|
Monday, 3 March 2014
FREEDOM AND PROSPERITY PARTY -Press Release
Deniers - Who are they? Realists or Quacks?
Time to push back against the global warming Nazis
When politicians and scientists started calling people like me “deniers”, they crossed the line.
They are still doing it.
They indirectly equate (1) the skeptics’ view that global warming is not necessarily all manmade nor a serious problem, with (2) the denial that the Nazi’s extermination of millions of Jews ever happened.
Too many of us for too long have ignored the repulsive, extremist nature of the comparison. It’s time to push back.
I’m now going to start calling these people “global warming Nazis”.
Recently a global warming Nazi wrote:
"Sure, I call people like Spencer “deniers” not because of some imagined like (sic) to Nazis but because they are in denial."Amazing! The science has moved on, all their predictions have failed, the warming pause is in its 18th year and they call US "deniers?"
Another global warming Nazi wrote: "So basically climate change denialists are heading down to the tiny minority levels enjoyed by child abusers. Dare we make the correlation?"
Tiny minority. Really? No, that's a lie!
A poll of The American Meteorological Society members showed that it was roughly 50:50 believers and sceptics. And what a despicable attempt at blackening the realists; likening them to child abusers.
And "climate change deniers?" We don't deny that climate changes, rather the reverse. The global warming Nazis tried to deny that climate changes by flattening out the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period in the fraudulent hockey Stick Graph. See Who are the Deniers?
Joe Romm (I won't call him a global warming Nazi since he lost relatives in the Holocaust) although from the alarmist side, doesn't like his side using the denier term (link)
Over the years, I have explained why “denier” is not my preferred term. I tried to coin the terms “delayer” and “disinformer” for those who make a living spreading disinformation about climate science — and I still use the term ‘disinformer.’Disinformers? Really? WHO is disinforming? Who is still pushing the falsified AGW hypothesis? Who is still pushing the warming, even though there has been no warming for 17.5 years?
Therefore, are the global warming Nazis, really calling us deniers for our so-called "denial of their false science?" OR.. are they trying to cast the Holocaust slur?
Here are some of their quotes: (Courtesy Climate Depot)
- “The deniers of climate change are cut from the same cloth as Holocaust deniers. They’ve never been to the death camps, Auschwitz and Birkenau, so what they haven’t seen does not exist.“ - Charles Larson, American University (2013)
- “At its core, global warming denial is like Holocaust denial, an assault on common decency.“ - David Fiderer, The Huffington Post (2009)
- “It’s about the climate-change “denial industry”, …we should have war crimes trials for these bastards – some sort of climate Nuremberg.“- David Roberts, Grist Magazine (2006)
- “Let’s just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers.“ - Ellen Goodman, Boston Globe (2007)
- “I think these people are anti-science flat-earthers. …They are every bit as dangerous as Holocaust deniers.“ - Guy Keleny, The Independent (2013)
- “These are not debunkers, testing outrageous claims with scientific rigor. They are deniers – like Holocaust deniers.“ - Jim Hoggan, DeSmogBlog (2005)
- “Bluntly put, climate change deniers pose a greater danger than the lingering industry that denies the Holocaust.“ - Joel Connelly, Seattle Post-Intelligencer (2007)
- “Some people don’t believe in climate warning – like those who don’t believe there was a Holocaust.“ - Paul McCartney
- “Surely it’s time for climate-change deniers to have their opinions forcibly tattooed on their bodies.“ - Richard Glover, The Sydney Morning Herald (2011)
- “Denialism, a concept that was first widely used, as far as I know, for those who claimed that the Holocaust was a fraud, is the concept I believe we should use.“ - Robert Manne, La Trobe University (2009)
If it looks like an intended slur and quacks like an intended slur, it must be.......... from quacks!
THE ENVIRONMENTAL HERESY
NZCLIMATE TRUTH NEWSLETTER NO 327
by IPCC Expert Reviewer
Dr Vincent Gray
Dr Vincent Gray
FEBRUARY 28th 2014
THE ENVIRONMENTAL HERESY
The
concept of The Environment has its origins in the belief in Nature
Traditionally,
humans have always considered themselves to be superior to other creatures. It
was only after sufficient food became available that this could be questioned.
Members
of the Romantic Movement, who rebelled against the pollution and squalor of the
Industrial Revolution, considered humans were inferior to other organisms which
existed in a separate part of the world called Nature. Everything that
happened there was Natural whereas everything the humans did was Artificial
and thus inferior.
The Environment carries this belief much
further, to the extent that Environmentalism has become a substitute
for religion. Everything that humans do is harmful to The Environment.
The
Environment has not only become a substitute for God. It is also a Heaven on Earth.
There are no holy scriptures, but there is an amateur priesthood who are
consulted regularly to comment on every news item. In each country there is a
Minister and Ministry of the Environment
which promote its demands. There is a United Nations Environment Programme. There
are many local and international organisations which promote its doctrine.
These include Greenpeace, The Worldwide Fund for Nature, The Sierra Club,
Friends of the Earth, and many others.
The
demands of The Environment include regular and increasing sacrifices on
its behalf. All human activity is either forbidden or it has to be more
expensive than before. It has to endure uneconomic solutions and expensive permission
from environmental authorities.
Where
is The
Environment? It is everywhere and nowhere. What is it? It is a mixture
of Heaven, Nature, Never Never Land, Narnia, Erewhon and Utopia. One thing it
cannot be is a territory where humans have no influence, just as there is no
territory which has no influence from other organisms. We must continually “Protect”
The
Environment: from the harm done
by humans or at least “Mitigate” them. It would perhaps be better if there were
no humans at all
All
of the claims of Environmentalism are in contradiction to the science of
evolution.
The Greek philosopher Heraclitus is supposed to have said
"everything flows” and for most people it is surely obvious that
everything about the world is constantly changing.
Medieval society believed otherwise. They thought that
everything about the world was static and unchanging, apart from the occasional
cyclones, earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, often blamed on the anger of God. When these special events were over, the world returned exactly to where it was
before.
Carl Linnaeus, who in 1735 launched the most popular
classification system for all organisms, believed that they were all constant
and unchanging, individually created by the almighty.
It was only early in the 19th century with the
discovery of fossils of extinct animals and the geology of Hutton and Lyell
that it became obvious that the earth and all of its organisms have changed by
evolution.
Early works of Cuvier, Erasmus Darwin, Lamarck and Robert
Chambers led to the formulation of a general theory of the mechanism of
evolution by Darwin and Wallace in 1858 and the publication of Darwin’s book
“The Origin of Species” in 1859.This theory has been comprehensively confirmed
by recent work on genetics and the mechanism of heredity.
Darwin had noted that most organisms have more offspring than
could survive. They also possessed variability. The survivors of each
generation would be those from this variety that could cope best with each
changed circumstances. Over time the living organisms would undergo obvious
change. Each organism is involved in a “struggle for existence”. or “survival
of the fittest”. Darwin showed that this process could be carried out on
domestic animals and birds by selective breeding.
Darwin
himself was captured by his community beliefs. His wife was an enthusiastic
Christian and he struggled long before admitting in his final autobiography
that he was an “Agnostic”. The confession was censored from this work until his
granddaughter published the full version as late as 1958.
Darwin
saw that the process by which the “fittest” survived was Selection, but he still
believed in Nature, so he made a
distinction between “Natural Selection" and "Artificial
Selection," admitting a human privilege that his theory denied.
The
process does not need his distinction. Selection operates in the same
manner whether it is by deliberate or inadvertent action of a particular
organism, an action of the climate, or earth changes. They all have the effect
of processing evolution.
Evolution
by selection applies to all organisms including humans. Humans therefore have
no privileges over others. They have no supervising deity, no after life, and
no responsibility for other organisms, except for their own survival.
.
Darwin’s theory was later wrongly altered to incorporate the idea that humans are special
by Julian Huxley, Ernst Mayr and others.
“The Origin of Species” explained that the
term “Species” is merely a classification category decided arbitrarily by
taxonomists. The decision on separation of Species is both arbitrary and
variable. At present there are two competing methods, that of Linnaeus, based
on appearance and behaviour, and that based on DNA sequences. Whichever is
chosen, the number of species can be any figure that taxonomists decide; there
is no definite number. The reasons for separating one species from another are
not standardized and are almost impossible to decide for fossils and for
viruses and bacteria.
Organisms
participate in mutual struggle for existence, and some are more successful than
others. The process is so complex that the future cannot be predicted.
Occasionally a particular organism becomes extinct and human activity may play
a part in the process, but we are not obligated to intervene unless our own
interests are involved.
The
disagreement between the Environmentalist Heresy and Evolution Science can be
summarised in the following table.
ENVIRONMENTALISM
|
EVOLUTION
|
The
Environment
|
The
Environment has no physical existence. Organisms interact in such a complex manner
that no clear boundary can be drawn between one group of organisms and another
|
Humans are
responsible for the “planet”
|
Humans are
just one of many organisms interacting with one another. No organism is responsible
for any other organism unless its own interests are involved
|
Humans
are destroying the “planet”
|
Humans have only a minor influence on organisms in
general
|
Sustainability
|
Sustainability is the reverse of evolution.
Evolution cannot be stopped, let alone reversed. Each organism tries to take
advantage of evolution, but to stand still is the road to decline.
|
Endangered
species
|
All organisms evolve and new ones replace old ones.
The term “species” is a human artifact which tries to classify evolutionary
progress. Organisms that become less common make way to others which renew
the world.
|
Ecosystems
|
Ecology
is the study of interaction between organisms. It is a dynamic process and it
occurs at every level. It is not possible to divide organisms into convenient
packages. Every region, whether small or
large, is constantly changing, never static
|
Biodiversity
|
The numbers of organisms interacting in one
area cannot be satisfactorily counted, and they depend on the climate and the
evolutionary success of each organism. There is no ideal number nor is a
larger or smaller number a reason for concern.
|
Conservation
|
The opposite of evolution. Humans have a
tendency
to oppose inevitable change.
|
The
Selfish Gene
|
A theory that only the evolution of individuals is
important. It ignores the importance of social evolution and the development
of instincts
|
The
Noble Savage
|
The belief
that primitive peoples are somehow superior and free from problems of more developed
societies is untrue
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)