h1

Consensus Thaws On Global Warming

August 24, 2009

Consensus Thaws On Global Warming

12 Aug 2009 – Investors Business Daily

Ice floats in the Arctic Ocean, which Greenpeace said will be ice-free during summer months by 2030. It admitted later that it made a mistake. AP

Ice floats in the Arctic Ocean, which Greenpeace said will be ice-free during summer months by 2030. It admitted later that it made a mistake. AP View Enlarged Image

Global Warming: What’s the climate change scare really about? Not what the alarmists want the public to think. Just ask the retiring head of Greenpeace. In an unguarded moment, he might spill the secret again.

During an Aug. 5 interview with the BBC, Gerd Leipold, outgoing executive director of Greenpeace, admitted that his organization emotionalizes issues to influence the public. At the time, he was admitting his group had made an error in its July 15 news release that claimed “we are looking at ice-free summers in the Arctic as early as 2030.”

“I don’t think (the Greenland ice sheet) will be melting by 2030,” he said. “That may have been a mistake.”

Or maybe it was one of those examples that Greenpeace embellished to stir fear in the public? If so, it wouldn’t be an isolated case. Others have admitted they’re willing to bend the truth in order to draw attention to the cause.

Twenty years ago, Stanford University environmentalist Stephen Schneider told Discover magazine that it’s perfectly fine “to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts we might have. … Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”

Al Gore noted the power of propaganda when he once told Grist, a magazine for environmentalists, that “it is appropriate to have an overrepresentation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience.”

So why all the distortions about global warming? To save the planet, to save us from ourselves? No. To choke economies in developed nations, particularly the U.S.

“We will definitely have to move to a different concept of growth,” Leipold told the BBC’s Stephen Sackur in the same interview in which he acknowledged Greenpeace’s mistake. “The lifestyle of the rich in the world is not a sustainable model.”

This same thinking is found in the minds of so many of the global warming alarmists. They say they can make the trouble go away if they can just force the U.S. and other developed nations to cut their levels of consumption.

When all the pretense about science is stripped away, it becomes clear that the global warming scare is not about the planet, but about establishing egalitarianism across the world. It’s about making everyone more equal by slowing growth in rich nations rather than increasing growth in poor and developing countries.

The mind-set can be found in campaigns such as Climate Justice, which “is not only the right tool for climate stabilization,” says Jin-woo Lee, a policy analyst for the Energy & Climate Policy Institute for Just Transition, but also “the underlying principle for global equity.”

Greenpeace’s Leipold said he believes the world is finally beginning to take global warming seriously. But that seems wildly optimistic. The movement looks to be losing momentum.

Already 20,000 overnight hotel stays that had been reserved for the December United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen have been canceled. Either a lot of people are losing interest — or they’re thinking it will just be too cold.

Advertisements

One comment

  1. I have not been one to run with global warming, because I’m not a scientist, and haven’t done enough research to say whether it is happening or not. I am not a fan of so many people using Leipold’s quote to dispute global warming though. Just because he exaggerated the effects, does not necessarily mean it doesn’t exist. It just means that he’s trying too hard. And I also don’t think that most environmentalists are trying to kill the economy. Over consumption has an effect on more than carbon emissions (which of themselves are a half truth – somewhere along the way numerous greenhouse gas emissions were reduced to only one…not sure how that happened), it pollutes. I think most true environmentalists strive for responsible manufacturing and responsible consumption. At least for myself, I strive to see less pollution and fair working conditions for laborers. I write more about this on my blog here http://iaminformed.wordpress.com/2009/07/08/to-all-global-warming-dissenters/



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: