To be a socialist is very clearly to be opposed to all of the real advantages of civilized human society. They would infuse that society with the constant use of force unguided by reason and indeed directed by the malevolent radical environmentalist's bias against humans. They would deprive us as individuals of the freedom to cooperate with others in endeavors of our own choice. Such a society will soon become thoroughly evil and unsustainable. That that is the course of such societies is richly substantiated by history.
17 April 2016
RICO for government climate deniers? by Paul Driessen and Ron Arnold
How corrupt and fraudulent is the government “science” that denies natural climate change?
To be a socialist is very clearly to be opposed to all of the real advantages of civilized human society. They would infuse that society with the constant use of force unguided by reason and indeed directed by the malevolent radical environmentalist's bias against humans. They would deprive us as individuals of the freedom to cooperate with others in endeavors of our own choice. Such a society will soon become thoroughly evil and unsustainable. That that is the course of such societies is richly substantiated by history.
A self-appointed coalition of Democrat state attorneys
general is pursuing civil or criminal racketeering actions against ExxonMobil, the Competitive Enterprise Institute and other organizations. The AGs claim the groups are
committing fraud, by “denying” climate change. The charge is bogus.
What we contest are false assertions that “humans are
creating a dangerous climate change crisis.” We do not accept false claims that
“the science is settled” and will not be limited to discussing only “what we
must do now to avert looming climate catastrophes.”
That’s not just constitutionally protected free
speech. It is the foundation of scientific progress and informed public policy.
Meanwhile, EPA and other federal agencies, the UN’s
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), climate activist
organizations, state legal and environmental agencies, and legions of
scientists who receive government grants for advancing the “manmade climate
cataclysm” mantra are themselves engaging in what many say is truly misleading
or fraudulent climate science, policy and regulation.
Millions in poor countries die annually from
preventable diseases, because hysterical climate claims justify denying them
access to affordable modern electricity and transportation that could be
provided by coal, natural gas and petroleum products. In developed nations,
climate hysteria has cost millions of jobs, adversely affecting people’s living
standards, health and welfare. In European countries, thousands are dying each
winter, because they can no longer afford proper heat.
The problem is not human intervention in the climate;
it’s improper political intervention in climate science. It has corrupted
scientific findings from the very beginning.
A 1995 document from the US State Department to the IPCC
confirms this, or at least gives allegations of fraud and corruption sufficient
credence to raise serious integrity questions.
When a recent FOIA lawsuit sought that 1995 document,
the State Department said there is “no such correspondence in our files.” But
if we have a copy of the document, how come State doesn’t? Attesting to its
bona fides, Our copy has State’s date-stamp, a Department official’s signature –
and 30 pages of detailed instructions on how the Clinton Administration wanted
the IPCC to change its scientific findings and summary for policymakers, to
reflect US climate and energy policy agendas.
The document is too complex and
technical to summarize. So we’ve posted it in PDF form – unchanged in any way and exactly as received
from a well known and credible source who must remain anonymous to avoid
retribution by people like the RICO prosecutors. You’ll be amazed at what it
says.
It consists of a three-page cover letter to Sir John
Houghton, head of the IPCC Science Working Group,
from Day Mount, Acting State Department Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment
and Development, introducing 30 pages of line-by-line “suggestions” from scientist
Robert Watson and others. One wanted a correct statement about warming rates changed
to a flat lie. “Change ‘continue to rise’ to ‘rise by even greater amounts’ to
provide a sense of magnitude of the extended change,” it says.
Talk about agendas dictating science. Moreover, this “ominous”
warming ended just a couple years later, there has been virtually no planetary
warming since then, and the warming followed 30 years of cooling.
The document raises serious questions
about State Department actions on subsequent IPCC Assessment Reports. What did State
do? Where are the correspondence and instructions to change the science in other
IPCC reports? What are the State Department, EPA and other Obama agencies doing
now to further corrupt climate science and advance their radical energy, social,
economic and political agendas?
We know they won’t answer truthfully. If
they did, they’d have to investigate themselves under the Racketeering
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. Worse, the corruption, deception,
manipulation, exaggeration and fabrication have grown with every passing year,
as alarmists sought to obfuscate their shenanigans and preserve their $1.5
trillion Climate Crisis Empire. The AG actions are designed to punish and
silence organizations that are revealing the scientific flaws and deceptions.
The IPCC was set up in 1988 to examine possible
human influences on Earth’s climate, amid powerful natural forces that have
always driven the complex, dynamic, turbulent, frequently changing climate. As
we note in our book, Cracking Big
Green, from the
outset, Swedish meteorology
professor and zealous warming advocate Bert Bolin wanted to help scientists
“get global warming onto the political agenda.”
By 1995, Bolin could finally say “the
balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate.” Of
course, “discernible” merely means “detectable.” But it gave the State
Department license to dictate the “science.” Then “discernible”
morphed into “dominant,” which morphed into “sole.” Suddenly humans had replaced the complex, interrelated natural
forces that had driven innumerable climate changes throughout Earth’s history.
Voila. Climate hysteria began to drive the political agenda.
Behind the hysteria are carefully orchestrated efforts
to find steadily increasing planetary temperatures, and claim floods, droughts,
hurricanes, tornadoes, snowstorms and snowless winters are more frequent and
intense – even though Real World records show they are not. Original data are
“homogenized” with other data to create higher temperatures; student papers and
activist news releases are presented as “peer-reviewed studies” in IPCC
documents; computer models are presented as “proof” of chaos, even though
actual observations contradict their predictions; and ClimateGate emails reveal
more chicanery. As climatologist and professor David Legates explains, even the 97% consensus claims are fraudulent.
Organizations that pointed out these flaws and
fabrications became a threat to politicians, activists, “warmist” scientists
and bureaucrats who were determined to advance an anti-fossil-fuel agenda.
Their money and efforts were not winning the non-debate. They needed a blitzkrieg counterattack.
In June 2012, the Union of Concerned Scientists and
Climate Accountability Institute organized a “workshop” in La Jolla, CA for climate activists, scientists,
lawyers and other experts. Their subsequent report detailed how successful attacks on tobacco companies could be used as
a template for campaigns, RICO actions and other operations against “climate
denier” companies and organizations.
By 2015, Senator Sheldon “Torquemada” Whitehouse (D-RI) was calling for RICO prosecutions. His actions
prompted free market champion Alex Epstein to tell a congressional committee the senator
should resign because of his
“unconstitutional” attacks on free speech and the energy that powers our
economy.
In January 2016, a secret meeting was held in the Rockefeller Family Fund’s Manhattan offices. It brought
350.org founder Bill McKibben and a dozen other anti-hydrocarbon activists
together, to refine their legal strategies against ExxonMobil and others who
dared to challenge “the scientific consensus” that fossil fuels have brought
humanity and our planet to the brink of “climate chaos.”
Then, on March 29, 2016, New York AG Eric Schneiderman
headlined a press conference of 16 state attorneys general, who announced their
intention to go after organizations that were “committing fraud” by “knowingly
deceiving” the public about the threat of manmade climate change. Within days,
he had launched a RICO action against ExxonMobil, and the Virgin Islands had
done likewise against CEI.
It is difficult not to perceive a pattern of collusion
here, among the activists and their financiers, among the AGs, and probably
among all of them. We are eager to see what emails and other documents might reveal
– especially since Section 241 of
US Code Title 18 makes it a felony “for two or more persons to agree together to injure, threaten or
intimidate” another person in exercising their constitutional rights.
We have only begun to fight – for energy, jobs, sound
science, free speech and human rights. CEI and Exxon are vigorously battling
the outrageous RICO suits, and CFACT will present its new Climate
Hustle movie in a one-day May 2
extravaganza in hundreds of theaters across the USA. We will not be silenced.
Paul
Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow
(www.CFACT.org). Ron Arnold is executive vice
president of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise. They are coauthors of Cracking Big Green: To save the world
from the Save-the-Earth money machine.
My Comments:
This RICO persecution of those who say that catastrophic man-made global warming is nonsense, is proof that the socialists have no respect at all for either individual rights, such as free speech or property rights, or for the scientific method or indeed any rational thought.
The socialists are not willing to engage those who oppose them on the field of rational discussion. They are aware of the fact that they are unarmed and unprotected in a rational discussion of ideas. At first they tried calling those of us who believe in rational discussion ugly names and attributed belittling beliefs to us, which they simply made up. When I signed the Minority Report on Global Warming, I noted that: “Observe which side resorts to the most
vociferous name-calling and you are likely to have identified the side
with the weaker argument and they know it.” That school-yard tactic by the socialists failed, so now these desperate alarmists and profiteers have turned to RICO persecutions by government in the courts. It could not be more obvious how intellectually bankrupt they have become.
To be a socialist is very clearly to be opposed to all of the real advantages of civilized human society. They would infuse that society with the constant use of force unguided by reason and indeed directed by the malevolent radical environmentalist's bias against humans. They would deprive us as individuals of the freedom to cooperate with others in endeavors of our own choice. Such a society will soon become thoroughly evil and unsustainable. That that is the course of such societies is richly substantiated by history.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment