CLIMATE SCARE HOAX

A freakish commercial of Greenpeace shows an angry child accusing all adults of destroying his future with global warming! Thousands of drones benefit directly from the global warming scare, at the expense of the ordinary consumer. Environmental organizations globally, such as Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, and the Environmental Defense Fund, have raked in billions of dollars. Government subsidies for useless mitigation schemes are skyrocketing. http://venitism.blogspot.com
 Emission trading programs are at two hundred billion euros a year level, with large fees paid to brokers, those who operate the scams, and kleptocrats. Many people have discovered they can benefit from climate scares and have formed an entrenched alliance with mafiosi and kleptocrats.


Vaclav Klaus declares very clearly that he doesn´t see a special role for science which would be different from doing science. Klaus has, of course, in mind normal science, not a post-normal science whose ambitions are very often connected with political activism. The role of scientists is not in speculating on the probabilities of events that cannot be directly measured and tested, nor in promoting a pseudo-scientific precautionary principle, nor in engaging in activities which are the proper function not of scientists but of risk managers.

Klaus muses the real problem is not climate or global warming, but the Global Warming Doctrine and its consequences. They may eventually bring us close to a real planetary emergency. Absolutely unnecessarily, without any connection with global temperature.

This doctrine, as a set of beliefs, is an ideology, if not a religion. It lives independently on the science of climatology. Its disputes are not about temperature, but are part of the conflict of ideologies. Temperature is used and misused in these disputes. The politicians, the media and the public – misled by the very aggressive propaganda produced by the adherents of the global warming doctrine – do not see this. It is our task to help them to distinguish between what is science and what is ideology.

Klaus points out the global warming doctrine believers have not yet presented its authoritative text, its manifesto. One of the reasons is that no one wants to be explicitly connected with it. Another is that to put such a text together would be difficult because this doctrine is not a monolithic concept which can be easily summarized. 

Its subject-matter does not belong to any single science. It presents itself as a flexible, rather inconsistent, loosely connected cascade of arguments, which is why it has quite successfully escaped the scrutiny of science. It comfortably dwells in the easy and self-protecting world of false interdisciplinarity which is really a non-disciplinarity, it is an absence of discipline.http://venitism.blogspot.com