Climate cultists just can’t help themselves
A recent Washington Post essay faced backlash online after listing common Thanksgiving foods and their “climate impact” in order to inform readers which of the festivity’s staples can be consumed “with a clear conscience.”
The Thursday article by food columnist Tamar Haspel, titled “The climate impact of the Thanksgiving meal might surprise you,” begins with the author admitting that “tallying the environmental impact of a holiday feast” does not seem to be in the holiday spirit.
“I know, I know, nobody wants to put ‘climate’ and ‘Thanksgiving’ in the same sentence,” she continues.
Reassuring readers of the “good news” that the mainstays of the meal — poultry and plants — make Thanksgiving “a much more climate-friendly holiday than, say, the burgerfest that is the Fourth of July,” the author then lists typical Thanksgiving dishes alongside “how they stack up, climate-wise.”
They can never just mind their own business
Perspective: The climate impact of the Thanksgiving meal might surprise youhttps://t.co/UbPZGcTTqC
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) November 18, 2022
The WP says that most of our Thanksgiving foods are sorta OK for their carbon footprint. Which is interesting, because I could easily go back and look at my posts from previous years and see the unhinged Warmist nutjobs whining about the carbon footprint of Thanksgiving. They are all just such miserable, nagging people.
In response, many slammed the essay’s attempt to push climate “guilt” onto the family-oriented festivity.
“[H]ave you considered the fact that sharing a festive meal with your loved ones might be destroying the world, actually?” wrote Founders Fund Vice President Mike Solana.
No, they really do not care.
