Environmentalism: too many gravy trains, lies and dangerous hidden agendas; now driven by the ‘establishment’

The modern environmental, or ‘green’, movement has shifted from overt care for the environment towards activist and economic damage, self-serving agendas and covert promotion of more sinister agendas, often supported, even driven, by politicians.  But opposition grows by the day as evidence and  common sense start to prevail.   

Scroll down to read the most recent articles; links to previous articles follow.

The madness of Extinction Rebellion

The madness of Extinction Rebellion  By Brendan O’Neill, Spiked Online, 12 October 2019

This is an upper-middle-class death cult and we should ridicule it out of existence.

Yesterday, in London, I witnessed an eerie, chilling sight: I saw a death cult holding a ceremony in public.

The men and women gathered outside King’s Cross station and formed a circle. They swayed and chanted. They preached about End Times. ‘What will you do when the world gets hot, what, what?’, they intoned, conjuring up images of the hellfire they believe will shortly consume mankind. They sang hymns to their god – science. ‘We’ve got all the science / All that we need / To change the world / Hallelujah’, they sang, rocking side to side as they did so.

They demanded repentance. ‘Buy less, fly less, fry less’, said one placard. Catholics only demand the non-consumption of meat on Fridays, as an act of penance to mark the day of Christ’s death. This new religion demands an end to meat-consumption entirely, as penance for mankind’s sins of growth and progress.

And like all death cultists, they handed out leaflets that contained within them ‘THE TRUTH’. The leaflets foretell floods and fire: ‘We are in trouble. Sea levels are rising… Africa and the Amazon are on fire.’ The only word that was missing was locusts. They can’t be far behind these other ghastly visitations to sinful mankind.

And if you question their TRUTH? Then, like those heretics who were hauled before The Inquisition 500 years ago, you will be denounced as a denier. A denier of their revelations, a denier of their visions. ‘Denial is not a policy’, their placards decreed. Spotting me filming their spooky, apocalyptic ceremony, one of the attendees waved that placard in my face. A warning from the cult to a corrupted outsider.

This was, of course, Extinction Rebellion. Let us no longer beat around the bush about these people. This is an upper-middle-class death cult.

This is a millenarian movement that might speak of science, but which is driven by sheer irrationalism. By fear, moral exhaustion and misanthropy. This is the deflated, self-loathing bourgeoisie coming together to project their own psycho-social hang-ups on to society at large. They must be criticised and ridiculed out of existence.

Yesterday’s gathering, like so many other Extinction Rebellion gatherings, was middle-aged and middle-class. The commuters heading in and out of King’s Cross looked upon them with bemusement. ‘Oh, it’s those Extinction freaks’, I heard one young man say. It had the feel of Hampstead and the Home Counties descending on a busy London spot to proselytise the cult of eco-alarmism to the brainwashed, commuting plebs.

It was a gathering to mark Extinction Rebellion’s week of disruption. The group is asking people in London and other cities around the world to ‘take two weeks off work’ and join the revolt against the ‘climate and ecological crisis’. You can tell who they’re trying to appeal to. Working-class people and the poor of New Delhi, Mumbai and Cape Town – some of the cities in which Extinction Rebellion will be causing disruption – of course cannot afford to take two weeks off work. But then, these protests aren’t for those people. In fact, they’re against those people.

Extinction Rebellion is a reactionary, regressive and elitist movement whose aim is to impose the most disturbing form of austerity imaginable on people across the world. One of the great ironies of ‘progressive’ politics today is that people of a leftist persuasion will say it is borderline fascism if the Tory government closes down a library in Wolverhampton, but then they will cheer this eco-death cult when it demands a virtual halt to economic growth with not a single thought for the devastating, immiserating and outright lethal impact such a course of action would have on the working and struggling peoples of the world.

Extinction Rebellion says mankind is doomed if we do not cut carbon emissions to Net Zero by 2025. That’s six years’ time. Think about it: they want us to halt a vast array of human activity that produces carbon. All that Australian digging for coal; all those Chinese factories employing millions of people and producing billions of things used by people around the world; all those jobs in the UK in the fossil-fuel industries; all those coal-fired power stations; all that flying; all that driving… cut it all back, rein it in, stop it. And the people who rely on these things for their work and their food and their warmth? Screw them. They’re only humans. Horrible, destructive, stupid humans.

Progressive movements, as the name suggests, used to be about pursuing progress, pushing mankind forwards, creating a better, wealthier world for all. Extinction Rebellion wants the precise opposite. It wants to propel us backwards, to the Stone Age. It wants to reverse the most important moment in human history – the Industrial Revolution. It wants to undo that revolution’s liberation of mankind from the brutishness and ignorance of life on the land and recreate that old, unforgiving world in which we all ‘ate locally’, never travelled, danced around maypoles for fun, and died of cholera when we were 38.

The sheer backwardness of Extinction Rebellion was captured when two of its members appeared on Sky News yesterday morning. They complained, hysterically, about modernity. One of them bemoaned all the electricity that is used in a city like London. So the very lighting up and warming of cities, the electricity that powers homes and workplaces and transport systems and life-support machines, is offensive to these hair-shirted, self-flagellating loathers of arrogant humankind. ‘Switch it all off’, is their alarmingly immoral cry.

=====================

Climate activists recruiting child soldiers

Climate activists recruiting child soldiers  By Jennifer Oriel, The Australian, 30 September 2019

In the 20th century, the United Nations was created to prevent totalitarianism re-emerging. In the 21st century, UN leaders are adopting the totalitarian method of using children for mass political action. The UN generally regards child exploitation as a no-no unless, apparently, the child is useful to a left-wing cause. Child marriage is rightly condemned as primitive. Child labour is criminalised. But exploiting kids for political gain is making a comeback.

The Permanent Mission of China to the UN hosted a reception to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China. It’s a euphemistic term for the communist one-party state. Xinhua reported the opening speech of the country’s permanent representative to the UN, Zhang Jun: “Under the Communist Party of China, Chinese people have embarked on a glorious journey in the history of human development.” In a message to the reception, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said it was a pleasure to celebrate the founding of the communist state. He commended its work on “climate solutions” and its commitment to peace and human rights.

The peace Guterres praises was won by China’s communist regime banning dissent, murdering 45 million people, and turning children into militants for Maoist ideology.

The United Nations has presented Greta Thunberg as the leader of a revolution against the old world. In a telling session, Guterres urged youth to “force” revolution and hold his generation to account. He claimed adults had failed to preserve justice in the world and incited young people to revolutionise it. Following Guterres’s advice, Thunberg took to the stage. She denounced dissenters, raged against adults and threatened people who disagreed with her.

Some critics were concerned about the emotional manner of the speech and its express hatred of dissent. But the UN applauded her. The left-wing media lavished praise on her. In The Guardian, her speech was compared to the Gettysburg Address. Channel 10’s The Project tweeted its admiration for the “incredible human”. The ultimate doomsday prophets — extinction activists — projected images of the teen on landmarks in Western Australia. The US media website Good wrote of Thunberg’s Viking blood and lauded young people “bonded by fear, outrage” who realise “economic privilege, class, or the random luck of birth will not protect them from the poisoned planet they’re about to inherit”. Everywhere, the left framed climate change as a battle between us and them.

Despite the shift from 20th-century class struggle to 21st-century climate struggle, the West is still held culpable by broad sections of the left. The “in” group conforms to the UN line that the developed world is responsible for climate change disasters, despite communist China producing 27.2 per cent of global emissions. The developed world comprises mostly Western states with relatively free political systems. Under UN climate proposals, the free world would finance corrupt regimes and mass emissions by developing nations. For those of us who want a clean, green future and a free world, the UN does not provide the answer. Nor do teenagers too young to grasp the power dynamics distorting global environmental politics.

The Prime Minister expressed concern about the UN treatment of Thunberg. He emphasised the importance of knowledge and facts in teaching children about the world. Importantly, he took the high ground and spoke of adults’ responsibility to manage the problem of climate change while reassuring children they have a future.

No responsible adult would look at Thunberg’s UN performance and reward her anxiety with praise. Like many children, she wants a good future. And like many budding activists, she sees the world in absolute terms because she has not lived long enough to understand the passage of history and the predictability of human error.

I took to the streets at the ripe old age of eight in a one-girl protest to save the whales. It was the opening act of a happily misspent youth devoted to righting political wrongs with direct action and protests. It is natural for kids to want a better world, but there is nothing natural about adults who exploit children for political ends.

——————————

Dr Jennifer Oriel is a columnist with a PhD in political science. She writes a weekly column in The Australian. Dr Oriel’s academic work has been featured on the syllabi of Harvard University, the University of… Read more

=====================

Letter to the UN: There is no climate emergency

Letter to UN, There is no climate emergency  There is no climate emergency, 23 September 2019

Professor Guus Berkhout, Catsheuvel 93, 2517 KA The Hague, guus.berkhout@clintel.org, 23 September 2019

Sr. António Guterres, Secretary-General, United Nations, United Nations Headquarters, New York, NY 10017, United States of America.

Ms. Patricia Espinosa Cantellano, Executive Secretary , United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCCC Secretariat, UN Campus, Platz der Vereinten Nationen 1, 53113 Bonn, Germany

Your Excellencies,

There is no climate emergency

A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors.

The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose. Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions on the basis of results from such immature models. Current climate policies pointlessly, grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, continuous electrical power.

We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation.

We ask you to place the Declaration on the agenda of your imminent New York session.

We also invite you to organize with us a constructive high-level meeting between world-class scientists on both sides of the climate debate early in 2020. The meeting will give effect to the sound and ancient principle no less of sound science than of natural justice that both sides should be fully and fairly heard. Audiatur et altera pars!

Please let us know your thoughts about such a joint meeting.

Yours sincerely, ambassadors of the European Climate Declaration,

Professor Guus Berkhout, The Netherlands

Professor Richard Lindzen, USA

Professor Reynald Du Berger, French Canada

Professor Ingemar Nordin, Sweden

Terry Dunleavy, New Zealand

Jim O’Brien, Rep. of Ireland

Viv Forbes, Australia

Professor Alberto Prestininzi, Italy

Professor Jeffrey Foss, English Canada

Professor Benoît Rittaud, France

Morten Jødal, Norway

Professor Fritz Vahrenholt, Germany

Rob Lemeire, Belgium

The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, UK

—————————-

There is no climate emergency

 A global network of 500 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate polities should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.

Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming

The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.

Warming is far slower than predicted

The world has warmed at less than half the originally-predicted rate, and at less than half the rate to be expected on the basis of net anthropogenic forcing and radiative imbalance. It tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.

Climate policy relies on inadequate models

Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools. Moreover, they most likely exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.

CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth

CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crop worldwide.

Global warming has not increased natural disasters

There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly. For instance, wind turbines kill birds and bats, and palm-oil plantations destroy the biodiversity of the rainforests.

Policy must respect scientific and economic realities

There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, and they certainly will, we have ample time to reflect and adapt. The aim of international policy should be to provide reliable and affordable energy at all times, and throughout the world.

======================

Links to previous articles

About Peter Senior

I'm a very experienced and pragmatic management consultant. I've reviewed and led the restructuring of many organisations - large and small corporations and Government Departments, much of the time as President of the New Zealand Institute of Management Consultants. Before that I was General Manager of a major NZ newspaper; earlier, an analyst for IBM UK. I gained an honours degree in engineering at London University, and studied management at Cambridge University. This wide range of experience has left me frustrated: I continue to see too many examples of really bad management. Sometimes small easily fixed issues; sometimes fundamental faults; and sometimes really tricky problems. Mostly these issues can be fixed using a mixture of common sense, 'management 101' and applying lessons from years of management experience. Unfortunately, all too often, politics, bureaucracy and daft government regulations get in the way; internal factors such as poor culture and out-of-date strategies are often evident. So what's gone wrong, and why, and most importantly, how to fix 'it'? I hope there are like-minded people 'out there' who will share their thoughts enabling 'us' to improve some significant management failures that affect the general public. If you just accept bad management, you don't have the right to complain! If you'd like to share thoughts on any aspects of management, send me an email to petersenior42@gmail.com . My latest project has the interim title 'You’ve been conned. Much of what you were taught and read is largely irrelevant, misleading or plain wrong – this is the REAL story of life: past, present and our possible future.' The working paper so far comprises 105 pages, many listing references and interim conclusions. The main problem is finding sufficient credible evidence, and realising the more Iearn, the more I realise I don't know!
This entry was posted in Environmental battles. Bookmark the permalink.