by Eric Englund
is the search for truth, whether we like it or not ~ David Bohm
I discovered Austrian economics, in 1999, I gradually undertook
a process of intellectual rebirth. I read many of the masterful
books written by Hayek, Mises, and Rothbard. The more I read,
the more I came to understand that the economics, history,
and social studies classes I attended, from grade school through
grad school, were laden with pro-statist junk. Years of indoctrination
in public schools, which I attended, tend to shape a person
into a non-thinking, state-worshiping, sponge who absorbs
"news" and information from the mainstream media
and mistakes it for knowledge. This being stated, could it
be that science itself has been tainted by statism?
Say it isn’t so as I immensely enjoyed taking science courses
while attending school. Alas, the poisonous reach of the state
leaves nothing unscathed.
face it; for the most part, teachers aren’t very bright. The
vast majority are state propagandists who cannot imagine a
world without an omnipotent state. In their little minds,
all we have is due to the beneficence of the state. It is
no wonder teachers preach the religion of statism, which permeates
each and every subject they teach, including science.
the classroom to the mainstream media, conventional wisdom
dictates that the science is settled when it comes to DDT,
AIDS, and anthropogenic global warming. We "know"
DDT is a dangerous, carcinogenic pesticide; that AIDS is caused
by a deadly virus named HIV; and that mankind’s carbon dioxide
emissions are causing global warming. Why would anyone want
to revisit these topics considering the exhaustive and damning
media coverage given to these subjects?
the answer is simple. For all of those years I spent in public
school classrooms, I received what I now call "junk education"
(from personal experience, I firmly believe such junk education
is endemic to private schools as well). It was time for me
to ask tough questions, to read dissenting views, and to expunge
the pollution spewed into my brain by teachers, media talking
heads, and others. Due to discovering Austrian economics,
there was a specific catalyst which thrust me from gradualism
into re-education overdrive.
of 2001, I attended Mises University. For me, it was a life-changing
experience. Every class I attended was interesting due to
the top-flight quality of the instructors teaching each course.
The lecturers, at Mises University, sang the praises of capitalism
and hit all of the right notes based upon the unshakable foundation
of Austrian economics. I came away, from Mises University,
with the understanding that general prosperity emerges through
capitalism, not the state. To be sure, plenty of books were
available for sale and I partook as an eager consumer; I wanted,
after all, to supplement my wonderful experience with something
tangible to take home.
on August 10, 2001, I purchased Dr. George Reisman’s magnificent
book Capitalism (he autographed it for me); and I thumbed
through it later that day. When I arrived at chapter three,
titled "Natural Resources and the Environment,"
I was thunderstruck by Part B, of chapter three, subtitled
"The Ecological Assault on Economic Progress." This
is when I had the epiphany that my public school education
had polluted my mind with enough rubbish to seriously impede
my intellectual growth.
me that my grade school education – of the late 1960s and
early 1970s – was peppered with environmentalism, statism,
and a distaste for economic progress. Woodsy
Owl implored me to "give a hoot, don’t pollute,"
Bear informed me that "only you can prevent forest
fires." I recall, on numerous occasions, having folks
dressed as either Woodsy or Smokey drop by our elementary
school and essentially lecture us about our duty to protect
Mother Earth; which, by implication, seemed to be the property
of the state.
clear to me, in retrospect, the only "religions"
allowed in my public school were that of environmentalism
and statism – we performed the pledge of allegiance at the
beginning of each and every school day. Yes, we were allowed
to celebrate Christmas by putting on an annual Christmas show
for our parents, but the posters of Smokey and Woodsy were
posted year round. And, of course, each classroom housed an
American flag to constantly remind us of the all-pervading
back to that fateful day in August of 2001, here is the passage,
which I found to be of particular importance:
is the product of a growing loss of confidence in reason
long predating the collapse of socialism. It is the leading
manifestation of a rising tide of irrationalism that is
engulfing our culture. As previously mentioned, over the
last two centuries the reliability of reason as a means
of knowledge has been under a constant attack led by philosophers
from Immanuel Kant to Bertrand Russell. The growth of irrationalism
has been manifested in a series of developments each of
which has contributed to the rise of environmentalism. Among
them have been the loss of the concept of economic progress,
the growth of irrational skepticism, a growing decline and
outright perversion of education, and the cultural devaluation
is even more destructive than environmentalism. The growth
of the state has had a profoundly negative impact on science
itself, and thus, science education. As George Reisman explains,
scientific practice and content have been perverted by the
state-sponsored science rests on an existing consensus or
on the initiative of an individual politician, it differs
radically from genuine science in yet another respect. This
concerns the relationship between science and money. In
a free market, it is the truth and importance of the science
that drives the raising of money. Money is raised in order
to facilitate the development and dissemination of the science.
Money is the means; science is the end. With state-sponsored
science, this relationship is largely reversed.
state, in effect, offers pots of money in the form of "grants"
for the study of matters selected by politicians and their
appointees, and then scientists must choose areas of investigation
that are most likely to secure them some of that money.
The "scientists" gather around the pots of money,
like bees around pots of honey, eagerly seeking as best
they can to slurp up some of the money by means of writing
whatever kind of grant proposals they think will promote
the agenda of whichever officials have the power to determine
the award of the grants.
meaning of this state of affairs is that the initiative
for science passes from scientists to the state, i.e., to
politicians and their appointees. And instead of money serving
science, science now serves money, and, it must be stressed,
not ordinary money, but money collected at the point of
a gun, and made available on conditions determined by politicians
and the appointees of politicians.
sure, sound scientific practices continue in spite of state
intervention. By controlling the purse strings, nonetheless,
political agendas do infect science education and science
you attended public or private schools, or paid attention
to the mainstream media, it is extremely likely you were authoritatively
informed that DDT is a supremely dangerous and carcinogenic
pesticide, that AIDS is caused by HIV, and that our earth
is warming dangerously with the cause being mankind’s carbon
dioxide emissions. In other words, you were indoctrinated
with junk science.
follows is additional narrative containing descriptions of
books, essays, lectures, and articles that have been invaluable
with respect to deprogramming the aforementioned scientific
dogmas, regarding DDT and AIDS, which had infected my brain
(I was able to catch onto the global warming scam before it
could take root in my noggin). Perhaps you will find it as
liberating as I have when it comes to expunging state-sponsored
junk science from your mind.
indoctrination of junk science, which I recall from grade
school, related to the banning of DDT in 1972. My teacher
informed me and my classmates that if we didn’t stop using
this evil pesticide, the entire food-chain was going to be
poisoned, many species of wildlife were going to become extinct,
and human beings were going to get sick and some were going
to die of cancer. Hence, when DDT was banned by the EPA, in
1972, we school children could breathe easier as this horrible
chemical was not going to harm any of us. The science, about
DDT, was settled and our public school teacher imparted this
wisdom upon us accordingly. No reason to give this matter
any further thought; end of story. The state has spoken.
than 30 years later, DDT leapt back into my consciousness.
By chance, I had heard that every
30 seconds a child dies from malaria. Out of curiosity,
I did further research and was shocked to find out each
year 350–500 million cases of malaria occur worldwide,
and over one million people die; most of them young children
in sub-Saharan Africa. It struck me as to how tragic it was
that DDT is such a harmful chemical as so many people could
have been saved by this pesticide; if it was safe.
radicalism took over and I decided to see if there was another
side to the DDT story. I already knew Rachel Carson’s book
Spring rallied the environmental movement to bring
about the banning of DDT. Well, I hit the jackpot when I found
Dr. J. Gordon Edwards’ utter demolition of Silent Spring
in his article titled The
Lies of Rachel Carson. Dr. Edwards was a professor
of entomology, at San Jose State University in California,
and taught biology and entomology there for over 40 years.
propaganda, in Silent Spring, contributed greatly to
the U.S. Government’s banning of insecticides which were capable
of preventing human deaths. She shares the responsibility
for millions of deaths among the poor people in underdeveloped
is something my grade school teacher failed to inform her
students with respect to DDT. It was a matter of public record;
and thankfully, after all these years, Dr. Edwards recounted
this important aspect of DDT’s history. After seven months
Judge Edmund Sweeney arrived at the conclusion that DDT
should not be banned. In his final official decision,
issued on 26 April 1972, he stated: "DDT is not a carcinogenic,
mutagenic, or teratogenic hazard to man. The uses of DDT
under the regulations involved here do not have a deleterious
effect on freshwater fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds,
or other wildlife... The evidence in this proceeding supports
the conclusion that there is a present need for the essential
uses of DDT."
of Judge Sweeney’s findings, EPA Administrator William
Ruckelshaus unilaterally banned DDT. It did not matter
Judge Sweeney’s decision was based upon sound science; backed
by a 9,400 page transcript compiled during the hearings. As
Dr. Edwards stated: "Ignoring the seven months of testimony
and evidence, and the Hearing judge's deliberations and conclusions,
Ruckelshaus personally reversed the Court's decision and gave
the victory to his friends in the Environmental Defense Fund!
His decision to ban DDT appeared to be political, rather
than reflecting scientific evaluations." This really
should come as no surprise as Mr. Ruckelshaus is an environmentalist
and a member of the Environmental Defense Fund.
was DDT targeted by environmentalists? The answer is ugly,
yet simple. Environmentalism is an anti-human movement in
which mankind is viewed as a cancer killing Mother Earth.
DDT was responsible for saving countless lives and, therefore,
added to what environmentalists perceive as a population problem;
meaning the lower the human population, the better. Dr. Edwards
refers to this horrifying, anti-human environmental agenda
in this video-taped
Crichton was another scientist who found the banning of
DDT to be reprehensible. Most people think of Michael Crichton
as an author, screenwriter, and film director. Many do not
know Dr. Crichton was a medical doctor who graduated from
Harvard Medical School in 1969. Consequently, he understood
knew environmentalism has an anti-human agenda. In fact, he
argued environmentalism is a fanatical religion responsible
for the deaths of millions of human beings. Here is what he
stated in his 2003 speech titled Environmentalism
so many past failures, you might think that environmental
predictions would become more cautious. But not if it's
a religion. Remember, the nut on the sidewalk carrying the
placard that predicts the end of the world doesn't quit
when the world doesn't end on the day he expects. He just
changes his placard, sets a new doomsday date, and goes
back to walking the streets. One of the defining features
of religion is that your beliefs are not troubled by facts,
because they have nothing to do with facts.
So I can tell you some facts. I know you haven't read any
of what I am about to tell you in the newspaper, because
newspapers literally don't report them. I can tell you that
DDT is not a carcinogen and did not cause birds to die and
should never have been banned. I can tell you that the people
who banned it knew that it wasn't carcinogenic and banned
it anyway. I can tell you that the DDT ban has caused the
deaths of tens of millions of poor people, mostly children,
whose deaths are directly attributable to a callous, technologically
advanced western society that promoted the new cause of
environmentalism by pushing a fantasy about a pesticide,
and thus irrevocably harmed the third world. Banning DDT
is one of the most disgraceful episodes in the twentieth
century history of America. We knew better, and we did it
anyway, and we let people around the world die and didn't
give a damn.
Carson, was a scientist with an agenda. Other scientists jumped
on her environmentalist bandwagon and fraudulently concluded
DDT was some sort of doomsday chemical which must be banned.
What a lethal combination it is when environmentalism receives
state backing. What emerged was a recipe for junk science
that resulted in the deaths of millions. How utterly despicable.
and private schools claim to have an objective of graduating
students with critical-thinking skills. In my opinion, this
claim is laughable as I seriously doubt more than a miniscule
fraction of teachers properly view the state as a criminal
organization. Heck, I seriously doubt most teachers have
critical-thinking skills. For the most part, we are taught
our government is good, although not perfect, and that it
looks out for the best interests of its citizens. And when
you live in the most powerful country in the history of the
universe, any imperfections one may perceive in our government
must be forgiven; after all, be you a Marxist or a state-capitalist,
you can always vote for change – how wonderful. With such
tripe being pounded into each student’s head for a dozen or
more years, it is not surprising nearly every person I meet
is a statist. As a result, the vast majority of people uncritically
accept whatever information is fed to them by the state; and
the state has fed us a whopper when it comes to AIDS.
of 1984 federal AIDS researcher, Dr.
Robert Gallo, and the Secretary of the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services held an international press conference
in which Dr. Gallo declared he had discovered the virus that
causes AIDS. I was a senior in college when this discovery
was announced; and word, about this lethal virus, spread around
campus like wildfire. I do not recall hearing any skepticism
about AIDS being caused by a virus. Our government and its
paid researchers, as we are instructed, have our best interests
at heart. Thus, without further ado, the science was settled
regarding the cause of AIDS.
there was no evidence proving HIV causes AIDS, in 1988 Congress
mandated that the U.S. Surgeon General, C. Everett Koop, send
every household in America a brochure
about AIDS. Americans, after all, were terrified by the
prediction, from scientists and state health officials, that
AIDS would become an epidemic and "…would turn into the
greatest public health catastrophe of the twentieth century."
Some scientists knew Robert Gallo jumped the gun by announcing
he discovered the cause of AIDS; while having absolutely no
evidence. Ah, but the indispensable state loves to frighten
the somnambulant masses; from time to time.
forward, to the summer of 2004, and I had the good fortune
of discovering Harvey Bialy’s outstanding book Oncogenes,
Aneuploidy, and AIDS: A Scientific Life and Times of Peter
H. Duesberg. Consequently, this lead me to read Peter
Duesberg’s controversial and masterful book Inventing
the AIDS Virus. Dr. Duesberg is a professor of molecular
and cell biology at the University of California at Berkeley.
He is a man with courage along the lines of Ludwig von Mises.
Dr. Duesberg knows the HIV-causes-AIDS hypothesis is incorrect.
Like Mises, Duesberg’s steadfast honesty and search for the
truth have lead to his marginalization in academia. Duesberg
aptly has been dubbed "A
to Inventing the AIDS Virus, is worth the price of
admission alone. It was written by Kary
B. Mullis; winner of the 1993 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.
This will give a flavor of what Mullis has to say about Duesberg’s
controversial stand against the HIV/AIDS hypothesis:
and respect Peter Duesberg. I don’t think he knows necessarily
what causes AIDS; we have disagreements about that. But
we’re both certain about what doesn’t cause AIDS.
have not been able to discover any good reasons why most
of the people on Earth believe that AIDS is a disease caused
by a virus called HIV. There is simply no scientific evidence
demonstrating that this is true.
have also not been able to discover why doctors prescribe
a toxic drug called AZT (Zidovudine) to people who have
no other complaint than the presence of antibodies to HIV
in their blood. In fact, we cannot understand why humans
would take that drug for any reason.
cannot understand how all this madness came about, and having
both lived in Berkeley, we’ve seen some strange things indeed.
We know that to err is human, but the HIV/AIDS hypothesis
is one hell of a mistake.
also refreshing to know Dr.
Mullis has not bought into the junk science asserting
humankind is causing global warming.)
is the epidemic that would become the twentieth century’s
greatest public health catastrophe? In Dr. Duesberg’s book,
he mentions how the World Health Organization forecasted 100
million people would be infected, by HIV, by early 1990. When
it was announced HIV could be found in saliva, talk of "casual
transmission" became mainstream and terrifying. Worse
yet, who can forget the idea of how a deadly blood-borne virus
may end up being spread by mosquitoes? Yet, once again, where
is the epidemic predicted by state health officials? Oh, the
the AIDS Virus, Dr. Duesberg convincingly acquits HIV
of all charges that it causes AIDS. In reality, HIV is nothing
more than a passenger
virus. Here are his exact words:
short, a virus that has been in its host for years before
a disease occurs, that is typically inactive and rare during
a disease, and that is not present in every case of that
disease is not a credible suspect for viral disease. It
is an innocent bystander or a passenger virus. HIV meets
all of these criteria. Since HIV also fails Koch’s
postulates, there is no rational basis for the HIV-AIDS
hypothesis. In the courts of science HIV must be acquitted
of all charges for AIDS – it is an innocent virus.
is AIDS? For an answer, I recommend Christine Maggiore’s concise
book titled What
if Everything You Thought You Knew about AIDS was Wrong?
Christine Maggiore states "AIDS is not a disease."
In fact: "All AIDS-defining conditions occur in people
who test HIV negative, none appear exclusively in those who
test positive, and all existed before the adoption of the
name ‘AIDS’." There are over two dozen conditions which
are used to define AIDS (such information is also available
in Duesberg’s lengthier and more detailed book). Yet, oddly
enough, such conditions have medically recognized causes and
treatments unrelated to HIV. In other words:
+ Positive HIV Test = AIDS
+ Negative HIV Test = Pneumonia
+ Positive HIV Test = AIDS
+ Negative HIV Test = Tuberculosis
yet, the drugs used to treat AIDS are themselves lethal. Chemotherapy
compounds such as AZT and ddl are prescribed in combination
with protease inhibitors to battle the HIV infection. Imagine
fighting a pneumonia with extraordinarily toxic drugs that
can cause liver failure, fatal damage to the pancreas, and
nerve damage throughout the body? This is what comes to pass
when a person has a harmless passenger virus (HIV) and happens
to catch a pneumonia. Your doctor’s prescription, in other
words, may kill you when all you need perhaps is ten days
worth of simple antibiotics.
of a quote, from Dr. David Rasnick – a designer of protease
inhibitors – can be found in Maggiore’s book:
a scientist who has studied AIDS for 16 years, I have determined
that AIDS has little to do with science and is not even
primarily a medical issue. AIDS is a sociological phenomenon
held together by fear, creating a kind of medical McCarthyism
that has transgressed and collapsed all the rules of science,
and has imposed a brew of belief and pseudoscience on a
Maggiore, over time, found herself in the crosshairs of the
government-backed AIDS cabal. In 1992, Christine was diagnosed
as HIV positive and was given a death sentence by the medical
establishment – she had five years to live. She was encouraged
to be retested, and she did so more than a dozen times, and
received results of HIV negative, HIV indeterminate, and HIV
positive. Such bizarre results lead her to ask questions which,
unfortunately, produced a backlash from the very AIDS organizations
she was helping to build. At this point, she was on her own
and needed to think critically and objectively.
her independent research, Christine Maggiore concluded an
HIV positive diagnosis is not a death sentence. By 1996, she
had written her seminal book What if Everything You Thought
You Knew about AIDS was Wrong? Not only was her research
and writing first-rate, it was gutsy as well. How dare anyone,
who is HIV positive, write a book which questions scientific
consensus and provides false hope to other HIV positives?
Going against the mainstream viewpoint, to be sure, made her
27, 2008, Christine Maggiore died of pneumonia. A touching
can be found online celebrating the life of this intelligent,
loving, and courageous woman. The following passage struck
me as to how cruel humans can be when a person chooses to
think independently and not blindly buy into state-backed,
spite of Christine’s strength, she was also under tremendous
pressure and scrutiny. She often felt that she wasn’t allowed
to get sick like other people. After her daughter died in
2005 of an allergic reaction to an antibiotic for an ear
infection, the LA County Coroner – ignoring evidence to
the contrary – declared it a death from AIDS and Christine’s
suffering increased horribly. She was vilified in the world
media and harassed by outspoken opponents of her work who
openly gloated that this was her just comeuppance. She and
her family endured a yearlong criminal investigation that
not only terrorized them, but also robbed them of an opportunity
to mourn the loss of their daughter. That loss was twisted
into sensationalized and mean-spirited television episodes
that portrayed Christine as a quack and a murderer and ultimately
as dead. Christine never fully recovered from the unjust
treatment that she received around the loss of Eliza Jane
and that treatment ultimately exhausted her.
Maggiore’s legacy is one of hope, love, intellect, caring,
and respect for those who still believe in the scientific
method. Her detractors, who support state-backed terror and
robbery, are intellectually and spiritually dead.
mind, the HIV=AIDS=Death hypothesis has everything to do with
increasing the "health" of the state. Politicians
are opportunistic parasites who look for ways to aggrandize
the state by painting doomsday scenarios, often "supported"
by junk science, and then promising the populace to rescue
them from calamity. With both public and private schools preaching
the religion of statism, we are mislead to believe – at a
very young age – that life would be nasty, brutish, and chaotic
without the good and stabilizing forces brought to bear by
United States, with AIDS not becoming a public health catastrophe
as predicted back in the 1980s, a new scare tactic was devised
to keep people in terror of HIV/AIDS. What better way to do
so than claiming AIDS is a threat to our beloved state. As
Harvey Bialy points out in his above-mentioned book, in 2000
from the White House and its outgoing occupant William Clinton,
who declared that AIDS in Africa was suddenly of national
security concern to the United States. An article from the
Washington Post explains the reasoning for this as
follows: "Authors of one intelligence report said the
consequences of AIDS appear to have ‘a particularly strong
correlation with the likelihood of state failure in partial
democracies’ and held out the prospect of ‘revolutionary
wars, ethnic wars, genocides and disruptive regime transitions.’"
Thus, HIV, not only causes poverty and malnutrition in Africa,
but it also is a cause of political instability and potential
you have it, the state has given a harmless passenger virus,
HIV, the bum rap of not only killing human beings, but being
a potential state-killer as well. Be very, very afraid.
is the next bogeyman for the politicians to pull out of their
hats? How about declaring a trace gas, essential to life itself,
as a threat to Mother Earth’s very existence? Nah, the political
elites have more respect for the intellect of their state-loving
citizens than that. Or do they?
global warming (AGW) is a scam being perpetrated by politicians,
corrupt scientists, unethical businessmen, and environmentalists.
This scam’s ultimate objective is to increase state power
over our lives, thereby taking us further down the road to
socialism. Along the way, political elites and their cronies
will line their pockets at our expense.
better way to frighten us into submission than to assert mankind’s
carbon dioxide emissions are going to cause a global climate
catastrophe which may render a great deal of Earth uninhabitable.
Let the state, therefore, provide us with edicts, supervision,
and laws in order to guide us into becoming more eco-friendly
citizens. This state-sponsored scam is one which I unraveled
before it took hold in my mind. Most assuredly, I am not "going
I will admit my public school education wasn’t a complete
waste. In fifth grade I recall learning about photosynthesis.
Integral to the photosynthesis process is a trace gas known
as carbon dioxide. Without carbon dioxide, there would be
no plant life here on Earth. In turn, no plants means no animals.
All those years ago I was taught carbon dioxide was essential
to my very existence. As a child, how else could I view this
gas other than in a positive light?
the global warming alarmists deem carbon dioxide to be a dangerous
pollutant. This tipped me off to the scam immediately. How
in the world could life emerge based upon pollution (CO2)
as a building block? Carbon dioxide, moreover, is found in
beer, sparkling wine, soda pop, and sparkling water. Let’s
also not forget carbon dioxide is integral to the process
of making bread. Consequently, the global warming alarmists
are telling me that I am eating and drinking pollution. This
is nonsense on steroids and a lie of epoch proportions. You
and I would not be alive without carbon dioxide. To label
CO2, as a pollutant, is nothing short of deranged.
topic I recall from grade school science pertained to the
atmosphere. We learned the two most abundant gases are nitrogen
(78%) and oxygen (21%). With how important carbon dioxide
is to the formation of life, I was a bit surprised to learn
it only comprised approximately .038% of the atmospheric gases.
It truly is a trace gas.
carbon dioxide comprises a minuscule proportion of the atmosphere,
it instantly made no sense to me that a runaway greenhouse
catastrophe would be precipitated by a trace gas. This, to
me, seemed to be a physical impossibility.
of physics, in July of 2007, German physicists Gerhard Gerlich
and Ralf D. Tscheuschner published a seminal paper titled
of the Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects within the Frame
of Physics (this is version 4.0 published January
6, 2009). On page 92 of this document, Gerlich and Tscheuschner
are no common physical laws between warming phenomenon in
glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effect,
which explains the relevant physical phenomena. The terms
"greenhouse effect" and "greenhouse gases"
are deliberate misnomers.
can carbon dioxide not cause a runaway greenhouse catastrophe,
but the whole business regarding greenhouse effects and greenhouse
gases is pure bunk. Thus my initial thought of a trace gas
not being capable of causing a greenhouse catastrophe wasn’t
quite correct because the entire notion, regarding greenhouse
gases, is incorrect in and of itself.
is even more delicious, about Gerlich and Tscheuschner’s paper,
pertains to how the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis
violates the first and second laws of thermodynamics. Read
pages 75 through 79, of this document, and enjoy the smashing
annihilation of AGW.
goes to show how shameless politicians and environmentalists
are when it comes to terrorizing people into submitting to
a green-socialist version of social engineering. Not only
do they call carbon dioxide a pollutant, they concoct a scam
that violates the very laws of physics; and none of this will
make the evening news.
bothersome aspect, of the global warming swindle, pertains
to the lack of any role the Sun takes in climate modeling.
It seems as if the climate modelers are writing computer programs
along the lines of writing a cookbook without ever mentioning
book, which dismantles the AGW scam, is Ian Plimer’s book
and Earth: Global Warming the Missing Science. Dr.
Plimer, the Emeritus Professor of Earth Sciences at the University
of Melbourne, has written a magisterial tome irrefutably proving
anthropogenic global warming is merely junk science. Among
the many topics covered, by Dr. Plimer, is the Sun. He opens
chapter three – titled "The Sun" – with a sentence
Al Gore would never utter: "The Sun is the primary driving
force of climate." Imagine that. Perhaps it would make
sense to better understand the Sun, and its cycles, in order
to bring forth advances in climate science. To convey an important
perspective about the Sun, Dr. Plimer points out the following
in Heaven and Earth:
second, the Sun delivers to Earth the total amount of energy
released by an earthquake of Richter magnitude 8. The amount
of energy human’s use annually is delivered from the Sun
to the Earth in one hour. The known recoverable resource
of oil contains the energy that the Sun delivers to the
Earth in 36 hours.
So let’s get this straight, Al Gore and his green minions want
us to ignore the Sun. We are to focus, instead, on carbon dioxide
as the most important driver of climate. This despite the facts
that carbon dioxide is a trace gas; it is not a pollutant; the
AGW hypothesis violates the first and second laws of thermodynamics;
and it is essential to photosynthesis which makes CO2 absolutely
indispensable to life on Earth. Plain and simple, AGW is junk
science aimed at frightening the poorly-educated masses; which
covers just about everyone.
begs the question as to what do Al Gore and the politically-connected
greenies have to gain from vilifying carbon dioxide, via junk
science, and leading us to believe in the "solutions"
our beloved governments will provide to us? A great way to
find the answers is to read The
Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism
by Christopher C. Horner. Ultimately, it comes down
to money, power, and social engineering; with a lot of fear-mongering
along the way.
we do not want the Chicago
Climate Exchange to take wing. One of the directors of
the Chicago Climate Exchange is Maurice
Strong. He is a former Under-Secretary General of the
United Nations and is a flaming environmentalist. He is infamous
for stating the following:
"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized
civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring
that about?" Without a doubt, Mr. Strong is an enthusiastic
supporter of cap and trade legislation. Should such legislation
pass in the U.S., there will be a markedly negative impact
on our already morose economy; in the meantime, well-connected
folks such as Mr. Strong will profit handsomely by legally
fleecing Americans – which is what the Chicago Climate Exchange
is all about. In other words, follow the money, and at the
end of the trail you will find con-artists like Al Gore and
Maurice Strong. If you don’t believe anthropogenic global
warming is a state-backed scam, with a key objective of redistributing
wealth from the poor and the middle classes to the wealthy,
then think again.
examined, the state should be viewed
as "…a clumsy, retarded giant, and therefore you have
to be careful to limit what tasks you assign it." We
have, regrettably, assigned government the tasks of providing
education and redistributing wealth for a goodly portion of
which clearly retards intellectual growth and critical thinking,
has become the opiate of the frightened masses. Statism’s
delivery devices include television, radio, newspapers, magazines,
and especially schools; private and public. We are surrounded
by the state, we are terrorized by it, we are dumbed-down
by it, we are murdered by it, and yet, we worship it.
have performed an especially admirable job of producing fools
who mistake their pro-statist brainwashing for an education.
Therefore, I can see why people have come to believe that
a life-saving compound, DDT, is evil and poisonous; I can
see how a harmless passenger virus, HIV, is deemed a deadly
threat to humanity; I can see how carbon dioxide, a life-giving
trace gas, can be labeled as a menace to the entire planet;
and everywhere I look, I see an opiated and intellectually
truncated populace behaving like battered wives who heap affection
and respect upon the abusive and murderous state.
reminded of the timeless H. L. Mencken quote: "The
whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with
an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
Think of DDT, HIV, and carbon dioxide. Only the state, indeed,
can save its somnambulant plebes from these make-believe foes.
tasks, ultimately, should be assigned to the state? None!
The sooner people come to realize this, the sooner they can
wake up from the nightmarish opiated stupor that is statism.