Is climate change a socialist plot?

Written by PSI Staff

The Spectator has an article (November 5, 2013) by David Holmes who poses the question, ‘Is climate change a socialist plot?‘ in which Holmes infers that those who question the global warming narrative are tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorists.

Apart from the tens of thousands of scientists who would disagree with Holmes on this issue, there is also an excellent article by Dr Tim Ball, co-founder and first Chairman of Principia Scientific International (PSI) to put the question into a more factual context. Although the article primarily addresses the fraudulent acts of alarmist professor Peter Gleick, it also provides a unique insight into how the UN’s Agenda 21 goes hand in glove with man-made global warming scare stories.Dr Tim Ball

Below we cite freely from Dr Ball’s article.

Dr. Ball is not only a respected scholar of the back story of the climate fraud, he is a climatologist who witnessed the rise of the global warming fraternity among his academic colleagues in the 1980’s. He has always bravely defended real science, even in the courts when required. To better guide us into deciding the answer to the Holmes question Tim advises us to look no further than the grandfather of the UN’s IPCC, Stephen Schneider, who made the following admission in Discover magazine in 1989:

“On the one hand we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but, which means that we must include all the doubts, caveats, ifs and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists, but human beings as well. And like most people, wed like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that we have to get some broad-based support, to capture the publics imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This double ethical bind which we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.”

Dr Ball advises that Schneider’s ‘science’ was incorporated by the Club of Rome (COR), that is well known for advocating for a ‘new world order’ based on socialist ideals.

The COR also promoted publications such as Paul Ehrlich”s book The Population Bomb, but predictions were set out primarily in Limits to Growth using simplistic computer models. They extended the Malthusian idea that population would outgrow food supply and applied it to all resources with amplification by capitalism and fossil fuel driven economies. Almost all the predictions were disastrously wrong.

Others involved were PhD Stanford graduate John Holdren, co-author with Ehrlich, and now President Obama’s Science Czar. Gleick’s water research is referenced throughout their works.

Water was central to the COR concerns, probably with Gleick”s influence. Their agenda was incorporated into United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) specifically as Agenda 21. At the 1977 United Nations “Water Conference” they set up the International Drinking Water Decade as 1981 – 1990.

People involved with this project were associated with the COR and the plans for one world government. Central was socialist Barbara Ward, former Cabinet Minister in the UK government. In an article titled Only One World: An Awakening Stephen Berry quotes Ms. Ward, “We may be on the way to a new moral reality.” This view pervades all the policies emanating from the UN, the COR, and the environmental movement of the last 40 years.

The objective is one world government with almost total control. Environment became a vehicle for social control of individual countries and suppression of capitalism and technology. Strong used the UNEP with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) to create the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Neil Hrab wrote:

“What’s truly alarming about Maurice Strong is his actual record. Strong’s persistent calls for an international mobilization to combat environmental calamities, even when they are exaggerated (population growth) or scientifically unproven (global warming), have set the world’s environmental agenda.”

Now that warming has failed as the political vehicle, water is rapidly advancing as a replacement.

Mark Dubrulle: a 40-year member of the COR was asked in 2008, “Is water an issue within this consultation process and the general program of the Club of Rome?”

He replied,

“Resources include water by definition. We have within the Club very distinguished members who already years ago draw our attention on the problem of water. We intend to play an active role in the debate on water resources, water supply and water consumption, with a very critical attitude towards the current policies. Ian Johnson, the new Secretary General of the international Club of Rome, clearly stated that water is one of the big challenges, perhaps even more important than oil.”

The 74 Club book explains they believe “democracy has failed and new forms of governance are required”. They determined that “a common enemy must be found, one either real or invented, to unite humanity”.

They explain, “in searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.”

Therefore, we are left in no doubt that the Elite that tried to sell us into the global warming narrative have done so for ulterior motives that are less to do with tackling an environmental concern but more about changing the social order. The fact that this week the BBC, a long-standing champion of the climate cause that David Holmes champions has now gone on record to admit the world likely faces a long period of global cooling, not warming proves that those who still bang the drum for ‘action on global warming’ are either very much out of touch or pursuing a non-science agenda.

– See more at:


Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments (1)

  • Avatar



    PCTs come from all over; most believe that the government can control the weather/climate regardless. They are a malignant tumour on our culture, but we should focus on the real issues nonetheless, such as the perversion of science.

Comments are closed