Definition leads to clarity, clarity leads to understanding, understanding leads to good decision making.
By Rich Kozlovich
Prologue: In years gone by before I started Paradigms and Demographics I published a weekly e-newsletter called Green Notes that was sent out to people all over the nation who were involved in the pest control industry, and then others asked to be on the list, even some from England, Canada, and one from Germany.
In 2007 I decided to go with this blog instead. However, in most of my old Green Notes newsletters I had a section called, “Quotes of the Week”. So, a number of years go as I was going through all of the quotes I couldn’t help thinking how insightful some of them were. Then.... all of a sudden ..... I had a SHAZAM moment. I thought why not create a readable article out of nothing but these quotes even if they have to be paraphrased?
Well, those "SHAZAM" moments can turn into a lot of darn work. I said then:
"I am going to have to watch those SHAZAM moments! I keep forgetting that I have a job that interferes with my life; if I had known how much work this was going to turn out to be I wouldn’t have undertaken this task in the first place".
But I'm now retired and I came across this once again, and I like it, and as I re-read this I thought it's more profound now that it was then. Besides, all the work has already been done, and it seems a shame to waste it, so, once again, here it is, and I think it's an excellent history lesson to for our time. I originally published this in 2011.
For me, pragmatism is not enough, nor is that fashionable word consensus. To me consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects—the process of avoiding the very issues that have to be solved, merely because you cannot get agreement on the way ahead.
What great cause would have been fought and won under the banner "I stand for consensus"? Everyone carries a part of society on his shoulders; no one is relieved of his share of responsibility by others. And no one can find a safe way out for himself if society is sweeping towards destruction. Therefore everyone, in his own interests, must thrust himself vigorously into the intellectual battle. None can stand aside with unconcern; the interests of everyone hang on the result. Whether he chooses or not, every man is drawn into the great historical struggle, the decisive battle into which our epoch has plunged us.
Opposing this new authoritarian collectivist green offensive is "The Battle of Our Times”. For me, the laws of physics are not subject to change by virtue of a public consensus or declarations of highly placed politicians and government science bureaucrats. We're under attack by a lot of alarmists. We must learn and remember that the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
The study of history is a powerful antidote to contemporary arrogance. It is humbling to discover how many of our glib assumptions, which seem to us novel and plausible, have been tested before, not once but many times and in innumerable guises; and discovered to be, at great human cost, wholly false. I have said more than once that history never repeats itself: what happens is that people keep forgetting it. Show me someone who does not read books and I will show you someone lost in the fog of propaganda, manipulation, and the lies that pass for the news of the day. Books can tell you who you are, what you believe, and why. They always leave you changed in some fashion.
Fortunate is the person who can look back at his or her life and say, "I would do it all again, and in the same way.” Most of us mortals have made mistakes, sometimes too many to count. Some mistakes have to do with career; some have to do with money; some have to do with other poor decisions and poor choices – of course reconsidered with the benefit of hindsight.
But the ones that cause the most regret and the most pain have to do with our treatment of other people – especially those who have loved and trusted us. We finally discover the value and worth of what we once had and failed to appreciate. Let all who are here remember that we are on the stage of history, and that whatever our station may be, and whatever part we have to play, great or small, our conduct is liable to be scrutinized, not only by history, but by our own descendants.
The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. Losing liberty over a theoretical threat is the main concern here (no one has ever been killed by manmade global warming. because there is no way to distinguish manmade warming from natural).
We have all been lied to by a shameless confederation of scientists, their professional publications, their formal organizations, and politicians seeking to use this big scare to advance their careers and agendas. The problem for all of them is that the real science does not support green views and never did. Real scientists (branded as dissenters, skeptics, and deniers) held true to the principles of science, knowing that it would eventually end this vast and terrible hoax.
We keep hearing outrageous statements from the greenies claiming that modern living is killing us and they repeat things they know are false over and over again. The Bolsheviks discovered that truth does not matter so long as there is reiteration. The greenies have no difficulty whatever in countering a fact by a lie which, if repeated often enough and loudly enough, becomes accepted by the people. It ain’t what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's the things you know for sure that just ain't so. Think about the things that have improved our lives the most over the past century – medical advances, the transportation revolution, huge increases in consumer goods, dramatic improvements in housing, the computer revolution.
The people who created these things – the doers – are not popular heroes. Society’s heroes are the activist talkers who complain about the doers. Almost no one knows who Norman Borlaug was, and yet he may have saved a billion lives from starvation and prevented malnutrition on a massive scale worldwide. Most everyone knows who Rachel Carson was and it can be reasonably claimed that she is responsible for the unnecessary deaths of tens of millions and the illness of billions since the ban on DDT.
In 1900, the world supported 56 billion human life years, notes climatologist John Christy: 1.6 billion people times a 35-year average life span. Today it supports 429 billion life years: that's 6.5 billion (2011 figures) people times a 66-year average life span – and they live far better than anyone in history. Then ask yourself….do I really want to abandon what we have to live in squalor and dystopia? Because that is the alternative!
Greenies don't like tidal power, it might upset the fish you know! And coal, nuclear and hydroelectric are positively EVIL! Windmills are no good because they kill birds and bats and tidal power is also a no no. These are all things they supported and then they turned against, just like bio-fuels. There's just no such thing as a happy Greenie. What is the alternative? What will make the greenies happy? We all commit suicide.
Make no mistake: Living green is really about someone else micro-regulating you -- downsizing your dreams and plugging each one of us into a brand new social order for which we never bargained. Journalists have generally given up on seeking to understand science, but instead look for the next scientist who will say something strange so that they have a “story”.
Credibility has to be earned, and once it’s squandered may never be recovered, and with the internet we have discovered that the media squandered any credibility they had many years ago.
Let’s just take Global Warming scares promoted by the media. Newspapers should think about the damage they are doing to many persons, particularly young kids, by spreading the exaggerated views of a human impact on climate. As far as I can see the IPCC 'Global Temperature' is wrong. Temperature is fluctuating but it is still most places cooler than in the 1930s and 1940s. It will take about 800 years before the water level has increased by one meter".
Changes in solar irradiation have been the dominant causes of changes in climate. Volcanic eruptions can have caused some cooling events and greenhouse gases may have contributed to the increase in temperature over the last decades. However, the influence of solar variability has been the major forcing factor and will probably also remain so in the future. Every totalitarian regime needs its defining myth. With the Nazis, it was the “Aryan” fantasy of racial purity. With the USSR, it was the dictatorship of the proletariat. With secularized, semi-pagan Western societies in historic decline, it is global warming.
Environmentalists-even mainstream environmentalists, are less concerned about any crisis posed by global warming than they are eager to command human behavior and restrict economic activity. Their true plans and ambitions? Stop economic development and return mankind centuries back. They are interested in their businesses and their profits made with the help of politicians. Take away the grant money and they will go away.
Why are economic conditions chaotic? The reason is simple. Americans no longer possess the freedom to produce the goods and services required to maintain their former standard of living. Taxation – both direct and indirect through currency inflation – runaway government regulation and government-sponsored-and-encouraged litigation have reduced the productivity of Americans below that required to maintain their way of life. This tyranny – this economic slavery – has been produced entirely by the federal and state governments of the United States.
Science has traditionally been held in high esteem. That clearly is no longer the case. What has changed? The Holy Grail for most scientists is not truth but research grants. And the global warming scare has produced a huge downpour of money for research. Any mystery why so many scientists claim some belief in global warming? In science, refuting an accepted belief is celebrated as an advance in knowledge; in religion it is condemned as heresy, yet those who dared question the “consensus science” of the warmers were declared, skeptics and deniers such as the holocaust deniers. In short…they were called heretics.
What is the mission of the environmentalists? To spread their truth, no matter how many lies it takes. Green activists will always be outraged about something. What outrages them on any given day will depend on the emotions they are feeling on any given day. This is where I really have a problem with modern-day environmentalism; it confuses opinion with what we know to be true, and disguises what are really political agendas with environmental rhetoric. Those who talk about climate change are the same ones who occupy the tenth circle of Hell for in the eyes of many Americans: Politicians, the Media, Scientists, Educators, Hippies, and Showbiz types, making it a moral imperative to be against whatever it is they’re for.
The environmental movement I helped found has lost its objectivity, morality and humanity. The pain and suffering it is inflicting on families in developing countries must no longer be tolerated. Eco-Imperialism is the first book I’ve seen that tells the truth and lays it on the line. It’s a must-read for anyone who cares about people, progress and our planet.” – Patrick Moore, Greenpeace co-founder
It’s bad enough that politicians and scientists have been drinking the Kool-Aid, what is truly amazing is how many corporate types have been imbibing and buying into these anti-business Corporate Social Responsibility scenarios. When the corporate Neville Chamberlains ultimately forfeit their salaries, bonuses and their jobs thanks to their spineless leadership and the anti-capitalism cabal that now inhabits wine and cheese bars in the District of Columbia, I hope to be around to ask this simple question: “So, how’s that hope and change working out for you ?
Climate change is not a scientific problem that found political support; this is about eco-activists and politicians who found a scientific issue they feel can leverage them into power and control. The environment is a great way to advance a political agenda that favors central planning and an intrusive government. What better way to control someone’s property than to subordinate one’s private property rights to environmental concerns.
If the congressional, administration. and activist conspirators behind this massive deceit were in the private sector – peddling bogus drugs, rather than bogus science – they’d quickly become convicts. Instead of jail time, though, they’ll probably get bonus checks. It is time to clean out the climate cesspool, and bring integrity, transparency and accountability back to science, law and public policy.
There is one good thing about the lunatic "global warming" catechism now taught our youth in the mandatory government youth propaganda camps: When they are finally forced to admit that the globe has been cooling again, not warming, for the past decade, yet proceed to demand precisely the same remedies for "global cooling" (which they will cleverly dub "climate change") as they did for "global warming" -- that is to say higher electric bills, more government controls, taxes sufficient to cripple our industrial economy and generally lower our standard of living in keeping with the world socialist doctrine that America and particularly the "capitalist rich" must be "punished" and "made to sacrifice" in penitence for our former prosperity -- there is finally a decent chance they'll simply be laughed out of town .
Recently I was foolish enough to try to reason with an environmentalist. But it became obvious that he had his mind made up and didn't want to hear any evidence to the contrary. The Pope is more likely to have read Karl Marx than an environmentalist is to have read even a single book that criticized environmentalism. The EPA's muddled machinations should not come as a surprise, because the agency long has been a haven for scientifically insupportable policies perpetrated by anti-technology ideologues in career and appointed positions, pouring out a lava flow of scientifically dubious regulations.
It has a sordid history of incompetence, duplicity, and pandering to the most extreme factions of the environmental movement, all of which appears to be accelerating. The environmental movement has become so radical as to be an easily identified hazard to American life, and the EPA is not on my list of favorite agencies. There is no dealing with the greenies. They will never be satisfied and as for those who wish to define green and adopt it as a business model and make the green movement partners of some sort; let me help you. Green is a mixture of blue and yellow. That is the only factual definition of green that will stand the test of time. After that; any other definition is a corruption of a perfectly nice color.
Remember, when you dance with the Devil you won’t call the tune, you won’t choose the dance, you won’t lead, you can’t change partners and you may not be allowed to leave the dance floor.
Quotes by: Alan Caruba, Arthur Robinson, Bob Parks, Dan Miller Dr. Jay Lehr, Dr. Roy Spenser. Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, Gerard Jackson, H. L. Mencken, Henry Miller, Gilbert Ross, James A. Peden, James Lewis, Jon Ray, Larry, Ludwig von Mises, Larry Elder, Margaret Thatcher, Mark Twain, Nancy Brown, Nick Nichols, Patrick Moore, Paul Driessen, Paul Johnson, Peter Mullen, Rich Kozlovich, Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius, Stephen Murgatroyd, Steve Milloy, Thomas Sowell, Vaclav Klaus, Vin Suprynowicz, Viv Forbes, Winston Churchill
