By Chuck Rogér
A few weeks ago in a post titled, “Education Dep’t Tells Kids: All You Need Is Global Warmism, So Give Peace a Chance” (originally ran as “Education Department indoctrinates kids in global warming myths” in American Thinker), I noted that government ideologues are pushing climate change falsehoods on schoolchildren in order to spread the doctrine of the Church of Global Warming. To at least one person, the post’s title and message were not enough to identify me as a disbeliever of Church doctrine. I received the following email from one Sven Lilienström of Germany.
Dear Mr. Rogér,
We have read your article “Education Department indoctrinates kids in global warming myths.” with interest.
The CLIMATE VOTE PROJECT (http://www.climatevoteproject.org/) wants to challenge worldwide governments at the UN Climate Conference in Durban from 28 Nov. to 9 Dec. 2011 to conclude a comprehensive, legally binding climate protection agreement for the time after 2012 and to present the participating governments with our demand personally, especially the U.S. and China and India. It is hoped that 10 million Facebook user or more will add weight and coherence to this demand. Prof. Dr. Mojib Latif from Germany named our first Official Climate Ambassador. Our global media activities will start at the middle of August 2011.
It would be great if you could write about our campaign—also before the official start.
With best regards,
My blasting of the Education Department’s indoctrination effort was lost on Lilienström. In the previous post, I had observed that:
Kids were treated to a brain-liquefying sermon which claimed that “peace” can be achieved by “keeping the water blue for all the fish,” by “giving shoes to someone who needs them,” by “wearing different clothes,” by “keeping the streets clean,” and through “everyone having a home.”
English probably being a second Language for Sven Lilienström could play a part in his mistaking a mocking of global warming alarmism for promotion of that alarmism. And indeed, the Climate Vote Project unabashedly promotes global warming hysteria. From the organization’s website:
The purpose of the CLIMATE VOTE PROJECT is to challenge worldwide governments at the UN Climate Conference (COP 17 – CMP 7) in Durban from 28 Nov. to 9 Dec. 2011 in order to set the course for the conclusion of a comprehensive, legally binding climate protection agreement for the time after 2012. This request should be submitted personally on November 29, 2011 to the government leaders who are participating in Durban, in particular, the USA and China. It is hoped that 10 million Facebook user will add weight and coherence to this demand. The CLIMATE VOTE PROJECT demands, above all, the stringent implementation of the following points in this successor agreement:
1. To ensure that global warming stays well below 2 degrees Celsius, the industrialised nations must commit themselves to far more drastic reductions in emissions than in the first Kyoto period.
2. This time the new agreement must include the United States of America, which signed the first Kyoto Protocol but did not ratify it.
3. To encourage India and China to take part with appropriate targets for Kyoto Phase Two, the industrialised nations need to achieve demonstrable progress in the absolute reduction of their greenhouse gas emissions.
After reading this bundle of absurdity, I sent Lilienström a tame but pointed email.
Dear Mr. Lilienström,
Thank you for your email. I wonder if you could answer a few questions for me before I decide how to respond to your request for promotion of your project.
- Do you believe that human activity is creating “global warming?”
- If you do, what evidence do you cite? (Not opinions, evidence)
- What do you believe humans can do to stop Earth’s atmosphere from going through temperature cycles?
- What evidence do you have to support your answer to question number 3?
- Do you believe that developing nations should stop industrial development unless said development can be undertaken with no increase in carbon emissions?
- If your answer to number 5 is “No,” then are your saying that only technologically advanced nations should stop industrial development unless said development can be undertaken with no increase in carbon emissions?
- If your answer to number 6 is “Yes,” then do you acknowledge that you are advocating global wealth redistribution to “solve” “global warming?”
- How do you account for the fact that there has been no measurable increase in the temperature of Earth’s atmosphere for the last 15 years, a time throughout which CO2 has steadily risen?
- How do you account for the fact that proxy records indicate naturally-caused temperature cycles over the last 600,000 years, and that the CO2 increases have lagged behind temperature increases?
- Do you actually believe that nations can be legally bound to act against “global warming?”
I would love to “promote” your project. Please, would you take just a few minutes to provide answers to my questions before I determine my approach.
I have now granted Sven Lilienström’s request that I “write about [his organization’s] campaign.” Unfortunately, no reply to my email from anyone at the Climate Vote Project has been forthcoming. Therefore, I was only able to present my side of the picture.
I report. You decide.