jump to navigation

British judges plan to outlaw climate change denial – FIXED October 15, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, persecution, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society.

UPDATE: Sorry, that was the nastiest .html I’ve ever imported into a post, ever. It completely destroyed the format of my blog.  What a mess.  The Torygraph should be ashamed, what a nasty website they run.  Sorry!

If you think we get biased coverage and climate change hysteria in the US, you ought to see how it is in Europe.  British media in particular may be some of the most unhinged, frenzied partisans of anthropocentric global warming anywhere on earth.  While there is certainly opposition in Britain to the watermelon warmist’s agenda, they are generally derided and regarded as kooks and extremists…….more so than is the case in the US.  Among British elites……politicians, business leaders, academics, media personalities, etc……..there is even greater bias in favor of drastic action in response to supposed “warming” and a concomitant disregard for any and all opposition.  That is to say, British “officialdom” is even more in the tank for this leftist plot to centrally plan economies and reduce hundreds of millions to levels of abject poverty not seen in decades in the West (while they, of course, continue to enjoy all the comforts of 21st century living) than their American counterparts are.

So, it is probably no surprise that a semi-secret cabal of judges met to plan using legal decrees from unelected, unaccountable jurists to make so-called climate change denial illegal:

We might think that a semi-secret, international conference of top judges, held in the highest courtroom in Britain, to propose that it should be made illegal for anyone to question the scientific evidence for man-made global warming, was odd enough to be worthy of front-page coverage.

Including senior judges and lawyers from across the world, the three-day conference on “Climate Change and the Law” was staged in London’s Supreme Court. It was funded, inter alia, by the Supreme Court itself, the UK government and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)…… [Now why would an ostensibly non-biased judicial body be engaged in policy formation and political agitation?  All of those involved should and must be named, and must recuse themselves from any future cases having anything to do with climate change policy and the environment, generally.  But this is how corrupt our institutions in the West have become, they are increasingly self-serving politicized advocacy groups]

…..The purpose of this strange get-together was outlined in a keynote speech (visible on YouTube) by Philippe Sands, a QC from Cherie Blair’s [for US audience, wife of former British labor (liberal) PM Tony Blair] Matrix Chambers and professor of law at University College, London. Since it is now unlikely that the world will agree in Paris to a legally binding treaty to limit the rise in global temperatures to no more than 2 degrees C from pre-industrial levels, [based on which measurements? The satellite data that has shown zero global temp rise in 20 years, or the manipulated ground-station data that is constantly fudged to show warming?] his theme was that it is now time for the courts to step in, to enforce this as worldwide law.

Although his audience, Sands said, would agree that the scientific evidence for man-made climate change was “overwhelming”, there were still “scientifically qualified, knowledgeable and influential individuals” continuing to deny “the warming of the atmosphere, the melting of the ice and the rising of the seas”, and that this is all due to our emissions of CO2. The world’s courts, led by the International Court of Justice, said Sands, could play a vital role “in finally scotching these claims”. [I love how the left always pretends to declare themselves the rational ones, the Worshipers of the Holy Grail of Sciencism, but when some important data, produced by unbiased researchers, contradicts the political agenda, suddenly we see their Sciencism for what it is, just another denomination of the religion of unholy leftism, seeking always unlimited power for themselves]

“The most important thing the courts could do,” he said, was to hold a top-level “finding of fact”, to settle these “scientific disputes” once and for all: so that it could then be made illegal for any government, corporation (or presumably individual scientist) ever to question the agreed “science” again. Furthermore, he went on, once “the scientific evidence” thus has the force of binding international law, it could be used to compel all governments to make “the emissions reductions that are needed”, including the phasing out of fossil fuels, to halt global warming in its tracks.

This is actually worst than when I first read it.  He admits there is divergence of opinion among reasonably well credentialed individuals. He realizes there is an ongoing scientific dispute.  He just doesn’t care.  His – really – religious impulse in favor of centralized economic planning and ever-increasing amounts of power given over to socialistic government (meaning, he and his friends, he hopes) overrides everything else. The “science” is just a cover, as we’ve always known.

But on the off-chance he really thinks global warming is “scientifically proven” and critics are just oil-company funded hacks…….how many other near 100% consensus beliefs of science (which global warming most certainly is NOT, there is wide disagreement on whether warming is even occurring, and if humans are causing it) from the past were proven to be not just a bit wrong, but 100% wrong?  Scores, hundreds, maybe most.  To name a few: the rejection of germ theory, complete nonsense regarding heat transfer (“ether”), firm claims that there could be no particle smaller than an atom, impossibility of nuclear fission, human flight is impossible, heliocentric view of the universe (sun at center), fingerprints as 100% lock-solid ID for every individual, all the contradictory studies of medical science (cigarettes are GOOD for you!)……..I could go on.

Science is constantly refuting itself, constantly refining and even overturning theories, constantly overthrowing what had once been lock-solid conventional wisdom.  The idea that certain opinions should be outlawed – OUTLAWED, as in made ILLEGAL! – because they are contrary to what is purported to be the current “consensus” (especially galling since I do not believe that consensus exists)…….that’s not science.  That’s (very bad, very false) religion.  And there are few more feverishly religious in our culture today than the acolytes of the religion of satanic progressivism.

The thing is, in actuality, scientific skepticism of gerbil worming is actually on the increase. The so-called consensus is breaking down, and fast. One major reason is that “pause” in warming mentioned above. Another is the complete destruction of the work of some of the most fervent climate change advocates, like Dr. Michael Mann, and continuing revelations of falsified data and unrepeatable “studies” and “simulations” among other leading lights.  So I have little doubt that this open call for authoritarian “solutions” to the climate change debate are really about getting this nonsense fixed in law before the “consensus” claim becomes even more  untenable than it already is.  Or it’s just another useful weapon in the hands of the always radical left.

And to think……..we now have a Church encyclical that accepts this widely criticized and rejected theory as some kind of metaphysical truth.  Thanks, Pope Francis!


1. camper - October 15, 2015

Tantum, the format of the blog got wild… can u change it back?

Tantumblogo - October 15, 2015

Should be fixed.

2. Observer - October 15, 2015

As a resident of “the sceptred isle” I can say, yes things really are that bad here. Americans, guard your precious rights of free speech and arms bearing, they are the most potent impediment to tyranny.

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: