What’s Really Driving The Climate Hysteria Machine
Written by Sanjeev Sabhlok
We know there is simply no basis for climate alarm.
All “scientific” predictions have failed, life has survived happily with much higher CO2 in the past, the medieval warming period a thousand years ago was much warmer than today.
The small temperature variations of the 20th century are easily explained by natural causes, and the IPCC reports confirm that there is no increase in extreme weather events and no economic harm from CO2.
And yet the hysteria is increasing by the day. The “remedies” being suggested are becoming more extreme: it is no longer just about making energy so expensive that the poor can’t afford it, it is now about removing meat from their diet as well.
So how is such an irrational project going so strong? Because it is a clever way to disguise the deep hatred so many of the elites have of the poor.
After the Hitler debacle, talking about eugenics is no longer welcome in polite company. Climate alarm provides a perfect cloak.
It achieves the same goal while signaling virtue. Climate hysteria is driven by an amalgamation of the ideologies of Malthus, Marx, Hitler, and social Darwinism.
That this is not about the environment becomes clear when we note that these people do not care about market-based remedies to save wildlife, remove waste, and reduce chemical pollution.
These people also viciously attack nuclear energy. If they cared about CO2, they would be desperate for nuclear energy, but their goals are obviously quite different.
Stephen Schneider, a key “scientist” in the climate alarm bandwagon explained how their “goals” are to be achieved.
In a 1989 interview, he said that “to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change” scientists “need to … capture the public’s imagination” by “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.”
Straight from the Goebbels’ copybook.
Malthus is the father of this anti-poor ideology. Over 200 years ago he attacked the poor even though the world’s population was a tiny fraction of what it is today.
After Hitler’s eugenic project left a permanent stink, the Club of Rome revived the idea under the guise of “optimal population.”
Its goal: to cut the world’s population at least by two-third. A related 1980 “Global 2000 Report” wanted the US population to be reduced by 100 million by 2050.
This has never been about reducing just any population. It has a specific goal to protect first the “white” rich and then a few of the other rich while eliminating the poor, blacks and Indians.
Margaret Sanger’s goal was to “stop the multiplication of the unfit … the most important … step towards race betterment” (note the focus on “race”).
She wanted the “bloodstream of the (white) race” to be as pure as possible. She was involved in a ‘Negro Project’ to limit, if not eliminate, black births. She also detested Indians, considering India’s population (then only 300 million) a “curse”.
Nothing would have pleased her more than the total wipe-out of all Indians.
When she learned that Nehru had agreed to her persistent proposal to start a birth control program in India, she was delighted: “I cannot imagine anything more blessed happening on earth.”
In the minds of such monsters, it will be truly “blessed” when all of us Indians are wiped out.
Rachel Carson was the next prominent Malthusian. Her book, Silent Spring (1962) actively fought technologies that could improve the lives of the poor.
She lied through her teeth about DDT and tried to stop it from being used to fight malaria which kills millions of poor Indians and Africans.
Next came Paul Ehrlich with his 1968 book, The Population Bomb. His hatred for humanity was revealed in the title itself.
Not chastened by the total failure of all his predictions, he gloated in an interview in 2014 about the prospect that things could go so bad that humans will become cannibals. Nothing would please him more than the poor eating each other.
The specific issue of climate alarm originated as part of the Club of Rome of 1968 and its 1973 Limits of Growth report. One of the Club of Rome associates was a wealthy businessman, Maurice Strong, who played a particularly insidious role in drumming up a range of anti-poor hysterias.
The Club of Rome’s influence led to the establishment of the United Nations Environment Program which elected Michael Strong as its head.
Even though major climate scientists of the time were squealing about an impending Ice Age, he picked CO2 warming as his vehicle. After all, the best way to crush the poor is to choke their fossil fuel use.
He, therefore, drove the Action Plan for the Human Environment at Stockholm and Agenda 21 at Rio. This included the infamous Rio precautionary principle which underpins all anti-poor policy.
He had a revulsion for people. In his 2000 autobiography, he dreamt of the day when two-thirds of the world’s population might be wiped out.
A committed socialist, he outlined the plot for a novel in a 1992 interview in which: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Strong was widely supported by thousands of influential like-minded people, many of whom are extremely powerful today: for instance, William Nordhaus, who received the Nobel prize in economics last year.
In a major 1974 article, Nordhaus cited the Club of Rome and said its concerns about “the carrying capacity of the environment” are legitimate and the concept of economic growth itself needs to be reviewed.
He then started a life-long focus on CO2 and has long recommended a carbon tax without ever bothering to check whether CO2 is actually a pollutant.
The Club of Rome and its associate organizations remain active and operate behind the scenes. There is a powerful network of people determined to use climate alarm and anti-GM propaganda as instruments to curb agricultural productivity and choke energy use by the poor.
Al Gore is perhaps the most well-known but the group includes innumerable “scientists” who are happy to fudge data. The Climategate emails demonstrate how these “scientists” operate in the shadows to distort facts and mislead the public.
Our party is keenly aware of the intense hatred these “white” elites have towards India’s poor. We won’t let them get the upper hand. Scientific debate won’t work with them. So we call upon the Modi government shut down the IPCC.
Read more at Times Of India