Monday, November 30, 2009


For years we have known that some members of the scientific community who receive government funds have pursued a political agenda and suppressed an objective appraisal of the influence of man's activities on the climate.  But clear, hard evidence of their bias did not achieve widespread public notice until this month when a hacker penetrated the computers of the Climate Research Unit and published the dirty details.  The CRU e-mails, which have been verified as authentic, confirm a scandal of science that rivals the suppression of Galileo.  Despite much of the main stream media's attempt to ignore the issue, the fallout thus far has been significant.  Here are a few of the comments and reports identified by Robert Bidinotto, Breitbart and the Drudge Report:

Even those who believe that objective evidence supports the notion that mankind's commercial activities are altering the climate deplore the suppression of opposing views.  See Pretending the climate email leak isn't a crisis won't make it go away.

But President Obama, Al Gore and others continue pretend that the e-mails and evidence of doctored statistics have not surfaced. And they continue their efforts to create expensive systems of government constraints on commercial activity using global warming climate change as a pretext.  Gore is explicit in his anti-capitalist objectives: " . . . we have placed too great an emphasis on outdated modes of distilling economic value," citing Joseph Stiglitz's work in the Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.  (As I revealed earlier, Stiglitz confuses "capitalism" with a corporatist/fascist economy, which he believes needs more regulation.)  Gore's motives are more nefarious.  He is out to both line his own pockets and facilitate global governance, the ultimate consequence of which would be to supplant the form of government bequeathed to us by our forefathers with an omnipotent superstate. 

The cast of characters supporting the increasingly shrill cries of alarm about global warming climate change, alone, is sufficient to raise questions about the motivations of those who assert that "science" justifies relinquishing the beneficence that free enterprise bestows on us.  The biggest question is why, when climate change is a phenomenon that occurs over centuries, millennia and eons, is there is such an all-fired rush to diminish and dismantle mankind's progress?

No comments: