Common Nonsense

It is foolish to contend, as many do, that the earth’s climate is not changing. And it is equally uninformed to hold that the earth is not warming. It is an accepted scientific fact that twenty thousand years in the past, most of the Northern hemisphere was under thousands of feet of ice. Now, the Arctic Ocean is mostly ice free for much of the year and glaciers are retreating all over the world. That’s climate change and global warming by any interpretation. It is equally true that the Carbon Dioxide content of the atmosphere has increased by about thirty percent over the past fifty years. So, what does our future hold?

A good guess would be that the climate will continue to get a bit warmer until something changes, at which time, if history repeats itself, it will begin to get colder, and colder until the Northern Hemisphere is covered with ice once again. We shouldn’t panic though, in the past it has taken, on average, forty thousand years for the climate to reach its coldest and another forty thousand years for it to warm up to the point where the ice is melting and it approaches today’s more comfortable temperatures. Then, there will be about twenty thousand years of moderate weather until it starts to get cold again. Anyway, that has been the scenario in the past. This cycle has repeated about every one-hundred thousand years for at least two million years.

You might well ask ‘why does this happen’? Is it because, at the bottom of the cold cycle, the atmosphere’s Carbon Dioxide suddenly increases by thirty percent for some unknown reason, heating the planet up? If so, why does it reverse its self and get cold again? Does something reduce the Carbon Dioxide by thirty percent?

Changing the world’s climate from pleasant to frozen and back again would seem a heavy load for Carbon Dioxide to carry, especially since it is a trace gas, actually comparatively insignificant in the overall make up of the atmosphere, being three or four hundred parts per million. Put another way, if you isolated ten thousand molecules of atmosphere, only 3 or 4 of those molecules would be Carbon Dioxide. An unscientific common sense of proportion suggests that there must be something else involved besides Carbon Dioxide.

If variations in CO2 is not the major cause of climate change, what is? The answer to that is: …. no one knows the answer to that;. Then why are governments spending billions of dollars in the attempt to convince the public that CO2 must be reduced if something else is going to change the climate anyway? Perhaps people in high places have agendas that have nothing to do with climate change. Here are a few quotations to consider as indications of possible motivations:

Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environmental Minister: “No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits … climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world”.

Quote by Timothy Wirth, U.S./UN functionary, former elected Democrat Senator: “We’ve 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.”

Quote by Richard Benedik, former U.S./UN bureaucrat: “A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect.”

Quote from the UN’s Own “Agenda 21”: “Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced, a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals, and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.”

Quote by Maurice Strong, a billionaire elitist, primary power behind UN throne: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

So, it looks like some are willing to lie and misrepresent climate change and the role of Carbon Dioxide for environmental purposes, and others are interested in reorganizing society and world economics, and it looks like the United Nations Organization is deeply involved in the mendacity. I am sorely offended that so-called political and environmental leaders regard the public mentality with such contempt. Keep in mind that these are not duly elected officials. They are instead extreme environmentalists, and world government advocates involved with an organization (The United Nations) that is controlled by Third World Governments, Socialists, Communists, Theocracies, and Dictatorships.

It is especially vexing and difficult to understand why much of the Media Community has either been taken in by the mendacity or elected to join in the ideology. If the Media is endorsing the extreme environmentalism represented by the Global Warming/Climate Change movement, it is a deeply troubling breach of the public trust.

Quote by Ross Gelbsan, former journalist: “Not only do journalists not have a responsibility to report what skeptical scientists have to say about global warming. They have a responsibility not to report what these scientists say.”

Quote by Charles Alexander, Time Magazine science editor: “I would freely admit that on [global warming] we have crossed the boundary from news reporting to advocacy.”

The extreme environmentalist movement has taken on much of the irrationality of a fundamentalist religion, disregarding reality and grasping at improbable and unreasonable fantasies. The Earth is not in the dire straits that they imagine. In most ways, the environment is better than it has been for as long as we know our history. America and Western Europe have performed minor miracles cleaning up air and water pollution. Cities in America are cleaner than they have ever been. Endangered species have been protected and over protected, and the human species is safer, healthier and vastly more prosperous than ever. Forest have been protected; it is claimed that there are more trees in America now than in Columbus’s time. Wetlands, grasslands, mountains, rivers, wilderness’s, scenic vistas and much more are all protected from civilization. While it is true that the West is far ahead of most of the world, environmentally speaking, that hardly seems a reason to destroy the industrial societies that made these social and environmental improvement possible.

A few more telling quotations to consider:

Quote by Club of Rome: “A keen and anxious awareness is evolving to suggest that fundamental changes will have to take place in the world order and its power structures, in the distribution of wealth and income.”

Quote by Mikhail Gorbachev, communist and former leader of U.S.S.R.: “The emerging ‘environmentalization’ of our civilization and the need for vigorous action in the interest of the entire global community will inevitably have multiple political consequences. Perhaps the most important of them will be a gradual change in the status of the United Nations. Inevitably, it must assume some aspects of a world government.”

Quote by Dixy Lee Ray, former governor of State of Washington, U.S.: “The objective, clearly enunciated by the leaders of UNCED, is to bring about a change in the present system of independent nations. The future is to be World Government with central planning by the United Nations. Fear of environmental crises – whether real or not – is expected to lead to compliance.”

Quote by UN’s Commission on Global Governance: “Regionalism must precede globalism. We foresee a seamless system of governance from local communities, individual states, regional unions and up through to the United Nations itself.”

Quote by Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth: “A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources.

Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: “The goal now is a socialist, redistributionist society, which is nature’s proper steward and society’s only hope.”

Quote by Club of Rome: “The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man.”

Quote by Christopher Manes, a writer for Earth First! journal: “The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing.”

Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: “My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with its full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”

Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: “Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”

Quote by Susan Blakemore, a UK Guardian science journalist: “For the planet’s sake, I hope we have bird flu or some other thing that will reduce the population, because otherwise we’re doomed.”

Quote by Eric Pianka, professor at University of Texas: Good terrorists would be taking [Ebola Roaston and Ebola Zaire] so that they had microbes they could let loose on the Earth that would kill 90 percent of people.

As you may have noticed, there are powerful factions in the United Nations that are hungry for One World Government, to be centered in The United Nations, of course. These factions have spent many billions of dollars instilling the notion that industrial and commercial use of fossil fuels is destroying the earth’s climate through increasing Carbon Dioxide, with the goal of gaining control of the world’s energy supplies, eventually gaining control of world government. In their quest, they have prostituted or corrupted hundreds or thousands of scientists, dozens of formally respected scientific publications and other news media, vast numbers of environmentalists, and created or attracted an army of misanthropes. The above quotations suggest the kind of world we will be living in if The United Nations is successful in establishing its dream of One World Government.