Eric Utter writes for the American Thinker about a clear sign of climate alarmists’ nuttiness. A chief proponent of the alarmist argument plans to throw hundreds of millions of dollars at the misguided cause.

American Greatness reports: “Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (D-N.Y.) is planning to spend over $200 million on a global warming initiative that will seek to reduce the carbon emissions of 25 major cities across the United States.  As reported by Axios, the funds will come from Bloomberg Philanthropies, the charitable organization founded by Bloomberg.”  Memo to Michael: maybe work on getting Beijing, Wuhan, Mumbai, and Moscow to reduce their emissions first.

American Greatness again:

The program, formally known as the Bloomberg American Sustainable Cities (BASC), will provide the mayors with the funding and resources needed to gain access to expertise and further funding from the federal government, through such laws as the Inflation Reduction Act.

The program will provide “the funding” needed to gain access to “further funding”…from the federal government?  I have a question: will the funding provided to gain access to further funding be more than the amount of further funding?  If so, is this particularly efficient?  If not, couldn’t they have just decided on the total amount of funding “necessary” without funding the effort to gain that funding?

I have another question: what is wrong with our government, leaders, and charitable organizations?

And further funding from the feds will come via the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)?  Yeah, right — nothing relieves inflation like more spending!  Spending $1.7 trillion in a purported attempt to reduce inflation is absurd.  It is patently nonsensical.  It’s like producing millions more gallons of vodka to reduce the number of alcoholics.  (Or, conversely, like drastically cutting the number of police officers in order to reduce the crime rate.  Oh wait, we actually have done that, too.)