W A Beatty beskriver klimabevægelsen som en religion i American Thinker
It is no coincidence that man-made global warming, or climate change, or whatever it’s called this week, got very popular as an issue just as the Soviet Union fell. It is the top-down centralized government’s last best hope of controlling the masses. And like other forms of socialist totalitarian worldviews, it is a religion as well.
Man-made global warming is an earth-worshiping religion. The essential feature of any religion is that its pronouncements are to be accepted on faith, as opposed to hard evidence. And as with most religions, it is susceptible to the earthly temptations of money, power, politics, arrogance, and deceit.
Global warmists have an unshakable faith that man-made carbon emissions will produce a hotter climate, causing natural disasters. Their insistence that we can be absolutely certain that this will come to pass is based not on science, but on faith.
All the trappings of religion are here:
- Original sin: Mankind is responsible for the prophesied disasters, especially those of us who live in suburbs and drive our SUVs to strip malls and chain restaurants.
- The need for atonement and repentance: We must impose a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system, which will raise the cost of everything and stunt economic growth.
- Rituals: We must observe Earth Day, and we must recycle.
- Indulgences: Private jet-fliers like Al Gore and sitcom heiress Laurie David can buy carbon offsets to compensate for their carbon-emitting sins.
- Prophecy and faith in things unseen: Advocates say we must act now before it is too late.
Og den franske filosof Pascal Bruckner tilføjer at den økologiske religion er en hedens religion uden en trancendent gud. Al vores teknologi udgør en trussel mod vores liv og helbred, fra traffikken henover mobiltelefoni til det vi spiser og er således beboet af onde onder.
News Busters har i anledning af Earth Day samlet en top 25 over underholdende udsagn om klimaet og skriver i deres indledning
This Sunday marks the 42nd anniversary of Earth Day and for 25 of those years the MRC has documented the liberal media’s role in advancing the left’s green agenda. From fretting about overpopulation to scaring viewers about global warming, for over 25 years the media have championed the capitalism-killing agenda of the modern environmentalist movement.
So sacrosanct the liberal media believes its mission to be, that they haven’t even bothered to hide their bias. CNN’s environmental editor Barbara Pyle, as quoted in the July 1990 issue of American Spectator, actually bragged: “I do have an axe to grind…I want to be the little subversive person in television.” Time magazine’s science editor Charles Alexander, at a September 16, 1989 global warming conference, confessed: “I would freely admit on this issue we have crossed the boundary from news reporting to advocacy.”
That advocacy has been on full display as reporters and anchors have gone overboard in scaring their audience about the perils of our effect on the Earth, from overpopulation to global warming. In its January 2, 1989 “Planet of the Year” Time magazine’s editors warned: “Unless the growth in the world population is slowed, it will be impossible to make serious progression on any environmental issue.” Two years later, in an ad for its “Lost Tribes, Lost Knowledge” issue that appeared in the April 27, 1992 Sports Illustrated, Time magazine again warned: “Nature has a cure for everything, except the spread of Western civilization.”
Og et par eksempler
25. Billions of Lives At Risk
“Will Billions Die from Global Warming?”
— ABC’s on-screen graphic from the January 31, 2007 Good Morning America.
24. Who Needs Tanks, When You’ve Got the EPA?
“And yet, Congresswoman Schneider, in 1989, fiscal 1989 as we say in America, the Environmental Protection Agency got $5.1 billion dollars and the Defense Department got $290 billion dollars. What’s that tell us about our priorities?”
— ABC anchor Peter Jennings on the September 12, 1989 Capital to Capital special “The Environment: Crisis In the Global Village.”
21. Someone Get the Statue of Liberty a Life Preserver Before She Floats Away!
Tom Brokaw: “About 10 percent of the Earth’s surface is covered by ice, most of that in the polar regions. But if enough of that ice melts, the seas will rise dramatically and the results will be calamitous….If this worst-case scenario should occur, in the coming centuries New York could be abandoned, its famous landmarks lost to the sea.”
Dr. James Hansen, Goddard Institute for Space Studies: “Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, Miami — they would all be under water.”
— From Brokaw’s two-hour Discovery Channel special, Global Warming: What You Need to Know, excerpt shown on the July 15, 2006 NBC Nightly News.
14. Earth Would Be Okay It Weren’t for Us Pesky Humans
“Ultimately, no problem may be more threatening to the Earth’s environment than the proliferation of the human species.”
— Anastasia Toufexis, “Overpopulation: Too Many Mouths,” article in Time’s special “Planet of the Year” edition, January 2, 1989.
Det er svært at forestille sig, men deres nr. 1 er faktisk velfortjent. Jeg vil supplere med et par eksempler fra den seneste tid uden rangorden. For eksempel skrev den tidligere brandmand fra Tennessee i Forbes at ha ikke kunne forstå at der i dagens verden endnu var skeptikere der gik og løj med alle interesse som indsats. Nogen burde stå til regnskab
Let’s take a page from those Tennessee firemen we heard about a few times last year – the ones who stood idly by as houses burned to the ground because their owners had refused to pay a measly $75 fee.
We can apply this same logic to climate change.
We know who the active denialists are – not the people who buy the lies, mind you, but the people who create the lies. Let’s start keeping track of them now, and when the famines come, let’s make them pay. Let’s let their houses burn. Let’s swap their safe land for submerged islands. Let’s force them to bear the cost of rising food prices.
They broke the climate. Why should the rest of us have to pay for it?
Og vi venter så i spændning på at vi får vores klimaafgifter tilbage om godt ti år når vi sidder og ser tilbage på et kvart århundrede uden varme, men tværtimod med et lille fald i temperaturen. Indtil der går så lang tid skal vi høre lignende udfald i ABC News
One of the world’s most widely respected climatologists, James Hansen, director of NASA-GISS, which focuses on the study of earth’s climate for the space agency, testified to Congress in 2008 that the CEOs of fossil fuel companies (who, according to various professional reporting have been promoting this and other misleading messages about global warming in conjunction with ideological groups trying to prevent government regulation) “knew what they were doing” and, as stated in his written testimony to Congress in 2008, were guilty of “high crimes against humanity and nature.”
Hansen tells ABC News — in a phone call from the U.K. where he’s been traveling — that he used that highly charged phrase, crime against humanity, “not only for dramatic effect, but also because it is accurate, given the enormous scale of the consequences to humanity” if manmade global warming is not somehow stopped and reversed.
“It wasn’t only aimed at the fossil fuel CEOs,” Hansen added on the phone. “This also applies to politicians who pretend the global warming is not manmade.”
Hansen is not the first to have carefully decided to call the climate disinformation campaign “a crime against humanity.”
Journalist Ross Gelbspan, whose professional accomplishments include directing a Pulitzer-winning investigation at the Boston Globe before he turned his attention to global warming in the 1990s, entitled a chapter in “Boiling Point,” his second book on the climate crisis, “Criminals Against Humanity.”
The “criminals” he was referring to were fossil fuel and other executives who he reported to be intentionally promoting confusion and disinformation campaigns about solid findings of climate scientists around the world.
Fra Quark Soup
“By adopting a ‘one-child’ policy since 1979, Chinese demographers estimate that about 300 million births have been avoided, equivalent to the present population of the United States. Even at the relatively low level of Chinese per capita carbon dioxode emissions, the effect of this population policy can be measured as an avoidance of about 1.2 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide being emitted annually to the global atmosphere. This represents a nominal reduction of about 5 per cent in global carbon emissions, a much greater reduction than has been achieved by all the measures of the Kyoto Protocol.”
– Mike Hulme, Why We Disagree About Climate Change, Chapter 8
Og så skal Manu Sareen på banen for ifølge feminister i EU er klimaforandringerne kvindeundertrykkende, som Daily Mail rapporterer
A bizarre row has broken out among EU politicians over whether climate change is a feminist issue.
Members of the European Parliament will vote today on a report by a French Green party MEP who claims global warming ‘is not gender neutral’.
Women, claims Nicole Kiil-Nielsen, ‘consume more sustainably than men and show greater willingness to act to preserve the environment’ as they tend to organise household consumption and childcare.
She said that discrimination against women could be made worse in the developing world if climate policies do not take gender discrimination into account.
She was yesterday subjected to a withering attack from Marina Yannakoudakis, a Tory MEP for London, who called her motion ‘bonkers, baseless and bad for women’.
The report – Women and Climate Change – calls for a 40 per cent female quota on all EU delegations in climate negotiations and on the committees that allocate climate aid from member states. Funding is set to reach £62billion a year by 2020.
0 Kommentarer »
Ingen kommentarer endnu.