Climate change: Crisis or Con-job?

Posted: January 1, 2016 by tallbloke in Big Green, climate, Critique, government, Robber Barons
Tags:

governance

James Delingpole pulls no punches in a new article at Breitbart, part of which I’m reproducing below. Many  in the climate debate try to ‘stick to the science’, to avoid accusations of political bias or motivation. James doesn’t do science, though many think he’s an astute observer of it, and an entertaining, if occasionally over-the-top reporter on the state of the debate.

Global Warming Is Not the Problem. Global Governance Is.
James Delingpole 31:12:2015

To anyone with even half an eye on world events, it’s perfectly obvious that there are many more desperate problems – fundamentalist Islam, say – than the imaginary problem of man-made global warming. So why do our political class persist in pretending to us, in defiance of all the evidence, that “climate change” represents the only global issue serious enough to justify the convening of a conference like the recent one in Paris attended by 40,000 delegates and the leaders of over 150 nation states?

The answer to this is too complicated for one sentence – for the full story read this book – but the consequences can be summed up in two words: global governance.

This was always the masterplan of the sinister Marxist billionaire who invented the global warming scare – Maurice Strong. (You can read more about him here andhere). Environmentalism, he understood early on, was the perfect excuse to override the democratic process: after all, when the future of the world is at stake, it only makes sense to ignore the little people and concentrate power in the hands of enlightened technocrats like Maurice Strong and his eco-fascistic control freak pals….

Here’s how he once put it:

The concept of national sovereignty has been an immutable, indeed sacred, principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental co-operation. It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation states, however powerful. The global community must be assured of global environmental security.

There’s the plan: One World Government in the name of “global environmental security”. And it’s happening across the world right now. Never mind the facts that COP21 was a bit of a flop and that the Pope’s encyclical on the environment was widely ridiculed. The great global governance caravan is trundling on regardless: it’s now a business, remember, worth $1.5 trillion a year. There are an awful lot of snouts stuck in that trough and they’re not about to leave it any time soon.

Yet it’s something that is almost never mentioned in the mainstream media. How many times have you read or heard, anywhere in the MSM, about Agenda 21? It has been the guiding force behind most environmental policy across the world since it was born at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit (established by Maurice Strong) which in turn spawned all the big eco conferences we’ve had since, such as the recent COP21 in Paris. But no one ever talks about it. It just sounds like too much of a crazy right-wing conspiracy theory.

And that, I’m afraid, is also part of The Plan. Anyone who dares question the “consensus” on global warming – see Media Matters above – is dismissed as a fruitcake: journalists are marginalised, scientists lose tenure or funding, politicians are denied preferment, businesses lose contracts. Speaking out against climate change is the modern equivalent of being Galileo before the Inquisition…

So that’s going to be one of my jobs in 2016 – telling it like it is, regardless of what the bastards say.

I consider it both a pleasure and privilege.

Comments
  1. oldbrew says:

    If people saw what the actual IPCC reports really said, instead of hearing politicised summaries of the already-doctored IPCC summaries, they would probably be surprised by the frequent use of words like ‘uncertainty’ and ‘not well understood’.

    But all that gets suppressed by the bigwigs who claim ‘the debate is over’. What they mean is ‘we can’t allow any real debate in public, or all the weaknesses of the supposed settled science will be exposed.’

  2. Jaime Jessop says:

    If you attack them on the science, they get all huffity and run away or resort to blindly quoting consensus authority. If you question the ludicrous global warming ‘cure’, you’re a paid shill of the fossil fuel industry. If you point to the fact that there may well be an overarching motivation for the whole sustainable development/global warming boondoggle, referencing documents in the public domain, you’re a complete whacko/conspiracy theorist. There really is no silver bullet I’ve found that will see off these pesky warmists, but hitting them over the head with hard scientific facts and studies I personally find is more fun and rewarding – though I doubt any more effective than other methods!

  3. p.g.sharrow says:

    With the collapse of the Soviet Union the headquarters of the Communist party was moved from Moscow to San Francisco and it’s former head became the head of a Watermelon NGO that funds others that have been driving this Ecoloon frenzy. A manager of “Eastern European” money has been laundering former USSR wealth to fund this drive to establish their One World Government.
    Just 1 of several groups that lust over winning the Game of Thrones and ruling us all.
    Their greatest problem is the World Wide Web that allows us to communicate and bring light to shine into the darkest corners of their machinations. From time to time 1 or more conspire together against the people to benefit themselves at our expense. At other times they use us as pawns against those that are gaining power in this game. Ecoloons are just useful Idiots that are the fronts for the real power players…pg

  4. Bryan says:

    As people scramble about looking for alternatives to fossil fuelled thermal power plants more desperate choices are made.choices are made.

    http://www.dw.com/en/germans-worried-about-relaunch-of-old-belgian-nuclear-reactors/a-18921100http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160103/1032618121/belgian-nuclear-plant-reactor-shuts-down.html

    Then less than a week later……..

    The reactor that was re-booted last week has had to shut down again because of safety issues.
    All this to avoid burning fossil fuels the only safe practical cheap reliable power source.

  5. PeterMG says:

    We will continue to flounder until a real political leader emerges, not one who pledges to lead us from within the same tired old “not fit for purpose” dictatorship we currently have, but one who recognises that we need a new more inclusive system where people get back the power they think they have with the false notion we live in a democracy.

    The new system will need to be one where political accountability is built in and Politian’s can not spend a penny without our explicit permission. Also personal accountability will need to be part of this system so that if too many people vote for high spending then they bear the cost. For the key to stopping memes such as AGW is to cut off the money. In this way we will remove extremes.

    Remember its not just climate change where they waste money as if its water, you just need to look at the fiasco that is Rail Track and the GWR electrification. Its on track to be 4 times over budget, on a project that was never needed; all we needed was new trains and not all the electrification nonsense that can only be ever half done anyway.

  6. oldbrew says:

    ‘Parasites and tinpot tyrants’ – mild-mannered Delingpole goes for the jugular😉
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/04/1001-reasons-why-global-warming-is-so-totally-over-in-2016/

  7. oldmanK says:

    oldbrew, your link in the above post highlites 10 main reasons on the matter of global warming. All ten can be interpreted differently, by both sides of this hot divide/debate or argument, and both side can be very wrong.

    Global warming is not all a bad thing, depends on places and circumstances. What if the Sahara would return to being a green and fertile continent as it was 5000 yrs ago (no famines in Africa; and much more to look forward to). But it would be different to some others (though it will suit the polar bear nicely) if the arctic circle would come down from latitude 67 something to 55 or so.

    I read the Maldives might sink under some metres of water. Who really knows; they might end up as a mountain top. I see many raised eyebrows, but remember truth or here, reality, is always stranger than fiction. The name of the game is ‘evidence’.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s