UN Speaks Truth About Climate Change, for a Change

And it's not flattering.

Scragged's coverage of the fraud once was known as "global warming" has observed much of that issue's political arc.

When first we explored the concept, the entirety of the world's great and good of all parties wholeheartedly believed that the earth was getting warmer and that mankind was to blame.  What was worse, they believed that Drastic Action was needed to Save the Planet from mankind.  In an extensive eight-part series, we thoroughly debunked this false belief and its underlying logic such as there was any.

Alas, Al Gore's lies were more powerful than our truth - for a while.  We reported how England's High Court ruled An Inconvenient Truth to be so fraudulent as to be unfit for school kids, even as our EPA called polar bears endangered based on one of Gore's charges that the Court specifically found to be false.

Slowly, ever so slowly, truth outed and the tide turned.  The Europeans started to realize that eliminating carbon emissions would destroy their economies, and held themselves mostly to lip-service of environmental mantras instead of actually doing anything much that would be too expensive.

Then real scientific evidence demonstrated that the earth isn't warming at all - and even if it was, it's cold temperatures that cause harsher storms like Katrina, not to mention the fact that more carbon dioxide is good for plants.

How could the science be so varied?  Thanks to a still-anonymous leaker/hacker, we found out in the Climategate scandal that the warmists' numbers were faked and that indeed there is no actual data indicating a warming planet, as repeated harsh winters have hammered home.  Just when people were catching on to the fact that "global warming" wasn't happening, the fraudsters adopted the new name "climate change" which can mean anything.

Al Gore's new DC home.

Why this fraud?  We've argued that the phony "global warming" scare is yet another attempt to grow the size and power of government - and indeed governments the world around have used it as an excuse to get away with things they'd never have dared try otherwise, such as outlawing Edison's light bulb.  As always, researchers were willing to say anything that would get them funding.

Environmentalists have long argued that human beings are a pox on the planet and we need far fewer of them; reducing energy use, technology, and modern conveniences will kill off millions.  The culture and nation which has led to by far the greatest comfort and finest way of life for the largest number of ordinary people - namely, the American way, and Western culture - is the official enemy of environmentalists and statists the world over.

Dr. Evil Speaks

This seems like a wacked-out conspiracy theory.  Although Americans now generally understand that they've been lied to, most of us have a hard time believing that the world's great and good are truly that evil and have it in for them personally.

Fortunately, the United Nations has revealed the truth: Yes, Scragged was and is correct.  The official goal of climate alarmists and the world's environmentalists is, indeed, to steal America's wealth, destroy our way of life, and give it to "the needy" elsewhere who have never earned any wealth and show no likelihood of ever earning wealth of any kind.

This interview of German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer was reported in the German periodical Neue Zürcher Zeitung; you can read it there in the original German, but for the rest of us, here it is in English.

One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy... One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.  [emphasis added]

The interviewer asked, "The new thing about your proposal for a Global Deal is the stress on the importance of development policy for climate policy. Until now, many think of aid when they hear development policies." Dr. Edenhofer responded:

That will change immediately if global emission rights are distributed. If this happens, on a per capita basis, then Africa will be the big winner, and huge amounts of money will flow there[emphasis added]

Whose money would that be?  Ours, that's whose!  The interviewer realized the stunning nature of this revelation, and observed "That does not sound anymore like the climate policy that we know."  Do tell!

And the Doctor's reply?

Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War.  [emphasis added]

We strongly recommend that you read the entire translated interview several times.  Among other things, Dr. Edenhofer readily admits - nay, proudly advocates - that fixing our (nonexistent) climate problem will necessarily require an expropriation of most wealth from all countries which use natural resources - i.e., us, and more specifically, you.

In other words, the international community - that is, the UN, in an act of global governance - must forcibly take from the rich countries, force them to destroy their own economies, force them to stop using advanced energy technology, and give to the global poor who have so amply demonstrated over the past hundred years their stellar inability to use the international aid we've already given them.  Not!

Dr. Edenhofer is no marginal nutcase, he's a mainstream nutcase.  He is the Co-chair of Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change of the UN's International Panel on Climate Change which, as you may recall, recently shared a Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore for world-class lying.  You don't get much more official and exalted in the international community than that.

He's not alone, unfortunately.  Do his demands that we impoverish ourselves sound vaguely familiar?  Is there, perhaps, someone else who's been talking along these lines?

Why, yes, indeed there is.

We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK.

That would be none other than President Barack Hussein Obama, telling us gently what the UN wants to tell us forcefully: Go starve and live in a cave, destroying everything that four centuries of American innovators have built, so that we can solve a nonexistent problem - because we say so, and we're smarter than you are.

You know what?  If we listen and obey, if we let them destroy our economy on the basis of a lie, they're right - they are smarter than we are, because we're dumb as rocks.

Smarter than a Box of Rocks

Fortunately, our electorate is not as dumb as they think we are.  The Atlantic mourns:

According to the Wonk Room, following midterm elections, half of the Republican caucus in the U.S. Congress now questions the scientific consensus of global warming. Additional research suggests that 45 of 97 Republican freshmen and 85 of 166 reelected Republicans are confirmed climate deniers.

Instead of letting the self-appointed great and good roll merrily over us in the false name of global warming, we've elected a number of representatives who understand that it's all a scam.  Hopefully, these new representatives will call hearings, blow the scam wide open, cut off funding, and prosecute fraudsters as appropriate.

They can cut the deficit and preserve our way of life at the same time.  What a win!

Kermit Frosch is a guest writer for Scragged.com.  Read other Scragged.com articles by Kermit Frosch or other articles on Environment.
Reader Comments

How about Gore's regret about ethanol? http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFLDE6AL0YT20101122?sp=true

November 22, 2010 10:44 AM

Excellent, sir! I will forward this to everyone I know.

November 22, 2010 11:13 AM

Gore admits he did it to benefit his corn farmer voters. Amazing! Is this the first time a politician has admitted it's a political scam?

November 23, 2010 12:24 PM
Add Your Comment...
4000 characters remaining
Loading question...