As I’ve often said, environmentalism as a political philosophy is a cult of death, the highroad to hell, truly neo-Marxism at its blackest. For all those who have so stridently claimed that my criticisms are unjust, that they are divorced from reality and wildly exaggerated, I offer you this latest inanity from the 10:10 propaganda machine:
And here’s another one from the World Wildlife Fund.
More on the matter from Ed Driscoll’s James Delingpole and also this thorough article.
From Capitalism Magazine
Paul Ehrlich, population biologist, Stanford University
King of the pessimistic screechers, it would require a book to list all his foolish ideas… actually, he’s written several. Here’s a random sampling:
–
“In ten years [by 1980] all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish.”
–
“We must go back to the spinning wheel, returning to a beatific state of endless drudge labor, six days a week…”
–
“In the 1970’s… hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death…”
–
“I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.”
And from George Reisman – A word to Environmentalists.
Great blog post on this subject over at Pro Libertate
Here are a few excerpts
Ha – and why are they “concerned about climate change”??? Having an Inconvenient truth shoved down their throats probably helps…
The week before Earth Day, professors teaching the lab portion of CORE 101: Science, Technology and Society required their students to watch Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth during class. Every student at RWU must enroll in this core class to qualify for graduation.
Dana Peloso, a Young America’s Foundation student activist and a junior at RWU, sent an email to the assistant dean of the science department, Jeffrey Hughes, conveying that same point: “with the scientific community unsure if global warming is man induced or part of the natural cycle of the earth, do you think that it is intellectually honest to only show the alarmist viewpoint? If the movie is still shown, what plans are there to incorporate the ideas of leading global warming skeptics into class discussion?”
–
Sweet.
As long as your nihilism is shaded green, everything is ok.
–
What is more interesting about this 10:10 video is that it is actually a re-tread of a website produced by ABC – the Australian broadcasting corporation – telling children when they should die
–
It was known as “Planet Slayer”
Enviro-statism:
10-08-10
California grossly miscalculated pollution levels in a scientific analysis used to toughen the state’s clean-air standards. . .
The pollution estimate in question was too high – by 340 percent, according to the California Air Resources Board, the state agency charged with researching and adopting air quality standards. The estimate was a key part in the creation of a regulation adopted by the Air Resources Board in 2007, a rule that forces businesses to cut diesel emissions by replacing or making costly upgrades to heavy-duty, diesel-fueled off-road vehicles used in construction and other industries.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/07/BAOF1FDMRV.DTL#ixzz11iqEfuN9
Speaking of D, how are you ScummyD? Sorry your comment got caught up in the spam queue. Sometimes hyperlinks make WordPress suspicious, particularly when those hyperlinks contain dirty language, like “gross miscalculation of pollution levels.”
Excellent information.
Thank you for dropping by.
While I am writing this post, I am sitting in ikea, waiting for a couch cover.
shouldn’t ikea be giving me this couch for free???
Thanks Ray. Nice to know. Thought I got banned for some reason.
Banned!? My dear fellow, that would never happen.
Regarding the Professor of Physics: I have been researching the environmental/sustainability religion for the past two years; carbon dioxide is the great satan these environmental fanatics are pursuing. After analyzing massive amounts of information about global warming and climate change, my favorite (and scientifically based) two numbers are these:
1. 38 one thousandths of one percent is the total amount of carbon dioxide in earth’s atmosphere
2. 114 one hundred thousandths of one percent is the total amount of carbon dioxide being emitted by human beings into earth’s atmosphere
And, my favorite definition is:
Sustainability – requires the sharing and management of economic, environmental and social resources equitably throughout the community
When people learn about those few facts, they are able to easily understand why carbon footprints and sustainable development have very little to do with the health of the planet.
clearly this is THE subject of the century. global warming happened many times during earth’s history as well as cooling. so why the panic one would ask. one unmistakeable fact is that earth is in a warming phase that has and will continue to have a profound impact on our ecosystems and consequently our economies. man made or not, let’s leave that to the politicians and various interest groups to fight about. important for me as a human being having produced children, is that we need to get clear on the real science about the warming and, in the event it causes serious harm, to figure out what we can do about it. i for one am not prepared to take the risk that global warming will destroy my great grand children’s environment or that of any other great grand children. that is my position. i call for uncorrupted scientists and technologists to stand up (if they are still around) and come up with practical solutions. that is what our world and our future generations need. bickering over who is to blame for what doesn’t impress me and has never solved a single problem.
Hello Jungle Orchid. You wrote: “one unmistakeable fact is that earth is in a warming phase that has and will continue to have a profound impact on our ecosystems”
Unmistakable? Hardly:
http://www.co2science.org/
Thank you for dropping by and commenting.
31,487 American scientists have signed the “Oregon Petition”, including 9,029 with PhDs. This petition says “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.”