In Searching For A New Enemy To Unite Us, We Came Up With The Threat Of Global Warming
In Searching For A New Enemy To
Unite Us, We Came Up With The Threat Of Global Warming: by: Climatism: Jan 24, 2017
https://climatism.wordpress.com/2014/01/24/in-searching-for-a-new-enemy-to-unite-us-we-came-up-with-the-threat-of-global-warming/
“The common
enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we
came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water
shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused
by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes
and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is
humanity itself.“
– Club of Rome, premier environmental think-tank, consultants to the United Nations
– Club of Rome, premier environmental think-tank, consultants to the United Nations
“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 (UNEP)
Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
– Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)
Anthropogenic
“climate change”, and the control of carbon dioxide (energy) has deep roots
in a radical, yet gravely misguided campaign to reduce the world’s
population.
A misanthropic
agenda engineered by the environmental movement in the mid 1970’s, who
realized that doing something about “global warming” would play to quite a
number of its social agendas.
The goal was
advanced, most notably, by The Club of
Rome (Consultants to the UN) – a group of mainly European
scientists and academics, who used computer modelling to warn that the world would run out of
finite resources if population growth were left unchecked.
The Club of
Rome’s 1972 environmental best-seller “The Limits To Growth”, examined
five variables in the original model: world population, industrialization, pollution,
food production and resource depletion. Not surprisingly, the study
predicted a dire future for mankind unless we ‘act now’ :
Around the same
time, influential anthropologist and president of the American Medical
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Margaret Mead, gathered
together like-minded anti-population hoaxsters at her 1975, North Carolina
conference, “The Atmosphere: Endangered and Endangering”. Mead’s star
recruits were climate scare artist Stephen Schneider, population-freak George
Woodwell and former AAAS head, John Holdren (currently President Barack
Obama’s Science and Technology Czar). All three of them disciples
of Malthusian catastrophist Paul Ehrlich, author of the “The Population
Bomb”.
The conference
concluded that human-produced carbon dioxide would fry the planet, melt
the ice caps, and destroy human life. The idea being to sow enough fear of
man-made climate change to force global cutbacks in industrial activity and
halt Third World development.
With man’s
industrial fortunes fingered as the driver of eco-destructive population
growth, it was inevitable that ‘Science’ would be called upon to act as judge,
jury and executioner. However, as it turned out, the science of global
warming was butchered, tortured and corrupted to prove a hypothesis, rather
than to perform objective science.
James
Delingpole of The Telegraph elaborates : The
reason I have become so obsessed with “global warming” in the last few years is
not because I’m particularly interested in the “how many drowning polar bears
can dance on the head of a pin” non-argument which hysterical sites like
RealClimate and bloggers like Joe Romm are striving so desperately to keep on a
life support machine. It’s because unlike some I’ve read widely enough to see
the bigger picture. One thing I’ve learned in this wide reading is how obsessed
so many of the key thinkers in the green movement are with the notion of
“overpopulation.” As one of their favourite think tanks, the Club of Rome, puts
it: “Earth has a cancer and the cancer is man.” This belief explains, inter
alia, why the “science” behind AGW is so dodgy: because the science didn’t come
first. What came first was the notion that mankind was a problem and was doing
harm to the planet. The “science” was then simply tortured until it fitted in
with this notion.
Earth does not have a cancer; the cancer is not man – Telegraph Blogs
- Dr Tim Ball details how the science of climate change came to be “tortured
until it fitted in with [the] notion”: Almost
every aspect of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) work is
manipulated, selected, and controlled, to prove human CO2 is causing global
warming. The objective was to prove the hypothesis, not to perform objective
science.
The goal was
established by the Club of Rome whose member, Maurice Strong transmitted and
translated it into world government policy through the United Nations.
“The common
enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we
came up with the idea that .. the threat of global warming.. would fit the bill….
the real enemy, then, is humanity itself….we believe humanity requires a common
motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It
does not matter if this common enemy is a real one or….one invented for the
purpose.” — Club of Rome
He was assisted
by politicians like Al Gore and Tim Wirth. In 1993 the latter did not hide the
naked political objective. “We’ve got to ride this global warming
issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be
doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.“ Timothy Wirth, President
of the UN Foundation
They were aided
by national weather agencies and bureaucratic scientists with similar political
persuasions appointed to the IPCC. They claimed their goal was achieved in the
2007 IPCC Report which concluded,
“Another unusual aspect of recent climate change is its cause: past climate
changes were natural in origin, whereas most of the warming of the past 50
years is attributable to human activities.”
All the CO2
numbers used by the IPCC are very poor estimates and designed to underline the
human impact. They are meaningless figures from the total volumes to the annual
flows and the human inputs as depicted in the IPCC carbon cycle. IPCC wanted to
prove human CO2 was causing global warming as part of their belief that
industrialized populations would exhaust all resources and had to be shut down.
Their only objective was to show human production was steadily, inexorably
increasing. Their calculations predetermine that, because human CO2 production
is directly linked to population increase. A population increase guarantees a
CO2 increase. It is another of their circular arguments that has no basis in
science.
So is the
planet overpopulated? Tim Ball has done the numbers and concludes, “The
world is not overpopulated. That fallacy is perpetuated in all environmental
research, policy and planning including global warming and latterly climate
change.”
Global Warming
was just one issue The Club of Rome (TCOR) targeted in its campaign to reduce
world population. In 1993 the Club’s co-founder, Alexander
King with Bertrand Schneider wrote The First Global
Revolution stating,
“The common
enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages,
famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human
intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they
can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”
They believe
all these problems are created by humans but exacerbated by a growing
population using technology. “Changed attitudes and behavior” basically
means what it has meant from the time Thomas Malthus raised the idea the world
was overpopulated. He believed charity and laws to help the poor were a major
cause of the problem and it was necessary to reduce population through rules
and regulations. TCOR ideas all ended up in the political activities of the Rio
1992 conference organized by Maurice Strong (a TCOR member) under the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).
The assumptions
and objectives became the main structure of Agenda 21, the master plan for the
21st Century. The global warming threat was confronted at Rio through the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and creation of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It was structured to
predetermine scientific proof that human CO2 was one contribution of the “common
enemy”.
The IPCC was
very successful. Despite all the revelations about corrupted science and their
failed predictions (projections) CO2 remains central to global attention about
energy and environment. For example, several websites, many provided by government,
list CO2 output levels for new and used cars. Automobile companies work to
build cars with lower CO2 output and, if for no other reason than to appear
green, use it in advertising. The automotive industry, which has the scientists
to know better, collectively surrenders to eco-bullying about CO2. They are not
alone. They get away with it because they pass on the unnecessary costs to a
befuddled “trying to do the right thing” population.
—————
TCOR and later UNEP’s Agenda 21 adopted and expanded the Malthusian idea
of overpopulation to all resources making it the central tenet of all their
politics and policies. The IPCC was set up to assign the blame of global
warming and latterly climate change on human produced CO2 from an
industrialized expanding population. They both developed from false assumptions,
used manipulated data and science, which they combined into computer models
whose projections were, not surprisingly, wrong. The result is the fallacy of
global warming due to human CO2 is a subset built on the fallacy of
overpopulation.
See full article here : Overpopulation: The Fallacy Behind The Fallacy Of Global Warming | Watts
Up With That?
•••
UPDATE
Temperatures
have not risen for at least 15 years. The pause now threatens to expose how
much scientists sold their souls for cash and fame, warns emeritus professor
Garth Paltridge, author of The
Climate Caper: Facts and Fallacies of Global Warming and a
former chief research scientist with the CSIRO Division of Atmospheric
Research:
…there has been
no significant warming over the most recent fifteen or so years…
In the light of
all this, we have at
least to consider the possibility that the scientific establishment behind the
global warming issue has been drawn into the trap of seriously overstating the
climate problem … in its effort to promote the cause. It is a
particularly nasty trap in the context of science, because it risks destroying,
perhaps for centuries to come, the unique and hard-won reputation for honesty
which is the basis of society’s respect for scientific endeavour…
The trap was
set in the late 1970s or thereabouts when the environmental movement first
realised that doing something about global warming would play to quite a number
of its social agendas. At much the same time, it became accepted wisdom around
the corridors of power that government-funded scientists (that is, most
scientists) should be required to obtain a goodly fraction of their funds and
salaries from external sources—external anyway to their own particular
organisation.
The scientists
in environmental research laboratories, since they are not normally linked to
any particular private industry, were forced to seek funds from other
government departments. In turn this forced them to accept the need for
advocacy and for the manipulation of public opinion. For that sort of activity,
an arm’s-length association with the environmental movement would be a union
made in heaven…
The trap was
partially sprung in climate research when a number of the relevant scientists
began to enjoy the advocacy business. The enjoyment was based on a considerable
increase in funding and employment opportunity. The increase was not so much on
the hard-science side of things but rather in the emerging fringe institutes
and organisations devoted, at least in part, to selling the message of climatic
doom. A new and rewarding research lifestyle emerged which involved the giving
of advice to all types and levels of government, the broadcasting of
unchallengeable opinion to the general public, and easy justification for
attendance at international conferences—this last in some luxury by normal
scientific experience, and at a frequency previously unheard of…
The trap was
fully sprung when many of the world’s major national academies of science (such
as the … Australian Academy of Science) persuaded themselves to issue
reports giving support to the conclusions of the IPCC. The reports were touted
as national assessments that were supposedly independent of the IPCC and of
each other, but of necessity were compiled with the assistance of, and in some
cases at the behest of, many of the scientists involved in the IPCC
international machinations. In effect, the academies, which are the most
prestigious of the institutions of science, formally nailed their colours to
the mast of the politically correct.
Since that time
three or four years ago, there has been no comfortable way for the scientific
community to raise the spectre of serious uncertainty about the forecasts of
climatic disaster… It can no longer escape prime responsibility if it should
turn out in the end that doing something in the name of mitigation of global
warming is the costliest scientific mistake ever visited on humanity.
This is why
scientific organizations have – tragically – become almost the last places to
hear the truth about the global warming pause. Too many reputations are now
at stake.
•••
UPDATE
FINAL WORD :
The ultimate prize to the eco-activists and their big government benefactors is the control of carbon, which would touch every aspect of our daily lives. Consequently, greenhouse gases and global climate change are of paramount importance to the eco-activist agenda. While much has been written about global climate change over many years, the basic aspects of the issue haven’t changed; we are asked to forget things we once knew and ignore the simplest hypothesis that the earth’s climate is ever changing.
From the
Thursday Files:
If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself.
- Attributed to Goebbels in Publications Relating to Various Aspects of Communism (1946), by United States Congress, House Committee on Un-American Activities, Issues 1-15, p. 19, no reliable source has been located, and this is probably simply a further variation of the Big Lie idea. See Wikipedia
Comments
Post a Comment