[ed. 6 August 2010 – commentary added]
Two quotes to consider, and then some references, and then my basic comments. Additional points are made at http://kali-yuga.org/?p=1273.
Quote 1. Source: -George Orwell, in 1984
“…The rocket bombs which fell daily on London were probably fired by the Government of Oceania itself, just to keep people frightened…”
Quote 2. Source: – The Club of Rome Report – The First Global Revolution: A Report to the Club of Rome
“The common enemy of humanity is man..
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”
(Note – the wording differs slightly between the 1991 and 1993 editions)
Quote 2 variant: Page 75, Chapter “The Vacuum”
The common enemy of humanity is Man.
In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”
Resources:
Those seeking more information on The Club of Rome, should find the following links helpful. There are many other resources, of varying degrees of objectivity (as if Wikipedia was an objective source) but the following should be helpful.
– Wikipedia’s entry on The Club of Rome: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Club_of_Rome
-Alexander King, at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_King_(scientist)
-Aurelio_Peccei, at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurelio_Peccei
The Club of Rome itself: http://www.clubofrome.org/eng/new_path/
Comments:
And now, my comments – this is simple folks, distance yourself from the emotion of the matter to see clearly:
I agree in spirit with the need for greater environmental stewardship and sustainability – our civilization wastes an incredible amount of energy and materials. This will catch up with us.
However the entire climate change discourse, as a discourse, is a hoax, though one largely believed in by the mass of both sides – those believing in anthropogenic climate change and those rejecting it.
My basic point is this – the idea of a general trend, in anthropogenic Global Warming, as seen in the temperature data collected, could actually, possibly, be correct. It could also be incorrect, but either way it doesn’t matter, because either way we are still dealing with a hoax.
What’s more important to us is the rhetorical use of this theme, anthropogenic Global Warming, or Climate Change, used in the media, and by policy makers. This is actually more important to us than the actual facts. Climate Change discourse fits an Orwellian mold perfectly – it is essentially FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt).
It matters not whether or not there has been an overall increase in measured average global temperatures – as caused by human actions – the anthropogenic Global Warming/Climate Change hypothesis.
And it matters not whether or not there has been – as some of the Climate Change skeptics, so-called “Global Warming Deniers” assert – an overall decline in average global temperatures, e.g. Global cooling.
It is the discourse itself, on Climate Change, on both the Left and Right, which is stilted in such a way as to be the perfect hoax.
Read that again with care, I said the discourse. A discourse is independent of the facts discoursed. The hoax lies in the discourse itself, there could also be a hoax in the factual situation as well, but let’s focus on one thing at a time.
It matters not whether either phenomenon exists, in the past or present, or has quickened, slowed down, or ceased. The rhetorical and propagandist use of the theme is alone what concerns us.
As my friend Khalid Bey likes to point out, there is one tell tale sign of a perfect hoax – not only non falsifiability, but non verifiability. If data verifying or denying a thesis is kept closed, selectively released, if private discussions are made public regarding proposals to alter such data, “fudging” for any reason whatsoever, this shows that the discourse is only secondarily about science, and primarily about political or ideological agendas, and hence enters into the realm of emotions and rhetoric.
The anthropogenic Global Warming thesis could be factually correct based on the data recovered and yet the whole discourse still simply be a fraud.
This is counter-intuitive, most people are accustomed to thinking of a fraud in either or categories, true or false. Things are not this simple, which no doubt facilitates fraud greatly.
I will explore this theme in more depth shortly, for now just mull over that possibility.
_EOF
The Club of Rome is the central them of Jonathon Frantzens new book Freedom. I didnt know anything about it until i read the book and have bee researching ever since.
I should check the book out, I’m itching for a new good read.
There is much that’s said of the Club of Rome, much of it lacks substance and is but rumor an innuendo but what is solid and verifiable is very, very, interesting. They are worth knowing more about as they really are movers and shakers, as a set.
Brain…..never thought we can do something about it ….. if u asking me so it’s the best investment
wow ….great post
Makes u think about some great s****
Thanks mate and cheers
But we must admit things that’s happening right now, like natural calamities can be associated with global warming. But whatever the reason maybe, we must all do something about it.
Thanks for commenting, I believe that in order to do something, about anything, we first must actually know what is going on and what is it’s cause.
To make it clear, my best friend is a physicist – in going over the literature out there and really explaining the science well, he convinced of two things, one that
-Anthropogenic Global Warming IS a real phenomenon, but it’s drivers, and effects are being grossly simplified in the mdeia almost to the point of outright lies – also real is anthropogenic Global Cooling, and other forms of anthropogenic Climate Change that have nothing to do with *warming* per se, and may be FAR wider than just the “Greenhouse effect” alone.
-Carbon Dioxide, CO2, is no where near as significant a factor as a driver of real honest human caused Climate Change and/or Global Warming.
-Multiple other things are going on, including cyclical non-human caused aspects that interact in synergy with the human caused factors.
-The public discourse is being simplified simply for political and financial reasons. The stance of bodies like the Club of Rome comes to mind here.
Instead of a sane and rational debate what we see are the so-called anti-science deniers (many of whom are competent scientists) and the so-called rational science positive sustainabilty factions, and it is clear when you really look at it that both being played, honestly, by individuals with massive amounts of money invested in building a financial framework around globally enforced policies that not only will NOT do a lick of good in dealing with real calamities, but may actually facilitate them.
There is something to Climate Change, but the discourse is simplified for us in a way that prevents us from really seeing deeper what’s going on.
It’s made into a political football between the progressive and environmentalist left and the conservative right.
I do not disagree it is a mistake to ignore natural calamities, but what is a mistake is to pretend we know the real causes, and even the serious pro-global warming scientists admit we have no idea what is really going on, and every indication that our fears on these matters are being used for policy purposes in ways that naive apolitical scientists may not fully understand themselves, much less than a general public. The scandals and fraud with carbon trading being an example.
The first step is to stop making it an article of belief and politics, make it a matter of real science across the board, which means listening to and hearing ALL scientific voices instead of spreading lies about diseinters being Big Oil funded (and the reality is that “big oil” or rather “big energy” has cynically played both sides of the fence) and really look at the evidence from multiple perspectives.
There IS NO scientific consensus on anthropogenic Climate Change, it’s drivers, it’s effects, and the degree to which various human actions can affect it, and which human actions will affect it. I’ve talked to/corresponded with/met enough actual real scientists on this issue to satisfy my own curiosity,
The recent climategate scandals (and there were multiple ones) prove that this is not yet being done. That the political game of so-called consensus (and science doesn’t work on building consensus, it works best in breaking an old consensus by exploring aspects of a problem that the consensus view failed to take into account.
The only thing in which consensus truly matters is politics, and propaganda.
Again, thanks for commenting.
I have noticed you don’t monetize kali-yuga.org, don’t waste your traffic, you can earn extra
cash every month with new monetization method. This is the best adsense alternative for any type of
website (they approve all websites), for more details simply search
in gooogle: murgrabia’s tools
[…] …Das berüchtigte Buch des Clubs von 1991, The First Global Revolution, enthält eine Passage mit dem Titel „Der gemeinsame Feind der Menschheit ist der Mensch„: […]