The New York state governor recently signed a $75 billion “Superfund” law to compensate so-called “victims” for “damages” done by “extreme climate events.” This is laughable on all accounts, but the effect on our society won’t be. While the rest of the world is discovering the fraud behind climate catastrophism, our governor is digging in.

Ten years ago “climate experts” told us the Great Barrier Reef was dying from global warming; now it is bigger and healthier than ever. We were also told that climate change was killing all the honeybees, which would destroy agriculture. Weirdly, the bee population is now higher than it was then, and agriculture still sees records. We are told that extreme weather is threatening lives, but weather-related deaths now are only 3% of what they were 100 years ago.

So, how do we know the government isn’t lying about disasters just so they can create a political pork barrel like the Superfund?

Let’s examine a few of the absurd claims made by Superfund supporters.

— Claim 1: Only the fossil fuel companies will pay. Not surprisingly, the politicians, bureaucrats, and myrmidons supporting the Superfund law claim that all costs will be borne by fossil fuel companies.

Nonsense! As with any other regulation, penalty, or tax, the cost of the Superfund will be embedded in the cost of everything we consume, and will be borne disproportionately by the poor. For example, all food purchased (with EBT cards or otherwise) will have the Superfund costs embedded in the price because our food is grown, harvested, and delivered with fossil fuel powered equipment. There is no practical alternative. The Superfund is simply a tax on working people disguised as perverse social justice. New York state takes from the people and gives to the super-rich.

— Claim 2: Extreme Weather Events are due to CO2. Extreme weather events have occurred everywhere throughout history. How does one decide if a weather event today is due to CO2, versus being a random natural occurrence, or the result of natural warming over the last 300 years? Our biggest weather disaster in the U.S. was the Dust Bowl of the 1930s when there was no “CO2 problem.” The worst heat, drought, and starvation in China and India occurred in the 1940s before anybody thought about CO2.

The Climate Cult blamed the recent flood in Asheville NC on CO2, yet meteorologists tell us that such floods are routine 100-year events in that region, with the last flood of that magnitude occurring in July 1916 when there was no “CO2 crisis.”

Can we blame the 2024 flooding on CO2 when scientists say 20 such storms will have happened since the time of Christ? It is absurd to attribute any meteorological event to a rise in CO2.

— Claim 3: Fossil fuel companies should pay damages. Imagine a tornado hits northern Chautauqua County , and does serious damage to a few houses and buildings (like 2024). Should the Superfund pay for this? How do we differentiate the 2024 tornado from those that occurred in the 1960s in the county, and have occurred periodically across Upstate NY throughout history?

If a strong November storm causes damage in WNY, how do we differentiate the power of that storm from the November 1975 storm that sank the Edmund Fitzgerald well before the “CO2 crisis”?

Are storms more intense from CO2? Official UN-IPCC analysis (AR7) tells us there is “low confidence” that hurricane, tropical storm, or tornado strength or frequency has increased in the past 60 years. To clarify — because of the way the IPCC structured its hypothesis, their claim of “low confidence” is actually saying there is no evidence that CO2 is affecting storm strength or frequency.

— Claim 4: State companies should pay! How will New York state differentiate between CO2 generated in NYS from CO2 generated in China or India? The vast majority of atmospheric CO2 now comes from Asia. If NYS eliminated all fossil fuels tomorrow it would not make any difference, nor stop the ingress of Chinese CO2. Are companies in NYS being extorted to pay damage caused by China? At the recent Kazan conference the BRICs nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China, etc.) declared openly and defiantly that their “…domestic energy needs and economic wellbeing will take precedence over international climate agreements like the Paris Accords and ‘net zero’ initiatives”. Thus, Hochul’s Superfund law is simply narcissistic nonsense.

— Claim 5: Only “protected classes” can be victims. We have recently been deluged with the absurd claim that “climate change disproportionately affects” women, LGBTQ+, gay couples, people of color, the poor, people with nose rings, etc. Apparently only straight white males are unaffected, while their straight wives are devastated. Just read the legislation, and marvel that CLCPA is nothing more than “woke” activism put into law. CLCPA and the Superfund are merely wealth redistribution schemes.

What the Climate Cult and the Superfund ignore: Fossil fuels have been a gift to humanity.

Agriculture is more productive because fossil fueled equipment enables planting, care, and harvesting with amazing efficiency.Fossil fuels enable a super-fast supply chain that delivers your food fresh from the farm in California’s Central Valley to your table in about three to four days. Without fossil fuels, the modern supply chain for food would be crippled and people would starve.

Going electric for food production and logistics is not even remotely feasible. Thank fossil fuels and the (mostly) free market if your children do not go to bed hungry. Remember also that the increase in atmospheric CO2 has radically increased the growth rates of crops, and has enabled agriculture to thrive in arid places where crops could not grow without the additional CO2. Apparently, ending world hunger does not matter to the wealthy beneficiaries of the Superfund, who munch on caviar and fly around in private jets.

Who will actually bear the cost of the Superfund? It will always be working people of New York who bear the burden.

Our cost of living will soar, and more jobs will move from New York state to more enlightened states that have not fallen for climate catastrophism.

One question for the governor: Will your Superfund pay for the disposal of millions of tons of toxic and non-recyclable waste from wind, solar and battery farms? Why do you ignore the massive environmental damage caused by “Green Energy”?

Instead of vilifying fossil fuels, we should be turning our attention to the greedy politicians who created the Superfund to extort our hard-earned money to benefit their wealthy friends in the legal industry.

Do state politicians think the voters are stupid? Apparently they do. Are they correct?

Michael Dee is a Silver Creek resident and Scott Axelson is a Jamestown resident.