The punch-ups over climate change continue to bubble along, and it seems each new week brings further damning indictments of the gloom and doom crowd. In the meantime climate change sceptics seem to be going from strength to strength. Here then is a smattering of the latest on this controversial topic.
The London Times has just come out with yet another expose of scientific fraud and corruption. It begins: “The chairman of the leading climate change watchdog was informed that claims about melting Himalayan glaciers were false before the Copenhagen summit, The Times has learnt.
“Rajendra Pachauri was told that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment that the glaciers would disappear by 2035 was wrong, but he waited two months to correct it. He failed to act despite learning that the claim had been refuted by several leading glaciologists. The IPCC’s report underpinned the proposals at Copenhagen for drastic cuts in global emissions. Dr Pachauri, who played a leading role at the summit, corrected the error last week after coming under media pressure.”
As is so often the case here, simply follow the money trail. Pachauri had just recently been found to have received major grant money for his false claims. He “used bogus claims that Himalayan glaciers were melting to win grants worth hundreds of thousands of pounds. Rajendra Pachauri’s Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), based in New Delhi, was awarded up to £310,000 by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the lion’s share of a £2.5m EU grant funded by European taxpayers. It means that EU taxpayers are funding research into a scientific claim about glaciers that any ice researcher should immediately recognise as bogus.”
While many tend to think scientists can do no wrong, in reality, they can be driven by lust for money and power, fame and fortune, just like anyone else. As another example of this, consider a report in today’s press which reveals a major power struggle in a leading Australian green group. Today’s Sunday Age begins their story this way:
“One of Australia’s richest and most powerful environment groups is in crisis following a toxic power struggle that has split the organisation amid claims of bullying, financial mismanagement and secret board meetings. The Wilderness Society, which has grown rapidly in recent years and now has 45,000 members, is in disarray after 144 staff members signed a petition on Christmas Eve to dump executive director Alec Marr, one of the most influential figures in the environment movement.”
Lord Monckton, who is currently on a speaking tour in Australia, said this of such vested interests, money trails, and power grabs: “So when the IPCC came along and said, right, we need a world government, we need to deal with this major issue, a lot of politicians who were in search of an issue said, oh, now we can stand up and make speeches about saving the planet, no less, that makes us really sound important. So a number of interests came together. Bankers in particular wanted to make a fortune out of carbon trading. All the boys with red braces in the city of London who call it ‘trading hot air’, they were all there. The schoolteachers wanted to motivate their kids to save the planet from the sins of their parents. What can be more appealing for kids than a story like that? The media for whom it would always sell more newspapers of advertising space if you say ‘World to End: Shock’ than if you tell the truth which is ‘Climate Continuing Changeable: Yawn’.
“And so you put all these interests together and therefore it’s not so much a conspiracy as a coalition of interests, all of whom wanted this to be true while at one part of them there was still a kind of corner of sanity somewhere saying, well, actually we don’t want this to be true. The fact is it isn’t true, and what has happened is the ordinary people have begun to smell…I can’t use the word on the air, but it doesn’t smell very nice. They’ve smelled the propaganda, the sheer hysteria of those who have been trying to promote this scare, and their unwillingness to debate. So what we’re seeing now is a collapse in this belief system, as it was, it had become a kind of religion.”
Finally, Carey Roberts recently penned an article on the “Climate Greenshirts: The Rise of Eco-Fascism”. Says Roberts, “I’m not bothered by the progressives’ sky-is-falling predictions or the off-key Mother Earth dirges. But when the environmentalists begin to call for disinformation campaigns, criminal prosecutions, and cold-blooded executions, I say, ‘Hold on a green minute, fella!’”
He offers a number of quotes from these green extremists: “James Hansen of the National Air and Space Administration has called for trials of the skeptics for alleged ‘high crimes against humanity.’ Grist Magazine’s David Roberts has demanded Nuremberg-style inquisitions for the ‘bastards’ who populate the global warming ‘denial industry.’
“During a 2007 Live Earth concert, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., son of the former senator, railed against the ‘corporate toadies’ who question global warming and demanded their head on a platter. ‘We need to start treating them as traitors,’ he shouted to the frenzied crowd. Two years later Kennedy declared coal company execs ‘should be in jail…for all of eternity’. Gee, what’s Mr. Kennedy planning to do for an encore?
“Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki has called for pre-emptive action against foot-dragging politicians: ‘What I would challenge you to do is to put a lot of effort into trying to see whether there’s a legal way of throwing our so-called leaders into jail because what they’re doing is a criminal act.’ Ironically, Dr. Suzuki is a former board member of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
And then there’s the Ultimate Solution, the answer to all the laggards who stubbornly refuse to jump on the global warming bandwagon. The Talking Points Memo website is a hot-bed of environmental activism. A June 2 posting asked pointedly, ‘At what point do we jail or execute global warming deniers’?”
Roberts concludes, “Czech president Vaclav Klaus recently made these chilling remarks about the current state of global climate-change activism: ‘Communism and environmentalism – we are talking about two ideologies that are structurally very similar. They are against individual freedom. They are in favor of centralist master-minding of our fates. They are both very similar in telling us what to do, how to live, how to behave, what to eat, how to travel, what we can do and what we cannot do. There is a huge similarity in this respect.’ Maybe it’s time to denounce the excesses of the modern-day Green movement for what it really is: eco-fascism.”
Perhaps there is hope yet. As more and more reports of fraud, scandal, bogus science and false predictions come to the surface, and as more and more men and women of backbone and conviction stand up and speak out against the green hysteria, we may be able to turn things around. I certainly hope so. Because the extremist reactions of the greens may well be far more damaging to us than any supposed environmental threats.
The Czech president Vaclav Klaus has stated the obivous.
The environmental movement brings with it a whole basket of lies and scaremongering which the fear they produce are aimed at removing all our freedoms.
Sustainabilty has become the catch cry of the extreme right and the extreme left. Social justice, Freedoms and the right to be left alone robbed from all of us. Assets and the right to own land under the old “fee simple” robbed from us forever.
The Sad part is that I cannot see either of our major two party’s standing up against any of these extremes and both use them and promote them for political or financial gains.
I see the environmentalists as the modern day SS of this new corporate socialist state. Gone are our feedoms and natonal pride. Gone is our country’s right of self determination and pride. Lost is the warmth & security of a loving home inside a tradional family in a safe secure country town or suburb.
Replaced with a global model that does not hold down any chance of an allied force arriving to rescue us.
While we can all still fight the final battles in political party’s like the DLP and others, I feel more and more scaremongering (kaos and control) measures will orchestrated before we get to meet our maker.
Tony Zegenhagen
And Let us also not forget another of Obama’s mighty army of radicals in the administration who also falls under the green shirt banner, Cass Sunstein;
“In a lengthy academic paper, President Obama’s regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, argued the U.S. government should ban “conspiracy theorizing.”
Among the beliefs Sunstein would ban is advocating that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud.
Sunstein also recommended the government send agents to infiltrate “extremists who supply conspiracy theories” to disrupt the efforts of the “extremists” to propagate their theories.”
Natalie Grant Wraga was one of the world leading authorities on Soviet communist propoganda and she was under no illusions as to the Marxist roots of Green propoganda;
“Protection of the environment has become the principal tool for attack against the West and all it stands for. Protection of the environment may be used as a pretext to adopt a series of measures designed to undermine the industrial base of developed nations. It may also serve to introduce malaise by lowering their standard of living and implanting communist values.”
Damien Spillane
With all the talk about Global Warming (I refuse to call it by its alias “climate Change) I have not heard a lot about a left wing Canadian lawyer named Maurice Strong. Who is this “Maurie” fellow? Born in 1929, Strong is credited with thinking up the “theory” of Global Warming. He never directly entered politics, that was and is a very temporary occupation for most people. No, he positioned himself on the sidelines, close to politicians, enabling him to be of greater influence. The theory is that Global Warming could achieve two things. Enable politicians to eventually have total control over the lives of the populace along with its illegitimate cousin heavy taxation. First of all you need to frighten the hoi polloi with predictions of doom, then you make them feel guilty of being at least partly responsible for the doom. Next you make them feel obliged to follow your prompts, to help solve the insurmountable “problem” on the horizon, with paying their taxes with a smile. However, freezing temperatures around the world signalled the need to hit the panic button, so the illegitimate cousin was renamed “Climate Change” something that has been happening since time immemorial. After all, when conversationists run out of conversation, they always switch to talking about the change in the weather.
Frank Bellet, Petrie Qld
It has come to the point that ordinary, thinking people can no longer trust any announcements made by certain scientists at CSIRO and BoM when they rely on “peer-reviewed” literature (cronyism), or use distorted temperature data (fraud), or make wild assumptions about the supposedly deleterious effects of carbon dioxide (unscientific), or use ad hominem comments referring to sceptics. I urge everyone to do some wide research, such as Wong and Rudd have avoided.
Lindsay Smail
Yet none of those 10 points addresses the key question: Where is the scientific proof that CO2 causes most atmospheric warming? – There is none.
Lindsay Smail
The observation I count as significant is having some of my materialist friends, who couldn’t give two hoots over the wider philosophical aspects, becoming annoyed by the dishonesty/hypocrisy demonstrated by the “experts” struggling to (failing to) build a case for change, then atop that a case for humanity being the prime cause.
When even “their side” of the debate is upset by the tactics, what is an impartial observer to conclude?
Leon Brooks
Andrew Bolt reports how Rajendra Pachauri has defended himself against the serious charges against him and his organisation by attacking his detractors:
“They are people who say that asbestos is as good as talcum powder – and I hope they put it on their faces every day.”
Good solid, logical and scientific rebuttal as one would expect from the head of the IPCC!
Christopher Pearson has written a good article in The Australian this weekend. FInally, some unbiased commentary on the topic.
Jane Petridge
Thanks Jane
Yes it is a good one. It can be found here: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/dont-trust-the-weathermans-forecasts/story-e6frg6zo-1225824634542
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Well I’ve been saying it long enough.
The Czech president Vaclav Klaus has stated the obivous.
The environmental movement brings with it a whole basket of lies and scaremongering which the fear they produce are aimed at removing all our freedoms.
Sustainabilty has become the catch cry of the extreme right and the extreme left. Social justice, Freedoms and the right to be left alone robbed from all of us. Assets and the right to own land under the old “fee simple” robbed from us forever.
The Sad part is that I cannot see either of our major two party’s standing up against any of these extremes and both use them and promote them for political or financial gains.
I see the environmentalists as the modern day SS of this new corporate socialist state. Gone are our feedoms and natonal pride. Gone is our country’s right of self determination and pride. Lost is the warmth & security of a loving home inside a tradional family in a safe secure country town or suburb.
Replaced with a global model that does not hold down any chance of an allied force arriving to rescue us.
While we can all still fight the final battles in political party’s like the DLP and others, I feel more and more scaremongering (kaos and control) measures will orchestrated before we get to meet our maker.
Tony Zegenhagen
And Let us also not forget another of Obama’s mighty army of radicals in the administration who also falls under the green shirt banner, Cass Sunstein;
“In a lengthy academic paper, President Obama’s regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, argued the U.S. government should ban “conspiracy theorizing.”
Among the beliefs Sunstein would ban is advocating that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud.
Sunstein also recommended the government send agents to infiltrate “extremists who supply conspiracy theories” to disrupt the efforts of the “extremists” to propagate their theories.”
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/category/socialism/
Natalie Grant Wraga was one of the world leading authorities on Soviet communist propoganda and she was under no illusions as to the Marxist roots of Green propoganda;
“Protection of the environment has become the principal tool for attack against the West and all it stands for. Protection of the environment may be used as a pretext to adopt a series of measures designed to undermine the industrial base of developed nations. It may also serve to introduce malaise by lowering their standard of living and implanting communist values.”
Damien Spillane
With all the talk about Global Warming (I refuse to call it by its alias “climate Change) I have not heard a lot about a left wing Canadian lawyer named Maurice Strong. Who is this “Maurie” fellow? Born in 1929, Strong is credited with thinking up the “theory” of Global Warming. He never directly entered politics, that was and is a very temporary occupation for most people. No, he positioned himself on the sidelines, close to politicians, enabling him to be of greater influence. The theory is that Global Warming could achieve two things. Enable politicians to eventually have total control over the lives of the populace along with its illegitimate cousin heavy taxation. First of all you need to frighten the hoi polloi with predictions of doom, then you make them feel guilty of being at least partly responsible for the doom. Next you make them feel obliged to follow your prompts, to help solve the insurmountable “problem” on the horizon, with paying their taxes with a smile. However, freezing temperatures around the world signalled the need to hit the panic button, so the illegitimate cousin was renamed “Climate Change” something that has been happening since time immemorial. After all, when conversationists run out of conversation, they always switch to talking about the change in the weather.
Frank Bellet, Petrie Qld
Thanks guys
It seems it is not every week, but every day now that a new revelation emerges about green scandals, frauds and con jobs. See today’s instalment here: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/more-flaws-emerge-in-climate-alarms/story-e6frg6n6-1225825250835
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
It has come to the point that ordinary, thinking people can no longer trust any announcements made by certain scientists at CSIRO and BoM when they rely on “peer-reviewed” literature (cronyism), or use distorted temperature data (fraud), or make wild assumptions about the supposedly deleterious effects of carbon dioxide (unscientific), or use ad hominem comments referring to sceptics. I urge everyone to do some wide research, such as Wong and Rudd have avoided.
Lindsay Smail
And wonders of wonders, both the SMH and the Age have ran with this great article critical of the green alarmists: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/facts-conveniently-brushed-over-by-the-global-warming-fanatics-20100131-n6fr.html
Maybe the tide is beginning to turn.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Yet none of those 10 points addresses the key question: Where is the scientific proof that CO2 causes most atmospheric warming? – There is none.
Lindsay Smail
The observation I count as significant is having some of my materialist friends, who couldn’t give two hoots over the wider philosophical aspects, becoming annoyed by the dishonesty/hypocrisy demonstrated by the “experts” struggling to (failing to) build a case for change, then atop that a case for humanity being the prime cause.
When even “their side” of the debate is upset by the tactics, what is an impartial observer to conclude?
Leon Brooks
Andrew Bolt reports how Rajendra Pachauri has defended himself against the serious charges against him and his organisation by attacking his detractors:
“They are people who say that asbestos is as good as talcum powder – and I hope they put it on their faces every day.”
Good solid, logical and scientific rebuttal as one would expect from the head of the IPCC!
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/why_is_this_clown_still_head_of_the_ipcc/
Mansel Rogerson