Collectively,
most of these wealthy socialists acted through their privileged group called
the Club of Rome. The Club was formed in 1968 at David Rockefeller’s estate in
Bellagio, Italy. In their 1994 book The
First Global Revolution Alexander
King and Bertrand Schneider wrote.
“The common enemy of humanity is man. 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. All
these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed
attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is
humanity itself.”
They
claim the list of enemies is designed to unite people. In fact, it is needed to
overcome what they see as the divisiveness of nation-states and to justify the
establishment of one-world government or global socialism. They believe that
global warming is a global problem that national governments cannot resolve.
The changed behavior they want is for all to become socialists.
They finally settled on global
warming as the environmental issue best suited for their goal. Of course, the
plan was just the beginning. One of my favorite cartoons from theNew Yorker showed Moses on the mountain with
the Ten Commandments. The caption read “Great
idea, who is going to fund it?” Global
warming and the identification of human produced CO2 as the problem suited all
the political, financial, and pseudo-religious controls a socialist group could
desire.
The
Kyoto Protocol was presented as a solution to the problem of human-caused
global warming. Those who
created the Protocol also created the problem. Through the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) they produced the science
required to support their claim. It is a well-thought out, well-planned,
classic circular argument. One of the early examples occurred in the book Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment co-authored by Paul
and Anne Ehrlich and President Obama’s current Science Advisor John Holdren. While discussing the non-existent
problem of overpopulation they wrote,
Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control
laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained
under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently
severe to endanger the society.
The question is who “concluded that compulsory
population-control” could be
sustained? The answer is the authors did. The next question is who decides “if
the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society?” Again, it is the authors. So, they
claim there is a problem, then they decide when it is severe enough to warrant
complete suspension of legal controls against such totalitarianism.
More
succinctly, they created the problem, created the proof of the problem, then
offered the solution. This is what was done with the
AGW claim. They assumed,
incorrectly, that a CO2 increase causes a temperature increase. They
then provided proof by programming computer models in which a CO2 increase
caused a temperature increase. They ran the model(s) by doubling CO2, ceteris paribus. The results showed a temperature
increase, which proved their claim. Now they could use CO2 as the lever
for all their political objectives incorporated into the Kyoto Protocol.
Science became the basis of blind faith.
Full
text at: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/02/21/are-environmentalism-and-global-warming-effectively-religious-socialism/
