John Coleman on the "six legged monster"

Guest post by John Coleman – KUSI-TV, Weather Channel Founder

December 7, 2009

David and Goliath

The 21st century Goliath is Global Warming. It is a powerful six-legged monster. In no order of strength, those legs are:

(1) The big money climate change scientists and their powerful institutions from governmental centers to Universities,

(2) The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which is a Geneva-based, highly funded bureaucracy controlled by one-world government political activists,

(3) Environmentalists who seek to use threats of climate chaos to stop the use of fossil fuels and return to a simpler, more “natural”, primitive lifestyle,

(4) Government at all levels whose political leaders find dealing with global warming is their opportunity to save us all from disaster cementing their status and success,

(5) The media populated by people who love to warn us of impending disaster and give us the advice we need to cope, who believe in Al Gore and his political party and who know that “the sky is falling” is the best headline of them all,

(6) Al Gore, who uses his status as a successful former Senator and Vice President to provide a platform to promote his message of doom and gloom, a message he learned in his only college science class and must have truly believed for many years but should see now is only an empty threat.

The total financial resources and power structure behind Goliath are staggering.

Goliath now occupies Copenhagen. For the 15th time, Goliath is meeting to publicize his long list of threatened consequences if do not head his demands. The ice will melt, the coasts and islands will flood displacing millions and killing tens of thousands; the polar bears and eventually thousands of other species will die as habitats are destroyed; hurricanes will become superstorms wrecking havoc on the coastal cities killing tens of thousands; heat waves will kill more hundreds of thousands as they grip the planet; drought and heat will destroy our agriculture starving untold millions more. He tells us this is because of our carbon footprints left by our burning of fossil fuels emitting exhaust of carbon dioxide.

Fifteen thousand “delegates” are attending Goliath’s conference coming by hundreds of private jet aircraft, riding in over a thousand limos, occupying every hotel room for miles around and all living on expense accounts paid by taxpayers and stock holders. They are making speeches, politicking one another and most importantly negotiating how much the people of each of their nations will reduce their carbon footprints in coming years, having a major impact on all our lifestyles.

Meanwhile, here at home The Environmental Protection Administration, part of Goliath’s government leg, just classified carbon dioxide as a pollutant that is an endangerment to our lives. And the US Congress is working with the President on legislation known as Cap and trade that will make all of us pay taxes for our carbon footprints.

Goliath is a rich and very powerful monster. He thrives on carbon dioxide.

David is tiny and weak. He is composed of:

30 thousand scientists who sign a petition but only a few hundred of whom have the specialized education, skill and positions to do unfunded or underfunded research that debunks the carbon dioxide greenhouse claims of Goliath,

A handful of struggling policy institutes that strive to stage events to educate the public and media about the global warming myth,

The internet, a resource that is open to all on both sides to communicate and educate and organize and protest as best the skeptics can, There skeptics have established websites and blogs and posted videos, some serious and some as clever as animated musical parodies,

Talk radio with a hundred solid talk hosts who cover all aspects of the folly of global warming and reach several million people,

And a small cadre of elected officials from one or two Senators to a hand-full of members of the House of Representatives, to the President of Czech Republic and a small collection of other office holders who understand the science and are brave enough to join a minority group.

We are outmanned, poor by comparison and somewhat leaderless and disorganized.

How can David win this battle? The rocks he throws are small and his rock pile is small. Time is short before the consequences of increased government control, a scaled back and altered lifestyle and, most of all, establishment of bad science as a controlling instrument.

David has one great strength, however: Truth.

There is no significant man-made global warming, there has not been any in the past and there is no reason to fear any in the future. Carbon dioxide is a natural trace gas in the atmosphere with very limited greenhouse impact on temperatures and naturally produced CO2 greatly exceeds the CO2 produced by burning fossil fuels. There is no tipping point when the impact of CO2 sets in to cause an increased impact because of “forcing.” The bad science behind the global warming myth is based on a hypothesis that has failed.

Superman fought for “truth, justice and the American way.”

So is David. But he is no Superman. The battle goes on.

John Coleman

http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner

Share

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Mapou

Very nice. Although I would add the agenda-driven Nobel commitee to the list, maybe as a tail. But then again, it’s possible that the Nobel clowns are being paid by powerful interests within government.
It’s good to see that public opinion is turning around on this issue. Wired is getting their butts whipped by their readers at the moment after posting an article titled “The Psychology of Climate Change Denial”. First, they disabled commenting on the article and, after a few people complained, they changed their minds and opened the article to a flood of complaints and negative reactions. Check it out.
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/12/climate-psychology/

Martin Brumby

John Coleman is absolutely right. It will be a long and very bitter battle.
But he doesn’t even mention the ‘seventh leg’, the big financial operators like Goldman Sachs who made a killing out of the sub-prime housing scam, the ‘bailout’ scam and are 100% up for the cap and trade scam – by far the biggest and most lucrative of them all.
Too big to fail.
But eventually the truth will out.
At that time, the people need to hold these wicked clowns to account.

VG

Looks like the MSM is exploding with the climategate story.. finally. Advice to AGW scientists: if you were involved jump while you can! Advice to skeptics and deniers etc:: do not hound these scientist and do not insult them etc…they probably had a “good” ulterior motive (the Earth and its future which is very laudable) apart from the financial gain. Take the J Chirsty attitude… serene LOL

Tony

Well said, Mr Coleman. What we need, perhaps, is An Army of Davids.

Michael
Michael

It’s not nice too fool with Mother Nature. I hope one of the major talking points of the Republican delegation to Copenhagen is thee Deep Solar Minimum we are in and the brutally cold last two winters we have.
Al Gore Destroyed By Mother Nature on CNN 12-09-09

Shane

I would pefer to think of us “deniers” as:
“Batman, not Superman. He didn’t just show up with powers, he had to train his brain and his body and his skills. He gets dirty along the way. His character might be a little less sunny but it’s bulletproof.”
Thanks to T.C

Kate

It’s more like we are the Lilliputians that have to try to handle a potentially dangerous Gulliver.

Nicely done. You might want to look into The Club Of Rome as instigator of many of those “other legs”. They were behind the “Running Out Oh NO!” computer “projection” games of the 1970’s green movement (“Limits to Growth: by Meadows et.al.) and are reputed to be behind the AGW “movement” as well. Never mind that we can’t have AGW if we’ve run out… logical consistency is not their “thing”. They just look for a scare angle to exploit. But have very influential membership.
BTW, being “leaderless” can be an advantage. It lets you run an “underground” resistance, for example. No one appointed me. No one gave me orders. I get no funding. So none of those things can be threatened.
I’ve had someone badger me about stuff not being “peer reviewed” (and thus subject to the organized power grab structure). My response that I had something better than that, I was public reviewed; ended the event. Folks who are command and control oriented do not know how to handle those who are “coopetition” driven in a self organizing “mob”. A “market place of ideas”.
And finally, we have the blessing of the frigid weather. God must be a comedian to taunt Al Gore this way. I heard, back to back on the radio, Al Gore giving a rant about the UEA leak being unimportant because all you had to do was open your window and look at the hottest decade ever; followed immediately by a new flash of massive blizzards in the midwest and freeze warnings in California… Nearly busted a gusset 😎
I’ve done an ‘informal poll’ by making snide remarks like: “any more global warming like this and I’m going to freeze to death!” to random folks during the week. 100% have been clearly against the AGW thesis (with me giving no clue of my beliefs beyond the one snide / joke phishing line…) and when prompted with a follow on more anti-AGW line, they have all added an assessment of AGW as various levels of hokum or bunk. Several have commented “it is just a power grab” or just a “money grab”.
The AGW thesis was in trouble already, but Cimategate coupled with some killer cold weather has made for a very cynical and to some extent restive and bitter voter base. The more this is “rammed through” the more damage the AGW folks are doing to their long term position. All it needs now is a bit of a “push” from us…

We are not weak. We have Joe Bastardi on our side.
http://www.kerrytherealmccoy.com/garrettandjoe2.JPG
We have also time on our side, just to endure, resist and truth will come out. In USA, it is already coming (check average temperatures for last two years).

Alan S. Blue

8) The energy companies realizing a full decade ago “Hey, we need to diversify out of oil – if only for the public perception thing.” Extend this to GE finding a major market for turbines-in-triplicate. (With a natural gas turbine, a 1kW turbines gets you mighty close to 1kW continuous. With wind, good siting gets you to 1kW gets you .3kW. ) GE owns NBC….

John in NZ

MSM in NZ is starting to give time to the skeptics. TV3 news tonight had a piece on Climategate and referred to the emails as leaked rather than stolen.
I have no doubt the AGW movement will eventually collapse. Real science always wins in the end, even if it takes a few decades. But I am a bit concerned about a few things.
Firstly, the AGW true believers may resort to violence when it becomes clear they are not going to get their way. A fanatic who knows he is losing is very dangerous.
Secondly, the third world, or do we call them developing countries these days, have been expecting billions in compensation for the damage caused by the emissions of “rich” countries. Not just the governments but the ordinary people believe they are owed. There is going to be a lot of resentment as a byproduct of this mess.
Lastly, scientists will not be trusted as much in the future. This whole mess only got off the ground because people trust science. If it had only been Al Gore, politicians and the media singing the global warming song, people would have been more skeptical. On balance this is probably a good thing.

ChrisP

An army of Davids, or maybe just a ‘pebble’ in the right place.

CodeTech

Sadly, I’ve spoken with people recently who have no idea who David and Goliath were, therefore making a comparison is almost a waste of time. Is it really that difficult for our society to teach a few biblically sourced stories?
Anyway, this is a really succinct article, I’m passing it around tomorrow. Meanwhile, the Wired article Mapou linked to has 44 comments, only 2 are supportive of the AGW party line. Very interesting.
I have hope that the wheels are falling off of this thing even as we watch. It’s truly exciting, and fascinating, and all that.

Mabuse

“Superman fought for “truth, justice and the American way.” So is David. But he is no Superman. The battle goes on.”
Mr Coleman, ‘global’ and ‘American’ are not interchangeable. This is a global issue that goes way beyond the values and aspirations of any one nation, and one that completely transcends the petty partisanship of US domestic politics.
I will happily add my voice and effort to any movement that aspires to seek out the truth about climate change – whatever that truth might be. But if you’re looking for a global army to fight for the ‘American way’, count me out.

D. King

VG (00:14:58) :
Looks like the MSM is exploding with the climategate story
This is a CYA move. The AGW ship. the SS Calamity is sinking.

As we’ve seen from the ClimateGate leak, alarmists at the CRU did not validate (verify) their model for paleoclimate study of past temperatures. We can have no confidence that they have made any efforts to validate their other models, at least until they have performed a full disclosure proving so.
This is a point that will resonate with all the engineers in the world: if we -the engineers – release a product (a house, a bridge, an airplane or whatever) that fails and it was based on non-validated models we will do prison time or recieve a similar harsh punishment. When the leading institution behind the IPCC use unvalidated models to assess the climate, that is to an engineer as releasing an airplane that is not tested. All engineers will understand this point no matter what they understand about climate science.

Michael

Top story on Huffington Posts Green Tab has this as the first comment about The Copenhagen Summit. Is somebody handing out brains over there?
“Mogamboguru I’m a Fan of Mogamboguru I’m a fan of this user 328 fans permalink
” An Incredibly Expensive F o l l y ”
“Why Failure in Copenhagen Would Be a Success”
CO2 Emissions Cuts Will Cost More than Climate Change Itself
Based on conventional estimates, this ambitious program would avert much of the damage of global warming, expected to be worth somewhere around €2 trillion a year by 2100. However, Tol concludes that a tax at this level could reduce world GDP by a staggering 12.9% in 2100 — the equivalent of €27 trillion a year.
.
It is, in fact, an optimistic cost estimate. It assumes that politicians everywhere in the world would, at all times, make the most effective, efficient choices possible to reduce carbon emissions, wasting no money whatsoever. Dump that far-fetched assumption, and the cost could easily be 10 or 100 times higher.
To put this in the starkest of terms: Drastic carbon cuts would hurt much more than climate change itself. Cutting carbon is extremely expensive, especially in the short-term, because the alternatives to fossil fuels are few and costly. Without feasible alternatives to carbon use, we will just hurt growth.
Secondly, we can also see that the approach is politically flawed, because of the simple fact that different countries have very different goals and all nations will find it hard to cut emissions at great cost domestically, to help the rest of the world a little in a hundred years.”
Me;
Yes Virgina there is a Santa Clause.

Michael

E.M.Smith (00:49:25) :
+1000

peeke

“Goliath is a rich and very powerful monster. He thrives on carbon dioxide.”
Phrases like these are just as idiotic as Hansens “trains of death”.

CodeTech

No, peeke, “trains of death” is specifically designed to make people think of the Holocaust, Nazism, and among worst chapters in human history.
The phrase calling the AGW monster a carbon consumer is a humorous catchphrase.
I am truly in awe of your humor impairment.

Dave Wendt

Given the incredible disparity in financial resources, the almost complete domination by the alarmists of every means of opinion formation in society[news, entertainment, education,etc.], the ability of the rational viewpoint to turn the tide of public opinion in the face of a two decade long massive propaganda campaign from the climate alarmists has to rank as a miracle. Were I a more devout believer, I might be moved to suggest that it indicates that God is on our side. Or perhaps the spirits of our Founding Fathers, observing from their graves, the intent of our present flock of collectivist politicians to destroy the magnificent gift they gave to humanity at a terrible personal cost, were moved to place their indomitable wills behind the effort to derail this runaway train. I realize that such spiritual arguments are unlikely to draw a friendly reception here, but, though “the truth will out” is a very powerful notion, the success that has been achieved does seem to defy rational explanation.

Paul

Goliath may be a wealthy smooth talker but he doesn’t seem to have the powers of observation nor statistical skills. David, on the other hand is a bright boy who is quickly marching down the road to battle with the stiff winds of the earth’s climate at his back that seem to ignore Mannian curves.

alamo

“seventh legged” – “cosa nostra”
http://www.europol.europa.eu/index.asp?page=news&news=pr091209.htm
“Carbon Credit fraud causes more than 5 billion euros damage for European Taxpayer”
“The European Union (EU) Emission Trading System (ETS) has been the victim of fraudulent traders in the past 18 months. This resulted in losses of approximately 5 billion euros for several national tax revenues. It is estimated that in some countries, up to 90% of the whole market volume was caused by fraudulent activities.
Indications of suspicious trading activities were noted in late 2008, when several market platforms saw an unprecedented increase in the trade volume of European Unit Allowances (EUAs). Market volume peaked in May 2009, with several hundred million EUAs traded in e.g. in France and Denmark. At that time the market price of 1 EUA, which equals 1 ton of carbon dioxide, was around EUR 12,5. “

bradley13

Somewhat off-topic, but related: remember the Google discussion about “climate-gate” not showing up in the search recommendations? Here in Switzerland, climate-gate is number one on Bing, number two on Yahoo, and still nowhere to be found in Google.
Every day still sees new reports and new articles about melting glaciers, dying polar bears, and the scientific consensus. As far as I have seen, the MSM here has yet to even mention the existence of another viewpoint.

Trevor Jones

In the Penn State release on their investigation into Michael Mann, they say:
“In November 2005, Representative Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) requested that the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) convene a panel of independent experts to investigate Professor Mann’s seminal 1999 reconstruction of the global surface temperature over the past 1,000 years. The resulting 2006 report of the NAS panel (http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11676) concluded that Mann’s results were sound and has been subsequently supported by an array of evidence that includes additional large-scale surface temperature reconstructions.

But this is what the report they quote actually says:
Based on the analyses presented in the original papers by Mann et al. and this newer supporting evidence, the committee finds it plausible that the Northern Hemisphere was warmer during the last few decades of the 20th century than during any comparable period over the preceding millennium. The substantial uncertainties currently present in the quantitative assessment of large-scale surface temperature changes prior to about A.D. 1600 lower our confidence in this conclusion compared to the high level of confidence we place in the Little Ice Age cooling and 20th century warming. Even less confidence can be placed in the original conclusions by Mann et al. (1999) that “the 1990s are likely the warmest decade, and 1998 the warmest year, in at least a millennium” because the uncertainties inherent in temperature reconstructions for individual years and decades are larger than those for longer time periods, and because not all of the available proxies record temperature information on such short timescales.”
Which is NOT vindication of Michael Mann – in fact quite the opposite. Here in Britain, we call this New Labour spin: state the precise opposite of the facts. and hope no-one notices!

Chris

what about the arktic sea ice extend?
it went down at the beginning of the copenhagen meeting.
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

A Wod

To me the AGW crowd use the 4 degrees centigrade until disaster like the book of Revelations uses the 4 horsemen of the Apocalypse. The devil is not 666 but Q8 (Kuwait) or big oil. The BBC ran the the 4 degrees from disaster in a programme last night. No wonder the public is concerned.

People are moving and standing up we just need to keep getting the word out there. One way is to start writing in blogs and forums unrelated to climate science, get people in.
Here In Australia we have been bombarding our politicians so they know in no uncertain terms that anyone who supports the lie of global warming will not be re-elected. Whilst the media tries to spin that most of the population do support it the reality is most do not.

Capn Jack Walker

The Kraken’s up Johnno and the almighty Kraken has more than enough legs for Goliath. Stuff David and lone rangers we have fighters. A mixed motley crew every color and every fooken gender.

Aargh.

They want to destroy growth…
http://www.infowars.com/enviroment-eugenics-quotes/
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
– Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme

werner

Unfortunately “truth” is a very weak support for now. It will take many years until all the predictions of the IPCC have failed. Don´t underestimate the public brainwash. People who learned for so many years all the Al Gore style fairy tales will continue to believe in global warming even if an iceberg grows in front of their doors.

Patrick Davis

“Michael (00:31:04) :
It’s not nice too fool with Mother Nature. I hope one of the major talking points of the Republican delegation to Copenhagen is thee Deep Solar Minimum we are in and the brutally cold last two winters we have.
Al Gore Destroyed By Mother Nature on CNN 12-09-09”
Local cold weather events are not climate (Apparently).

John Peter

Here is more from Goliath:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6951029.ece
“Top scientists rally to the defence of the Met Office ”
Excerpt “One scientist said that he felt under pressure to sign the circular or risk losing work. The Met Office admitted that many of the signatories did not work on climate change. ”
They claim they have 1700 UK scientists who have agreed to sign a statement defending the “professional integrity” of global warming research.
You must read this to understand the way they work.

Too add to what Micheal (1:15:38) said,the public have been dishonestly led to believe that a transition to a low carbon economy would be relativly painless.
If the AGW lobby were pressed on the real cost to the individual and society of their proposed solutions maybe the public would demand a lot more scrutiny of the science on which this massive gamble with peoples lives is based.

Ryan Stephenson

We are just soooo lucky these clever scientists re-discovered this 100 year old global warming theory in time to save the planet by massive investment in Al Gore’s cunning schemes. If they had re-discovered Arrhenius theories just a few years too late then it would be impossible to do anything right now and we would all be on our way to oblivion. Isn’t it wonderful the synchronicity of the whole thing? It’s like we discover we need to save the planet just in time to save the planet. I mean that’s like “wow!”
Shame these scientist weren’t quite so prescient with Thalidomide.

alleagra

One way to start winning the battle is to create a single well-publicized authoritative website that acts as a to provide rebuttals for the latest scare story from the AGW crowd. It needs to provide solid information designed for an intelligent layman with links to peer-reviewed papers and data sites (on topics such as:-
1. Is the Arctic really warming beyond natural variability?
2. What about the Antarctic? Is there evidence of warming there?
2. Is there really a danger of the oceans becoming acidified?
3. Are the glaciers really disappearing? How many glaciers are there, how many are melting?: Give me the complete picture on this!
4. The truth on sea levels? Are the Maldives really sinking?
5. What about the Cartaret Islands. Monbiot tells me they’re sinking as well.
5. AGW doesn’t work without positive feedback so what’s the evidence on that?
6. What’s all this about species extinction due to global warming?
7. How many thermometers are used to build a global temperature estimate?
8. Full coverage of the global temperature data sets.
9. We’re told sketics are funded by big oil? What are the facts about funding for skeptics (touch of humour here!) and AGW?
10. etc., etc.,
WUWT readers will mostly be able to arrive at informed opinions on these subjects but the ordinary intelligent Joe in the street has no idea where to turn to make a decision.
In spite of CRUgate, make no mistake, the AGW people winning the battle and only a focused strategy will prevent an aconomic catastrophe.

Patrick Davis

OT, all is not good in Copenhagen:
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/developing-nations-clash-over-climate-targets-20091210-km8t.html
I wonder, if Climategate had not come to pass, along with the Danish leaks, would “delegates” (Liberal use of the word “gate”) be more agreeable?
Appears the gate was left cOPENhagen and the horse has now leaked through.

RR

Someone needs to tell Goliath that new carbon taxes won’t be helping the economy much. Or perhaps we should just let Goliath fall?
Growing up in the Chicago area, I have fond memories of Flynn, Daley, Frink, and Coleman @ WLS. John was (is) the best.

Ryan Stephenson

“do not hound these scientist and do not insult them etc…they probably had a “good” ulterior motive (the Earth and its future which is very laudable)”
You know, I think that is the whole problem. Too many people in climatology who, at their heart, want to save us all. They want to do good things. If you are in climatology then the only way to do something really good is to save us from something really bad happening in the climate – either preparing us for the next ice-age as they did during the seventies, or dissuading us from cooking ourselves in CO2 as they are doing now.
It’s not a conspiracy – its just a large group of individuals with the same “I must stand up and use my advanced intellect to save earth!” mentality. They are looking for trouble and then looking to resolve that trouble. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Of course we now have another group of scientists building up that want to save us from the potential damage caused by the AGW Evangelists.

alleagra:
“One way to start winning the battle is to create a single well-publicized authoritative website that acts as a to provide rebuttals for the latest scare story from the AGW crowd.”
You’re reading it. And for the more technically inclined, there’s ClimateAudit.

peter_ga

Paranoia perhaps.
The institution of science acts so that groups of experts study a discipline, review each-others work, and generally provide disinterested advice to government and industry.
Obviously it can be a point of pride to such free thinkers to discover the most impelling need for general change, and to fearlessly promote the necessary changes.
Then the situation could arise where a group of politically, rather than scientifically, motivated experts take over a branch of science, sideline those with neutral or opposite motivations, and proceed to promote their own political direction rather then provide neutral advice.
If climate science has reached this latter point, then all is not lost. Simple rules — such as ensuring that all data supporting positions on which tax money is spent is available for analysis to all, and that government money should only be spent on predictions by models that are audited and verifiable rather than merely the opinion of an esteemed scientist, — would ensure that pointless courses of action more expensive than major wars are not embarked upon.

jaypan

German’s public TV had another horror debate last night. You can’t believe it.
A former kind of investigative format had nothing better to do than to have a former and the curent environmental minister sitting there, an actor who is deeply concerned about polar bears with heart-touching pictures how one of them swims out into the open sea, never returned … well, not not for the 45 minutes they kept watching.
Did you think that anybody was only mentioning that there are real problems next door, as children dying that very moment caused by hunger, Aids etc.?
Not at all. A ghost debate of a bunch of bored wealthy people.
Means beside science, MSM are completely losing ground when normal people get it how they have been grossly misinformed.
I am confident that some hobby environmentalists will be turned off once they have to pay the bills and find out who gets their hard-earned money.
So beside unhiding the data, extremely important, let’s have a spot on the money distribution system behind.
Great stuff here … thank y’all.

Michael Larkin

Somewhat OT: Never thought I’d agree with Nick Griffin, the British extreme right-wing BNP leader, but fair does, he’s stuck it to Copenhagen – see video at:
http://www.opednews.com/populum/diarypage.php?did=15235

Richard111

Good post to point out that this is nothing to do with science and very little to do with politics. This is a plain and simple grab for power.
How does it effect me and my family? IF it gets warmer as predicted we will survive the winters and not need coal, gas or electricity. The new powers imposed on my government mandates such swinging cost increases on these utilities that we will not be able to afford to use them. We will be reduced to a wood stove for heat and cooking.
IF it gets cold we face almost certain death.
You all know where this scenario will lead. Our polititions should pay heed.

Richard

Al Gore – “Climate Change” (aka Global Warming) is real. you just have to open your window. He does and a blizzard blows in – how ironic.

“goretith”

gianmarko

there is a seventh leg and is a very powerful one. international socialism, with the excuse of environment can:
– impose an unelected global government
– take control of energy resources
– impose socialist, high and highly progressive taxes based of “carbon”
– redistribute wealth taking money from those who produce much “carbon” and give it to those who produce less.
the reason why the MSM is riding the AGW wave is not just because it nicely fills the front pages, it is because MSM is an arm of international socialism. same goes for the UN, which is of course after a massive power grab, but socialism is an important component of the imperialist policy of the UN.
also, a large part of “intellectuals” and scientists are socialists themselves, as result of decades of socialist indoctrination and infiltration in the education and scientific infrastructure.

Stefan

Perhaps one thing in favour of “David” these days is that people are generally less interested in “authorities”. It took maybe 30 years for the greenies to get into positions of authority, but in the meantime the world has moved on and people are more interested in flexibility, adaption, reorganisation, and change. The new generation grows up having experienced large changes all their lives. You can dream up an innovative TV show but a season later people are already bored with it.
Change is the new reality. Remember nuclear war? Remember feeding Africa? Remember Flu pandemics? Remember terrorism? Remember global warming? (heck, even that changed its name.)
Dare I say that change is the enemy of climate change.
Greenies have tried to get round this by claiming that science is a slow steady progression and accumulation of knowledge. It seems tipping points and chaos are OK in Nature but not in academic journals! Our models are getting better all the time!
The silent smelly shadow of “optimum population”, “limits to growth”, and “conservation”, is this notion that “sustainability” means “status quo”.
Well the staus quo is that the West has the wealth and the Third World is underdeveloped, tribal, famished. Funny how greenies are not campaigning for the people of small islands to be given citizenship in USA, UK, Germany, and France. Their boat is sinking? Quick, get those people out of there! Err… no, no, it is no the boat that is sinking, it is the ocean that is rising… we must think carefully how to stop the ocean rising, for that is obviously their best strategy.
Looking at the UN publications about climate change, they have glossy photos of radiant peasants, smiling as they do their work in the lush green fields of mud. This is supposed to be the ideal of sustainability? Being a smiling peasant? A noble savage?
Perhaps this idea too will change when people get bored with it. I’ll wager the peasants themselves are already bored with it.

FROM ‘TIMES’
More than 1,700 scientists have agreed to sign a statement defending the “professional integrity” of global warming research.
ONE SCIENTIST SAID THAT HE FELT UNDER PRESSURE TO SIGN THE CIRCULAR OR RISK LOSING WORK.
THE MET OFFICE ADMITTED THAT MANY OF THE SIGNATORIES DID NOT WORK ON CLIMATE CHANGE.
They were responding to a round-robin request from the Met Office, which has spent four days collecting signatures. The initiative is a sign of how worried it is that e-mails stolen from the University of East Anglia are fuelling scepticism about man-made global warming at a critical moment in talks on carbon emissions.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6951029.ece
Science by consensus?
Very odd.