a masterful job. But the reason why I think a lot of people think the seasons are changing, it is one of the many cycles that does occur, but we had our hottest, the hottest decade on record ever recorded by thermometers.

The hottest decade on record globally was the 1930s. And in Climate Called, I go through all of the cities in the United States of America who recorded their highest temperatures ever in the 1930s. The climate change people don't wanna hear this.

They don't wanna hear that it was ever warmer than it is today even within the last 100 years or so. So this was the 1930s. Hottest weather ever, just amazing temperature records that were established in the 1930s.

Well, after the 1930s, we started to cool. And we started to cool notably until the late 1970s. That's why you saw all those headlines from Time Magazine and Fortune Magazine and these others. It's interesting because they have tried so hard to squelch all of that information.

They don't want you to know that it was warmer in the 30s and that we had a cooling trend that lasted well into the 70s. And then we started to warm up a little bit. In the early 2000s, we were, I think, actually about 2010 when my first book, Climate Gate, came out.

We were flat for a few years. There was no warming at all. And then in the last few years, it started warming up again. So this is cyclical. These kind of things happen. And so that's why you get old timers like me that say, well, I'll tell you something, you want winter?

When I was in the 70s as a kid, I remember winter. I lived in Chicago. It was terrible. I went to school at the University of Missouri. Oh my gosh, it was awful.

It was awful.

And we were in a cycle. And now we've come out of that cycle. We're seeing a little bit of warming, but nothing that's unusual, nothing that we, it's been during that period of time I mentioned in the mid evil years when the tree lines were much higher, for example, in the Alps and the Andes, et cetera.

Greenland.

Probably two degrees warmer than today. Two degrees Fahrenheit warmer than today.

Wow.

Well, Nathan Phillips has a comment. He says, most of all, the evangelicals in France believe in climate alarmism, including the National Council of the French Evangelicals. So he's in France. And I get the impression in Europe and England, this is actually more prevalent than in the United States, as prevalent as it is here.

I don't know if you've run into that, but.

Yeah, I think in general, the way it's been sold in the European Union is this is a fact. There's no denying it. You can't argue with this. I think we have a little more latitude to argue in the United States because we still hold to our free speech rights a little more securely than you find in other parts of the world.

But you're right, in the EU, in Great Britain, this is, it's more widely accepted.

The Brundtland Report and the United Nations' Sustainability Agenda

So let me ask you about sustainable development now, since this is something that we hear about quite a bit. And I know over the years, as I've been talking about social justice, people have sent me all kinds of stuff on this.

I know you gave me some slides on this, if I can pull them up. That was climate cooling, I think it's the next one. You quote, I guess this is from the Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development from 1987.

Yeah, yeah.

And it talks about sustainable development. And one of the last things it says is that people who are living affluent lifestyles have to basically change the way they live. So what is that? Because we're hearing more about it now.

It's funny to me that that was from the 1980s, because I thought, wow, I thought that was more of a recent thing, but it's been around for a while.

They unpack this. Anybody who's studied environmentalism or environmental science, or even atmospheric science in colleges in the last 10 years for sure, maybe the last 15 years, especially if you were a major in that topic, you would know about this quote that I pulled from Our Common Future.

Our Common Future was a United Nations report, also known as the Brundtland Report. But this was the first time sustainable development was actually trotted out by anyone. The whole term sustainable development was created by the United Nations.

And again, their branding is brilliant. The United Nations does such a great job, for example, taking global warming to climate change. Genius, diabolically genius. Same thing with sustainable development, because it means so many things to so many different people.