View topic - Czech Pres. calls man-made GW a myth;doubts Gore's sanity :: Free Dominion - Principled Conservative - Party and Canadian Politics

Czech president Vaclav Klaus has criticized the UN panel on global warming, claiming that it was a political authority without any scientific basis.

In an interview with "Hospodárské noviny", a Czech economics daily, Klaus answered a few questions:

Q: IPCC has released its report and you say that the global warming is a false myth. How did you get this idea, Mr President?•

A: It's not my idea. Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment. Also, it's an undignified slapstick that people don't wait for the full report in May 2007 but instead respond, in such a serious way, to the summary for policymakers where all the "but's" are scratched, removed, and replaced by oversimplified theses.• This is clearly such an incredible failure of so many people, from journalists to politicians. If the European Commission is instantly going to buy such a trick, we have another very good reason to think that the countries themselves, not the Commission, should be deciding about similar issues.•

Q: How do you explain that there is no other comparably senior statesman in Europe who would advocate this viewpoint? No one else has such strong opinions...•

A: My opinions about this issue simply are strong. Other top-level politicians do not express their global warming doubts because a whip of political correctness strangles their voice.

• Q: But you're not a climate scientist. Do you have a sufficient knowledge and enough information?•

A: Environmentalism as a metaphysical ideology and as a worldview has absolutely nothing to do with natural sciences or with the climate. Sadly, it has nothing to do with social sciences either. Still, it is becoming fashionable and this fact scares me. The second part of the sentence should be: we also have lots of reports, studies, and books of climatologists whose conclusions are diametrally opposite.• Indeed, I never measure the thickness of ice in Antarctica. I really don't know how to do it and don't plan to learn it. However, as a scientifically oriented person, I know how to read science reports about these questions, for example about ice in Antarctica. I don't have to be a climate scientist myself to read them. And inside the papers I have read, the conclusions we may see in the media simply don't appear. But let me promise you something: this topic troubles me which is why I started to write an article about it last Christmas. The article expanded and became a book. In a couple of months, it will be published. One chapter out of seven will organize my opinions about the climate change.• Environmentalism and green ideology is something very different from climate science. Various findings and screams of scientists are abused by this ideology.•

Q: How do you explain that conservative media are skeptical while the left-wing media view the global warming as a done deal?•

A: It is not quite exactly divided to the left-wingers and right-wingers. Nevertheless it's obvious that environmentalism is a new incarnation of modern leftism.•

Q: If you look at all these things, even if you were right ...•

A: ...I am right...•

Q: Isn't there enough empirical evidence and facts we can see with our eyes that imply that Man is demolishing the planet and himself?•

A: It's such a nonsense that I have probably not heard a bigger nonsense yet.•

Q: Don't you believe that we're ruining our planet?•

A: I will pretend that I haven't heard you. Perhaps only Mr Al Gore may be saying something along these lines: a sane person can't. I don't see any ruining of the planet, I have never seen it, and I don't think that a reasonable and serious person could say such a thing. Look: you represent the economic media so I expect a certain economical erudition from you. My book will answer these questions. For example, we know that there exists a huge correlation between the care we give to the environment on one side and the wealth and technological prowess on the other side. It's clear that the poorer the society is, the more brutally it behaves with respect to Nature, and vice versa.• It's also true that there exist social systems that are damaging Nature - by eliminating private ownership and similar things - much more than the freer societies. These tendencies become important in the long run. They unambiguously imply that today, on February 8th, 2007, Nature is protected uncomparably more than on February 8th ten years ago or fifty years ago or one hundred years ago.• That's why I ask: how can you pronounce the sentence you said? Perhaps if you're unconscious? Or did you mean it as a provocation only? And maybe I am just too naive and I allowed you to provoke me to give you all these answers, am I not? It is more likely that you actually believe what you say.

[English translation from Harvard Professor Lubos Motl]
_____________________________________________________________

New Europe may save Old Europe yet

Posted: 02/ 12/ 07 4:16 pm Post subject:

You can point out specific canonical environmental planks such as global warming may indeed be flawed theory, but you can't deny that there is a need for better environmental stewardship. The clearcutting of natural rainforests in Brazil and Madagascar is one such example.
_________________
http://xkcd.com/675/

Posted: 02/ 12/ 07 4:23 pm Post subject:

I think it's quite clear a solid portion of the enviro-crowd is mentally unstable. They're like the freaks who said the world would end in the year 1000 and then again in 2000.

Posted: 02/ 12/ 07 4:37 pm Post subject:

That rubble in the distance you hear is the start of the environmentalist kyoto crowds crumbling.
_________________
FREE DOMINION FORUM RULES
All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom; justice; honor; duty; mercy; hope ~ Sir Winston Churchill
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people''''s money." Margaret Thatcher

Posted: 02/ 12/ 07 4:48 pm Post subject:

Don't underestimate the power of the media and the stupidity of people Styky. You said "That rubble in the distance you hear is the start of the environmentalist kyoto crowds crumbling." I hope you're correct but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

Posted: 02/ 12/ 07 4:50 pm Post subject:

Posted: 02/ 12/ 07 5:12 pm Post subject:

Havel's a tough old bastard: he's survived Communism and Lung Cancer.

He's an old hand at standing up for freedom and against evil doers.

The enviro-fascists who want to plunder the economy of the West are the ideological successors of the Communists.

They are strong, at the moment.

However, history has a strange knick of producing men like Vaclav Havel to oppose them.

Godspeed to Mr. Havel!

Posted: 02/ 12/ 07 7:52 pm Post subject:

Incisive and insightful.

Suffice to say he'll be in the sights of the global left.
_________________
http://dai-head-jai.blogspot.com/

Posted: 02/ 12/ 07 7:54 pm Post subject:

I think he owes Al Gore an apology, after all according to Al he invented he internet. Laughing

Posted: 02/ 12/ 07 8:58 pm Post subject:

Posted: 02/ 12/ 07 9:02 pm Post subject:

I really liked this interview. Sounds like he did the interview after quaffing more than a few Pilsners. It comes off like a drunken bar conversation. However, I agree with everything Vaclav said, drunk or not.

Posted: 02/ 14/ 07 4:25 pm Post subject:

Posted: 02/ 14/ 07 4:28 pm Post subject:

I nominate Vaclav Klaus to be Prime Minister of Canada. Hurray

I read the article a second time. Klaus is brilliant, forthright and fearless. If Harper had taken this approach from day one, he'd be at 45% in the polls right now. Harper has an obligation as PM to educate Canadians about the hysteria and economic insanity of the global warming fraud. Instead he cynically buys into it, hoping that a Clintonesque triangulation on the issue will win him a majority. Even if Harper wins, we will all lose, because he's paved the way for the true Kyoto radicals to justify extreme action to "save our climate". Harper has given "conservative" credence to the latest liberal Big Lie and there's no going back. Mad

Posted: 02/ 14/ 07 4:55 pm Post subject:

Posted: 02/ 15/ 07 2:07 am Post subject:

	The time now is 09/ 02/ 10 3:44 pm
	Home ∴ Forum ∴ Recent ∴ Register ∴ Profile ∴ Log in to check your private messages ∴ Log in FAQ ∴ Search ∴ Donate ∴ Activist's Toolbox ∴ FD Links ∴ FD Swag [ Login to join chat ] FD Arcade - Click Here-->