In re-reading the chapter “The Tyranny of Visions” from Thomas Sowell’s classic little book, “The Quest for Cosmic Justice,” he observes that tyrannies “prevail in visions of social and economic activities” as well as in questions of war and peace. Dr. Sowell writes: “Perhaps no vision underlies more social and economic theories than the vision of the rich robbing the poor, whether in a given society or among nations.” Suddenly, I realized this is the crux of the United Nations man-made climate change scam.
Sowell continued. “As with so many other examples of cosmic visions, the intellect of the intellectuals has not been bent toward testing such beliefs against empirical evidence, but rather toward illustrating such theories with selected facts.”
That’s it. The promoters of the theory of man-made climate change have no evidence, but they use selected facts: statistics, modeling data; glaciers melting; sea-ice in the Arctic, etc. to assume their case. That is, if we (wealthy countries) don’t reduce worldwide fossil fuel emissions and pay up to the Third World (poor countries) catastrophic climate changes will destroy life across the planet as we know it. But, of course, there is no proof of that.
Dr. Sowell uses as an example Lenin’s Imperialism, a masterpiece of propaganda, which illustrates his theory (some-people-are-poor-because-others-are-rich) with statistics, “without subjecting it to the slightest test.”
Lenin used tables of data that appeared to offer evidence (“fulfills one of the most important functions of propaganda”), and he did offer some information, on a subject with which most people were unlikely to be familiar and in numbers on an impressive scale, writes Sowell. Dazzle them with irrelevant facts and figures and they won’t notice the illogical argument.
It’s all about power and money. And politics is the glue to which it sticks.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) leadership is behind exaggerated alarms and political advocacy of the theory of man-made global warming. Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer exposes one institutional problem that has caused false claims of science “consensus.”
“(C)limate modelers and their supporters in government are largely in control of the research funding, which means that most government contractors and grants go toward those investigators who support the party line on global warming. Sympathizers preside as editors overseeing what can and cannot be published in research journals. Now they even rule over several of our professional societies, organizations that should be promoting scientific curiosity no matter where it leads.” But they have a political agenda.
Central planners want control of government, resources and public funds; they work to usurp the sovereign powers of nations and states—the United Nations, the European Union, and NATO are modern examples. One way IPCC has done this is to politicize science. Dr. Spencer writes:
“The IPCC process for reviewing the science of global warming and climate change has been a peculiar perversion of the usual practice of scientific investigation. Science normally involves the testing of alternative hypotheses, not picking the first one that comes along and then religiously sticking to it. But that’s exactly what the IPCC has done.”
So, socialistic nations in the U.N. are trying to extend their authority by establishing economic and political influence over other states with coercion and fear about catastrophic climate change using global warming pseudoscience.
The degree to which this will succeed will depend on the strength and perseverance of American leadership—and the public recognizing this Marxist scheme.