Sorry to go on about this, but it's important.
The Green Party, via its leader Natalie Bennett, suggested last week that anyone in a position of seniority or influence who doesn't believe (sign up wholeheartedly) to the doctrine of man-made global warming, should be removed from their job.
My original response here (with a link to the Telegraph and BBC articles) was perhaps somewhat 'knee jerk' in nature and less considered than I would usually prefer, but I stand by it wholeheartedly.
Now I know that the Greens are hardly in a position of real power but the view expressed last week by La Bennett, whilst extreme, is not a million miles away from the main stream parties' views and nor is it far from the stance of the main stream media (MSM) including our national broadcaster the BBC whose views we cannot escape from and are forced to pay for.
How often do politicians such as Ed Davey (Energy Minister), Ed Miliband, Barak Obama etc., describe anyone not fully signed up to the concept of man-made global warming and our ability to control the planet's environment, as 'flat earthers' or climate deniers in a perjorative sense? They do it all the time and the BBC states that 'the science is settled' and will countenance no further debate.
On what they describe as the 'biggest challenge facing mankind' in the 21st Century.
It can't be discussed. The biggest challenge facing mankind cannot be discussed? Can that really be true in our civilized society? Can they really be suggesting that legitimate concerns, not just from 'ordinary folk' like me but also a significant and growing number of highly qualified scientists, should be prevented from getting a fair airing?
Well they are. Are you happy about that? It's like saying if you don't believe in God you will be victimised, disadvataged. Persecuted.
And I use that analogy carefully. There is no more empirical scientific evidence that man is responsible for climate change (and can, therefore control the globe's climate) than there is that God exists.
None. At all. Tell me I'm wrong about this. But read this and this first, because you need to know some of this stuff.
So what we have is an 'establishment' that has bought in, hook, line and sinker into what I believe is the biggest non-religious scam in history. And there is simply no evidence that the science is more than embryonic and fundamentally flawed, let alone 'settled'.
Answer me this: if the science is so compelling, so 'factual', so complete, why are these people doing anything they can to stifle any kind of debate or opposing views? Surely they can just point to their 'facts' and us 'flat earth deniers' will just go away having lost the argument? Why isn't that happening?
It isn't happening because there are no 'facts'. There is no compelling scientific evidence that man is causing climate change and equally no similar evidence that man can control the climate on earth.
If there was, I would be at the forefront of the campaign to restrict the use of fossil fuels, the emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere, saving our planet for our future populations. But there isn't. And large numbers of people including many scientists are getting rich on propagating this bullshit.
And governments are able to raise massive additional taxes from people who can ill afford it, on the basis of this massively flawed 'science and belief' system. No wonder they're keen on it.
In the 1930s a gentleman by the name of Hitler managed to persuade an entire nation that Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, disabled and mentally deficient people should be exterminated. That they were an underclass, inhuman and should be eliminated. He controlled the media and the message. By denying people free speech he controlled the very thought processes of his citizens. He denied debate - he (they, the Nazis) were right and there was no room for any kind of debate.
People were removed from their jobs if they didn't conform, didn't wholeheartedly buy in to his vision.
So, where are we now? Having learned from that despicable period in our history, surely no-one would ever countenance depriving people of their freedom of speech or thought? Surely no-one would try to deny people their legally held views. Their ability to question the actions of their elected representatives. After all that is democracy. It's what we fought and spilled blood for. What so many people lost their lives to preserve.
Are you listening Dave? And Ed and Nick? The BBC? The MSM?
Are you listening Natalie Bennett and the Green Party?
This is not a game. This is deadly serious. Suppressing people's views, making the facts fit your agenda (for your own gain) is not a 'bit of fun'. It's not democracy. It's not grown-up or civilized. It's Fascism.
Fascism, pure and simple. Anti democratic, anti free speech. Green Party policy.
Thanks for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment