Repost.Us

Popular Posts

Powered By Blogger

Translate

Wednesday 26 June 2013

How Climate Alarmism Advances International Political Agendas






The term “climate” is typically associated with annual world-wide average temperature records measured over at least three decades. Yet global warming observed less than two decades after many scientists had predicted a global cooling crisis prompted the United Nations to organize an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and to convene a continuing series of international conferences purportedly aimed at preventing an impending catastrophe. Virtually from the beginning, they had already attributed the “crisis” to human fossil-fuel carbon emissions.

A remark from Maurice Strong, who organized the first U.N. Earth Climate Summit (1992) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil revealed the real goal: “We may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrialized civilization to collapse. Isn’t it our responsibility to bring this about?”

Former U.S. Senator Timothy Wirth (D-CO), then representing the Clinton-Gore administration as U.S undersecretary of state for global issues, addressing the same Rio Climate Summit audience, agreed: “We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” (Wirth now heads the U.N. Foundation which lobbies for hundreds of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to help underdeveloped countries fight climate change.)







Incidentally, Timothy Wirth had previously been a close Senate colleague of then- Senator Al Gore and had been instrumental in helping him to set up his 1988 Senate Science, Technology and Space Committee hearings which got global warming frenzy off to a blazing start during an unusually hot East Coast summer that year. In an interview with PBS Frontline Worth recounted: “We called the Weather Bureau and found out what was historically the hottest day of the summerso we scheduled the hearing that day, and bingo, it was the hottest day on record in Washington, or close to itwe went in the night before and opened all the windows so that the air conditioning wasn’t working inside the room.”

Consider that while climate is generally defined in at least three decade-long periods, then-Senator Al Gore’s carefully staged steamy climate crisis spectacle occurred only slightly more than one decade after many scientists had predicted an opposite crisis. One of them was the late Stanford University Professor Stephen Schneider who authored The Genesis Strategy, a 1976 book warning that global cooling risks posed a threat to humanity. Schneider later changed that view 180 degrees, serving as a lead author for important parts of three sequential IPCC reports.

Also speaking at the Rio conference, Deputy Assistant of State Richard Benedick, who then headed the policy divisions of the U.S. State Department said: “A global warming treaty [Kyoto] must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the [enhanced] greenhouse effect.”

In 1988, former Canadian Minister of the Environment, told editors and reporters of the Calgary Herald: “No matter if the science of global warming is all phonyclimate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”

In 1996, former Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev emphasized the importance of using climate alarmism to advance socialist Marxist objectives: “The threat of environmental crisis will be the international disaster key to unlock the New World Order.”

Speaking at the 2000 U.N. Conference on Climate Change in the Hague, former President Jacques Chirac of France explained why the IPCC’s climate initiative supported a key Western European Kyoto Protocol objective: “For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance, one that should find a place within the World Environmental Organization which France and the European Union would like to see established.”



global climate change – and, more importantly, potential directions of public policies and organizational strategies. The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), representing the work of about 2,000 individuals, contends that recent global warming is a direct result of human activities for which we should mitigate the effects. In contrast, ‘climatesceptics’ have argued that the climate is changing due to natural causes and have countered with their own experts’ reports.

While there is a broad consensus among climate scientists, scepticism regarding anthropogenic climate change remains. The proportion of papers found in the ISI Web of Science database that explicitly endorsed anthropogenic climate change has fallen from 75% (for the period between 1993 and 2003) as of 2004 to 45% from 2004 to 2008, while outright disagreement had risen from 0% to 6%. A recent peer-reviewed survey of 1077 geoscientists and engineers finds that "only 36% of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis," according to James Taylor, writing at Forbes.com. 




Don't shoot the messengers
C101





0 comments: