Planet Of The Greens 

Posted: May 18, 2020 by oldbrew in greenblob, opinion
Tags:


Standard green response to criticism: ‘Shoot the messenger!’ They like to travel around the world telling people it’s a bad idea to travel around so much, due to some flaky climate theory.
– – –
Attempts by eco-activists to censor and shut down Planet of the Humans reveals the green movement’s authoritarian nature that turns most aggressively on its own apostates.

Jeff Gibbs’ and Michael Moore’s new film, Planet of the Humans has been watched more than eight million times, says The GWPF.

It has cast doubt on the green movement’s claims to be concerned with the environment and questions the motivations and integrity of its leaders and backers.

In reply, environmental activists have attacked Moore and Gibbs, and called for their film to be censored.

What this reveals is that the green movement is incapable of responding to criticism and that it turns most aggressively on its apostates.

Gibbs and Moore’s film has been attacked for supporting the interests of fossil fuel companies. But the film itself exposes deep links between even the most vilified energy producers and the green agenda.

Other critics have accused the pair of ‘ecofascism’ for their allusions to population control, yet Planet of the Humans says nothing that celebrated green film makers such as David Attenborough have not said.

Neither the film revelations nor the green movement’s hostility should surprise anyone. A deep contradiction lies at the heart of the green agenda, the exposure of which has triggered campaigners whose interests depend on it.

Since its first days, it has been wealthy industrialists such as oil tycoon Maurice Strong who have used their power to establish environmental concerns on the global political agenda. And it is wealthy philanthropists, whose fortunes were made from fossil fuels, such as the Rockefeller family, who have backed green organisations.

Despite the failure of greens’ dire prognostications, the green movement’s message of despair and its demands for draconian and authoritarian policies have changed little over the last half century.

Continued here.

Comments
  1. cognog2 says:

    The aggressive suppression of criticism has been endemic in the green movement for many years. It is one of the main indicators of the paucity of their messages. It is surprising to me how tolerant the public is of the examples of this aggression and how it seems to get away with it at the political level.

  2. oldbrew says:

    Some people can’t work out that industrialising the countryside and burning biomass or biofuel isn’t going to be a cure for the supposed excesses of industrialisation.

  3. Paul Vaughan says:

    Before the iron curtain fell the environmental movement was a beautiful thing promoting parks and outdoor recreation.

    I was a hard core environmentalist in those days — one of happy and proud ones spending 40-50 hours per week hiking, cycling country roads, and flat-water kayaking.

    My understanding of the aggregate structure of climate is strictly forbidden in today’s “green” movement, which is anything but green.

    Today there is nowhere someone like me would fit in any existing environmental movement, even though I consider myself possibly the last true environmentalist living on Earth.

    I’m absolutely silent about climate in public. People are too fragile to hear what I know and I am compassionate.

    I began a strict boycott of 2 prominent American climate blogs after generously allowing a year for ERSST vandalism to be retracted. Those blogs had been crossing red lines for years. That was the final straw and I’ve never looked back.

    Today I began an 80% boycott of MSM. I’ll develop and evolve guidelines for what types of headlines I won’t click because they appear as Satanic bait.

    News that reports just facts with no advocacy does not exist. If it did it would come under vicious attack from all sides immediately. The kind of good people that would run a good news source don’t want that kind of trouble, so it can’t exist.

    We already live in a world where department heads can’t survive if they do not dovetail with the Chinese deep state propaganda machine. China (the deep state — not to be confused with the beautiful Chinese people) now has full control over western “elite”.

    Those below the median are now locked in predatory eyes.
    Climate is completely irrelevant. The context has become primal and savage.
    Everything has been reduced to raw survival by whatever means.

    Like you I have a 2 year supply of messages that is now completely irrelevant. In a moment of divine transcendence I’ll probably hit delete and go silent.

  4. oldbrew says:

    The EU can’t impose its climate fantasies everywhere…

    Ambitious EU climate efforts could increase emissions in the rest of the world
    May 18, 2020 , University of Copenhagen

    https://phys.org/news/2020-05-ambitious-eu-climate-efforts-emissions.html

  5. Bloke down the pub says:

    How long before the Green movement seeks official recognition as a religion?

  6. oldbrew says:

    New Paper: Decarbonisation Plans Fail Engineering Reality Check
    Date: 19/05/20 Press Release, Global Warming Policy Foundation

    Net Zero target is ‘madness’

    https://www.thegwpf.com/new-paper-decarbonisation-plans-fail-engineering-reality-check/

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s