(UPDATED: OCT 2018) The politics of climate change hit me square in the face last week. BOOM! Right between the eyes. And I really wasn’t expecting it.
I know that whenever I write about climate change it makes people uncomfortable and defensive. It’s a given. All those good people truly believing they are doing the right thing by eagerly repeating the global warming and sustainable development mantras. Truly good people. All without ever doing any actual reading of any literature themselves. Good, but sadly misled. I think the technical term for it is “groupthink”.
Anyways, there I was calmly having an exchange with a “believer” over an article he had written about one of those pesky “deniers”. As usual the article was nothing more than an ad hominem against an intelligent well informed man – this time it was Mark Steyn – who dares to question climate change/climate disruption/global warming propaganda. In the most extraordinary example of doublethink I have seen for a while the article managed to suggest that Steyn shares David Icke’s views on Reptilians whilst simultaneously printing Steyn’s own words that “David Icke is a weirdo“. And I do believe that the author actually got away with it. Sheer brilliance. I am familiar with Icke’s work and I came away from the article feeling that Steyn’s reputation had been tarnished and he was forever associated with Icke’s more radical ideas – ideas that require quite a sophisticated understanding of geopolitics in order to comprehend them accurately. Edward Bernays would be so proud. Give the man a medal. Pronto. A mind-blowing degree of deceptiveness heretofore unknown by this little chickadee.
But wait. There’s more. Much more. That wasn’t the thing that smacked me out of my naiveté. After a few exchanges I could feel the obligatory ad hominem on me begin to take form. So I calmly and very adult-like stated that “I don’t engage in back & forth personal attack. I just point people to the info which is confronting to read” (quoted verbatim). I had already supplied information on a couple of very good books which outline climate change fraud, presuming that the author and the online publication who published his article would want to investigate. Because that’s what journalists do. That’s what journalists without an agenda do, anyway. Not so for these people. I soon discovered that I had been blocked on Twitter by this publication. A so-called independent Australian news organisation who “supports quality investigative journalism, as well as citizen journalism and a diversity of voices. It believes Australians are short-changed by the mass media — and so it dedicates itself to seeking out the truth and informing the public” (quoted verbatim from their website). Hmmm. And the next day the same publication posted an article on freedom of speech. PROMOTING freedom of speech. Double hmmm.
These are the types of incidents along the path to wisdom that help us to understand what’s really going on. When you sit back and lazily believe the detritus that spews out every day from the TV and newspapers you don’t have a chance of working it out. But if you actively engage in searching for truth you open the door to epiphanies such as the one I had last week. It was truly a blessing in disguise as it helped me to further get a handle on the disturbing politics of climate change. It’s a subject I care about passionately. Because I’m passionate about the truth. As a child I learned to value the truth.
I grew up in the 60s, 70s and 80s. It was such a great time to be a kid. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) hadn’t yet decimated the education system in Australia so we were raised on a diet of tried-and-tested accurate information contained within a politically-neutral curriculum. We were taught critical thinking and useful life skills. We weren’t propagandised with politically-biased issues and told what to think about them. We were taught to gather the facts, analyse the issues for ourselves and make up our own minds. Freedom of thought was business-as-usual.
Genuine environmental issues such as pollution and deforestation were absolutely not part of the curriculum. Yet we Gen-Xers have been enthusiastically using our recycle bins for decades. How can that be? It can be because we were raised to be thinking individuals. Back then we were taught to have a grip on our sense of freedom and our own volition in the world. Even without guidance from the United Nations (UN) we could see for ourselves that filling the world with plastic was not viable.
But UNESCO has put an end to critical thinking and freedom of thought. Gen-Y (Millennials) and Gen-Z (iGen) have been raised on a diet of pro-climate change, pro-sustainable development and pro-humans-are-the-problem-not-the-solution. They are “global citizens” who go to UN-funded and run “Model United Nations” conferences where they are taught that the UN will save the world – with their help. And seeing as most kids are genuinely good-at-heart, they believe it. Because they have to believe it. To give themselves a sense of having a future worth living they have to believe the hype. They are the saviours who are going to fix the misdeeds of their parents. Because the UN said so.
And as time has marched on it appears that some of us Gen-Xers have fallen for this UN propaganda that holds us all responsible for the impending end of the earth. Some of us have been turned into automatons who just repeat, parrot-fashion, that the world is doomed and anyone who questions the “official version” is a traitor to be reviled. And silenced. Without even having a critical thought about the information we are being fed. What went wrong?
I had an appointment recently with an intelligent successful professional Gen-Xer. She apologised for being late, saying that she had a situation at home that needed to be dealt with. She had maggots in the kitchen and her partner told her it was “because of climate change”.
Intelligent and successful.
Maggots in the kitchen.
And apparently we now have climate-induced financial distress, climate-induced war and catastrophic conflicts, a climate-induced explosion in viruses, climate-this, climate-that……it just goes on and on. And on. And very few of us are questioning it. While Al Gore and his already-wealthy cronies are making gazillions out of carbon credits we are all being punished with higher power bills, less property rights, less democratic representation with mega-councils (the first step on the path to global governance) …. all because there is apparently more carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere than before the Industrial Revolution. More of a substance that is essential for life on earth. Essential for the growth of trees. Yes, toxic CO2. The substance that is 4% of what we breathe out every few seconds. The substance that is currently 0.04% of the atmosphere. But they call it “carbon” so people don’t wake up to the fact that they are demonising a harmless, vital substance.
Scientists who have studied geological history know that current CO2 levels of 400ppm are much lower than for most of the history of life on earth. Four hundred and fifty million years ago the earth went into an Ice Age when CO2 levels exceeded 4000ppm – more than TEN TIMES the current concentration. Just Google “Medieval Warm Period” and see what you find. Your eyes will be opened when you read some legitimate science.
And have you ever wondered why the media never mention any NATURAL causes of climate change/climate disruption/global warming ? It’s because the organisations tasked with “investigating” climate change/climate disruption/global warming are PREVENTED from finding out if there are any natural phenomena causing the purported disruptions in global climate patterns. Yes, in 1988 the United Nations set up an investigative body called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and their terms of reference SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDE the investigation of natural causes of climate variability. The IPCC publication “Principles Governing IPCC Work” states that the IPCC will assess –
- the risk of human-induced climate change,
- its potential impacts, and
- possible options for prevention.
Using this limited framework of reference, the IPCC have published so-called “comprehensive” assessment reports in 1990 (with a supplementary report in 1992), 1995, 2001, 2007 and 2014. The sixth report is due in 2022. These incomplete reports are used to determine global responses to climate variability and more disturbingly, they are used to enforce regulations and restrictions on the population. These so-called “comprehensive” reports determine our future quality of life even though none of the reports address naturally-induced causes of climate variability. This is not legitimate science. This is an agenda being imposed on the entire population. The IPCC have deliberately misled the world about the nature and cause of climate variability for a political agenda. And thankfully more and more scientists are waking up to these fundamental problems with “climate science” – see more here, here, here and here.
And guess what? Agenda-free scientists have discovered that global temperature patterns vary directly with SOLAR activity.
So temperature is dependent on…. wait for it…. THE SUN!
It’s heartbreaking for me to see good people sucked into this global deception. It’s heartbreaking for me to see intelligent people manipulated by greedy insiders and their bizarre global governance agenda. Whilst we good people suffer restrictive “sustainable development” plans and programs, these wealthy powerful global bureaucrats make even more restrictive decisions based on manipulated data and remain completely without oversight. I remain in awe at how mainstream media has been used to manipulate good people into hating those of us who dare to question the climate change/climate disruption/global warming agenda. The utter demonisation of individuals who dare to do a basic part of science – to question and test hypotheses – is a frightening step in the wrong direction.
That the media have managed to brainwash good people into devaluing an integral part of “doing science” – not to mention an integral part of a free and open society – is very troubling. That so-called “independent” media who claim to support a diversity of voices are also leading the way in demonising those of us who question climate change politics is indeed troubling. It’s an assault on freedom. It’s an assault on democracy. It shows just how powerful those behind climate change politics actually are. And if there’s one thing I’ve learned in my 50 years on the planet, it’s that if a person or organisation refuses to openly debate and defend the agenda they are pushing, and they bully you into accepting their position by ridiculing you for questioning it, it certainly doesn’t pass the sniff test. In other words, something stinks.
But the buck stops with us. We are the only ones who can get off our reality-TV-addicted bottoms and actively search out the truth. Up until quite recently I was a “believer”. But in the course of my own personal research I came across more and more literature telling me that global warming was a hoax. Initially I was very uncomfortable that some of my favourite independent journalists were “deniers”. How could this be? How could he/she get this one so wrong? And then I read some more. And when I came across more information that made me more uncomfortable I read even more. And when the penny finally dropped it rocked my world.
It’s not easy to face the fact that, as George Carlin so eloquently taught us, “the government doesn’t give a f**k about you“. But it’s the truth. A f**k they certainly do not give. It is not a priority of our government to furnish us with accurate unbiased information. See more here. And based on the research I have done over the past few years, it’s even less of a priority for the UN to deliver agenda-free factual information to their “global citizens”.
The politics of climate change really are quite disturbing. My experience last week showed me just how deep the deception goes; how quickly the lid is put on someone trying to calmly, respectfully and intelligently share dissenting information. Those of us who have uncovered the truth really struggle for opportunities to distribute information to the wider community. We put all our efforts into social media and blogspots, struggling to retain followers. However, once Facebook, Twitter, You Tube or Google register that we are disseminating alternative views we have restricted-reach algorithms imposed on us (also known as “shadow-banning”) or we are accused of “fake news” and our accounts are deleted altogether. Some more seasoned and successful researchers manage to build a following of paid-up subscribers which allows them to produce high quality journalism. My hope is that people will start to wake up for themselves; that the outrageous claims now being made in the name of climate change will be enough for my fellow Gen-Xers’ critical thought to kick back in again. When a lie just keeps getting bigger and more outrageous, there comes a point when it becomes so implausible that we can no longer believe it without question. Maybe it’s not maggots in the kitchen, but maybe by the time we have travel restrictions imposed on us (using travel surveillance via your sat-nav) and power restrictions are a daily expectation (using power usage surveillance via your smart meter) whilst multinationals continue to profit from the manufacture of unnecessary planet-polluting products such as bottled water and coffee pods, maybe then people might start to question the reality of climate change.
Maybe then they’ll start to use what’s left of their
critical thought and democratic rights.