Hunter couldn't agree more with Guido


From Guido Fawkes' excellent blog:

"Climate change denial is bonkers, the evidence shows that in recent history temperatures have risen, but the argument that carbon causes climate change seems to be based on suspect science. Nevertheless the Greens have chosen to blame carbon emissions for causing climate change because of their supernatural hatred of industrialisation, the automobile and urbanisation, derived partly from their misty-eyed romanticisation of peasant life. It suits their political objectives to blame carbon emissions for climate change.

With the collapse of socialism and communism as plausible belief systems many of the former adherents have shifted into the Green movement. Green issues like clean air, pure water and high quality food command wide support across the political spectrum and even amongst the unpoliticised. Anti-capitalist extremists have hijacked these populist issues and now control the Green movement's wider agenda - that is the claim made by Patrick Moore and he should know, he co-founded Greenpeace. He believes that "one of the most pernicious aspects of the modern environmental movement is the romanticisation of peasant life. And the idea that industrial societies are the destroyers of the world. The environmental movement has evolved into the strongest force there is for preventing development in the developing countries. I think it's legitimate for me to call them anti-human."

There is strong evidence that carbon levels lag the rise in temperature. Two-thirds of our planet is water covered, as temperatures rise the seas release more carbon dioxide. The amount released by that process dwarfs the amount released by humanity. Plato argued that in order to keep a stable social structure, societies need a Noble Lie. In Plato’s mind, the Noble Lie is a religious lie that’s fed to the masses to keep them under control and happy with their situation in life. It seems to Guido that the Green movement is propagating a Platonic-style Noble Lie - we are doomed unless we give up our cars and planes. In reality rising temperatures are far more likely to be a result of solar activity cycles."

Hunter endorses this view 100%!

3 comments:

David Allen said...

One of the prospective candidates at our GLA selection last night had a few choice words on this subject: he believes that the British people are masochists. They are feeling just too prosperous these days _ and guilty for it _ and are looking for a hair shirt to appease their conscience and make them feel virtuous.
Of course, many bloggers have argued elsewhere in recent weeks that 'carbon offsetting' is just 'Indulgence buying' in 21st century clothes.
Still, I cna't help worrying that we are fiddling while Rome burns _ all because this cause is so beloved of people we loathe and despise......

Newmania said...

I think you have gone to far Justin , with the zeal of the ( late ) converted. I have been questioning climate chnage concensus for the last two years bu the basic science is simple and on balance there is sufficient truth in it to be concerned.
There are of course other agendas behind it all but that does not mean there is nothing there at all.

Get back to your Liberal wing where I feel comfortable with you . You are getting into righty territory and it scares me

David Allen said...

One climate scientist writes on Elle's blog, N, and you lose the courage of your convictions! For shame! I was at an interesting conference last week where I saw some private research conducted amongst scientists about how their research gets warped by other considerations. Scary stuff, which makes one very sceptical about their output. Studies which reveal 'inconvenient truths routinely remain unpublished, never making it into the scientific record and therefore are not available for mere mortals and sceptical scientists to evaluate. You should work on the iceberg principle _ for every study you find which does not fit the consensus, assume that there are 9 more which were never published or never even got the grant funding to be pursued because it did nto fit the then-current agenda.