Biden Names John Kerry For “Envoy for Climate”; Kerry Says “Climate Crisis Is Urgent National Security Threat”

9

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

President-Elect Joe Biden announced Monday that former Secretary of State John Kerry has been named as his Special Presidential Envoy for Climate.

Kerry, a former Massachusetts senator and 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, will sit on the National Security Council. This will be the first time the National Security Council will include an official dedicated to climate change, which the Biden administration said reflects their commitment to addressing climate change as an urgent national security issue.

Kerry played a crucial role in negotiating the 2015 Paris climate accord, which President Donald Trump officially pulled out of earlier this year.

Over the summer, Kerry partnered with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY, to lead the Biden campaign’s climate coalition.

Biden also tapped Alejandro Mayorkas as his Homeland Security secretary, Linda Thomas-Greenfield as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Jake Sullivan as his national security adviser and Avril Haines as director of national intelligence.

Mayorkas is the first Latino and immigrant picked to head DHS.

JOIN THE TENS OF THOUSANDS WHO ALREADY ARE ALERTED OF BREAKING NEWS LIKE THIS IN LIVE TIME:

YWN WHATSAPP STATUS UPDATES: CLICK HERE to join the YWN WhatsApp Status.

YWN WHATSAPP GROUPS: CLICK HERE to be added to an official YWN WhatsApp Group.

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)


9 COMMENTS

  1. Caring about the environment is not fighting against ribono shel olam. I would say they are on the side of ribono she olam. Protecting the bees so they can pollinate, the seas for the fish, the trees from man causing pollution….the world was not created for us to abuse it. Talk to farmers about climate change….we have choices….

  2. “treat the climate crisis as the urgent national security threat it is”

    Excuse my ignorance, or rather, please elucidate my nescience here, but if I genuinely and innocently Google “how much has global temperature increased” the first result says:
    “The average global temperature has increased by about 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 degrees Celsius) over the past 100 years, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)”
    (And a slightly different worded search returned an even more benign result than that.)

    1 degree in a hundred years !?! Or a tenth of a degree per decade. Presumably if there has been any temp increase it has accelerated as time progressed. But still, paint this in the worst possible light you can, and it is still far far far from a “crisis” or even a “threat”. This increase surely cannot be responsible for California’s most recent wildfires let alone any other recent climate anomalies.

    And that (0.01 degrees per year, or 0.1 degree per decade if that makes you more confident in the measures) is assuming that they can even get an average temperature over 365 days, across the entire Globe. Do you have any idea of how much room there is for error in such a measure?! ( ex. What time of day did they take the measures?) And hey, it could just be a regular healthy fluctuation from one year to the next. And that’s also assuming that they could make equally accurate measures 20, 30, 50, 80 years ago, and recorded the results with the kind of integrity that this heady accusation demands.

    I have never really researched the whole climate change issue before, but someone is going to have a hard time convincing me that there is any real significant change in any mid-to-long term climate measure. And that any such results are within any meaningful error bounds, and that even if that is all true, that this translates into any kind of crisis, and even if all of that is satisfied, you’d also have to convince me that we can even do anything about it all, and especially in any significant kind of way that doesn’t majorly disrupt our regular contemporary life style.

    What am I missing here? What is climate change crisis info that I’m lacking?

    (Perhaps this deserves it’s own CoffeeRoom thread?)

  3. hershh – “Why is the pilot flying the plane?! If Hashem wants the plane to fly it will fly! If Hashem want’s the plane to crash, who are these demons trying to keep it in the sky! Kfirah!”
    hershh – “Why is the doctor removing the cancer? Clearly Hashem wants the patient to die! Kfirah!”
    hershh – “Why is the fire department spraying water on the burning house? Fighting Hashem! He created fire and wants the fire there!” “Kfirah!”
    My goodness. Putting aside that Sefer Bereshit is clear that we (humans) have an obligation to take care of the world Hashem gave us, what kind of logic is it to say, “let’s do nothing about a life-threatening crisis because the crisis (whether man-made or not) is Hashem’s will.” Where is that in the Gemara? What daf?

  4. I agree that HKB”H wants us to be responsible stewards of His world.

    The rational discussion of whether or not climate change is man-made and whether we can have any impact on it is unfortunately muddied by leftist mentality that says “you have a right to your opinion as long as you agree with me. There are scientists on both sides of the argument; but the “non-believers” are shouted down.
    I wish Mr. Kerry the best and I hope that he will set a good example for all the climate change adherents and hold all his meetings via Zoom in order to minimize his carbon footprint.

  5. @myownopinion Anthropogenic Climate Change is as close to a scientific consensus as one can get. Not counting the right-wing nuts, conspiracy theories pushers, and other such ‘scientific authorities,’ there are about 3% of legitimate climate scientists who question human role in global warming. Considering what’s at stake it only behooves everyone to take this existential threat very seriously.

    @The Shady Charedi Yes, please do yourself a favor and research what 1, 2, 3 and 4 degree Celsius of average global warming from the pre-industrial levels (circa 1850) would mean. I especially urge you to look at how it affects the polar ice caps, the rise of sea-levels, the number of people that would affect, large population movements, number of climate refugees, catastrophic droughts, food and water security around the globe, extinction of plant and animal species, and while you are at it – when will we reach the point of no return where our planet goes into the self-sustaining feedback loop of warming/sequestered carbon release/more warming, etc. It’s not for the faint of heart.

  6. @NonImpeditiRationeCogitationis
    It’s not 4 nor 3 nor 2 nor even 1 degree. It’s 0.8 degrees in 100 years. And presumable the 70 years before that (ie taking us to the 1850 you quoted) was a much smaller change.

    (And again, the chances of accurately measuring an average global temp change over 100 years to within 1 degree is preposterous.)

    And you’re talking about what that “would mean”. But it’s already happened, apparently. So, since 1850 how many polar ice caps, sea-levels, climate refugees, catastrophic droughts, species extinctions has the climate change caused so far. Or rather, how many that are out of the ordinary compared to the previous thousand years?
    The answer is, a big fat zero.