Firing squads at dawnRichard Treadgold | December 11, 2009
Steve O’connor is a senior geologist who has studied paleoclimate for 40 years. He lives in the circulation area of the Taranaki Daily News, which today published some astonishing comments from one Trotter. I am, unfortunately, unable yet to confirm the Taranaki Daily News item or give a link to it, but I am re-publishing Steve’s letter anyway, because it is the best summary I have read of the central anxieties arising from the global warming scam.
UPDATE 14 Dec 8:30 am: To give you just an outline of Trotter’s complete abandonment of evidence-based science, his denial of the right to free speech and his denial of evidence-based doubts of man-made global warming, here are the concluding comments from his Dominion article, titled “In the war for nature, the deniers are traitors”:
“There will, of course, be people who whisper that the enemy isn’t really our enemy … In 1940, England was full of such whisperers. The British ruling class, in particular, was riddled with defeatists, Nazi sympathisers and traitors. Back then people called them “Quislings” and “Fifth Columnists”. If, therefore, the battle against climate change has to become the moral equivalent of war, with all the sacrifice that war entails, then climate change denial must become the moral equivalent of treason. Over the top? No. The stakes really are that high.”
It is sobering to reflect that, a mere 65 years after World War II, which killed so many of our finest young men as they defended the freedom we still live in against the oppression from without of the advancing fascist barbarians, we are about to subjugate ourselves from within. For the remaining vestiges of that freedom are about to be crumpled in the unelected fists of the most devoted, socialist, totalitarian, “environmentalist” bureaucrats the world has ever produced, justified solely on the grounds of non-existent evidence of man-made climate control.
A menacing interpretation
When I first encountered, a couple of years ago, this menacing interpretation of the approaching “carbon crisis” I scoffed. It was alarmist nonsense; outlandish that anybody would do such a thing; an imaginary conspiracy from the paranoid—surely the movement is based on the science of the enhanced greenhouse effect?
Now I must accept that the greenhouse effect is no justification; for world government is a growing theme, not only from my fellow sceptics, but from the very perpetrators themselves, feeling apparently secure in a certain popularity. My mouth drops open further the more I read their brazen assertions. Politicians, bureaucrats and environmentalists, becoming bolder with their increasing desperation—since global warming is so obviously waning—rush forward to spell out their need to control our lives. But they are intent on saving the earth, not us, and reveal no affection for scientific principles in doing so.
Antidote is honesty
So here is Steve’s elegant and concise elucidation of our potential future. We are indeed fortunate, for he also sets out the simple antidote which we can each take up and champion—transparency, by which he means simple honesty and openness. It is no more than all leaders should provide. Steve reveals that the campaign of the CCG and the NZCSC for access to climate data is not inconsequential, it is not mere chat about the weather: it is in fact vital for freedom.
If anyone had any lingering doubts about the real one-world government agenda at Copenhagen, paid for by the West, then Marxist Chris Trotter’s column, particularly the closing paragraphs (Daily News, 11 December), spelled it out beautifully. Anyone who disputes the IPCC scientists is to be tried and shot. Sound familiar? What will be the penalty for a too-long shower or an illegal light bulb?
To put this in a local context: if the NPDC [New Plymouth District Council] sent out a rates bill next year with a 50% increase that all, pensioners included, would have to pay, there would be letters of outrage to the press, with demands that the Council please explain. Well, from next year, every tax payer in New Plymouth will be paying the equivalent of that to the UN bureaucracy. You didn’t know this because they haven’t told you yet; at the moment they are just softening you up with a media campaign, including local presentations by their agents, about you being happy to pay for the safety of the world’s children (from which, using their own sustainability logic, there are too many little carbon footprints).
What people are demanding is the same transparency on this that they require from local authorities. We want complete access to weather data, not some massaged figures that suits their case. We want to know where your money is going, not some vague statements about “sustainability” and “fairness”. We want to know how much control on a strategic and daily basis a non-elected elite is going to have on our lives. In other words, we are a tad concerned about our economy and democratic freedoms that New Zealanders have worked so hard to preserve, and have in some cases even given their lives for.
UPDATE: Moments after publishing this, Steve sent me the link here to Chris Trotter’s opinion piece, published in the Dominion Post. Reading it, one admires the call to arms against the common threat, the stirring motives set out for our approval and the entirely worthy goals set forth for our collective efforts. There is nothing wrong with any of this. We all want to save the earth, of course we do. Could there be a more righteous endeavour? But there is one thing missing from this uplifting rhetoric: evidence of a threat. Missing that, all he says is hollow. Missing that, he himself becomes the common threat.