OK, look: I get that we, as a global culture, defined down what it means to be an expert in global warming when the preeminent face of environmentalism became a preternaturally angry teenaged real-life version of Pippi Longstocking.

We may have dodged a bullet when Miss Thunberg didn’t win a Nobel Peace Prize — as she was favored to by U.K. bookmakers, at one point — but the fact we took this underage marionette scold seriously is proof that, when it comes to Climate Change, “expertise” could not be a more relative term.

In that vein, meet Gus Schumacher. If you haven’t heard of him, he’s a “climate expert,” who also happens to be an Olympic hopeful in skiing. A true renaissance man, indeed. He also has one up on Greta — at least when she started her climate activism — given that, at 23 years old, he’s reached the age of majority.

This is pretty much where the praise stops. See, Mr. Schumacher was called as an “expert witness” by Democrats at a Senate hearing on Climate Change on March 20, according to the U.K.’s Daily Mail. The Democratic Party reportedly apologized to him for his exchange with colorful Louisiana GOP Sen. John Kennedy. The apology, you’ll soon see, probably should have gone the other way around.

After a brief exchange regarding how Schumacher got invited to address the committee as a “climate expert” — because he’s involved in winter sports, he apparently knows the firsthand effects of warming, blah blah blah — Kennedy started off with the most basic GED-level question for him: “What is carbon dioxide?”

Now, let’s pause for a second here. Kennedy is a senator, but he came to politics as a lawyer — and a darned accomplished one at that. There’s an old aphorism in law: Never ask a question of a witness where you don’t know how they’ll answer. The reason is simple. If they say something that you weren’t expecting, your argument could be blown to bits.

So, there are two possibilities here. First, Sen. Kennedy knew the witness was a world-class dolt and was going to humiliate himself. Second, he was willing to throw caution to the wind and bet on the fact that ski bro wasn’t exactly good with either words or climatology.

Advertisement

Either way, things worked out pretty well for Sen. Kennedy: “I’m — I went to high school,” a laughing Mr. Schumacher began. “But that’s, uh, carbon dioxide is a gas.”

“OK,” a dumbstruck Kennedy responded. Then, seeming to realize the possibilities of the moment, he stayed silent and gave ski bro more rope to hang himself with.

“I’m not a, not a professional to talk about carbon dioxide so much, but …” Schumacher said, trailing off.

At this point, pretty much everyone in the room could have thanked him for coming and ushered him out the door, but Kennedy pressed on, asking him what role it plays in climate change and why he wants to see it curtailed.

“Carbon dioxide is, what I see it as is, you know, a gas that exists in our atmosphere,” he said.

“Is it the major part of our atmosphere?” Kennedy asked.

“It’s a huge part of our atmosphere,” Schumacher said.

Advertisement

It is, in fact, 0.04 percent of our atmosphere. When Kennedy pointed out that it’s a minuscule gas in the scheme of things, Schumacher’s response? “Well, OK. But, yeah. I don’t know. What are you asking specifically?”

“You said we need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions,” Kennedy responded. “I’d like to know first if you know what it is.”

Whoa, emissions, man? Look, I haven’t smoked up in like, uh, at least 15 minutes. And not in the chamber. Also, I’m super hungry. Let me order some pizza. Wait, did I already?

Please note the sarcasm. I am not saying that Mr. Schumacher is a user of a certain drug that is popular among ski bum types and which — while still technically illegal at the federal level — rarely sees any enforcement from authorities. What I am saying is that, if this guy isn’t a pothead, he needs to come up with a plausible excuse for why he seems so stupid:

Say what you will about Greta Thunberg, when she spoke at official functions, you didn’t get the feeling she was trying to hide a three-foot bong in her backpack.

At the very least, Kennedy got Schumacher to admit that when he was there as an “expert,” that expertise was as a cross-country skier, speaking to “the changes in my winters and the landscape I live in in Alaska.” His solution is to “use more electric generation” instead of fossil fuels. Nobody informed him that fossil fuels are involved with electric generation, but this is problem No. 673 or thereabouts with this mess.

When asked about a timeline? “I would like to see it come as fast as possible.”

“How fast?” Kennedy asked.

“I’m not — I don’t have that,” Schumacher replied. I’m assuming he’s talking about the timeline, not the pizza he thought he ordered.

On literally every other question that involved the practical effects of the environmentalism that Schumacher came before Congress to evangelize for, he had no answer. No expertise, no real-world knowledge of what a switchover would entail, no firm grasp on what carbon dioxide was. There was a further back-and-forth about uninformed political tweets he made about defunding the police and other package-deal social justice items, but the key takeaway is that this “expert” wants his snow, thinks a gas he doesn’t know much about is stopping that snow from happening, and wants you to change your life, so he can keep on skiing.

This is what the left wants you to upend your life for. And they take it so seriously that this is who they drag before Congress. I hate to admit it, and you hate to admit it, but you know it’s true: You have a newfound respect, however slight, for Greta Thunberg after watching this.

I know, it feels degrading. But it shows you the caliber of “experts” the left can muster when it comes to the cause they hope to use to transform society.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.