By Dr. John Happs
United Nations officials knew there would be a number of environmental groups waiting in the wings to assist them in promoting climate alarmism and achieving the UN’s goals.
The UN wanted to provide a platform for Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) since they are essentially about radical environmental restrictions. Attending the UN’s climate sessions were a number of environmental activists with links to organisations such as Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, the David Suzuki Foundation, the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), Conservation International, Nature Conservancy, Earth First, Sierra Club, Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection, the Environmantal Defence Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, Friends of the Earth, the UN Green Climate Fund and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF).
Julia Patrick writes of the WWF:
“Working “in partnership” with Greenpeace, the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) is the world’s richest and largest environmental group, with its secretariat in Switzerland, but run from the USA. The Australian president is Robert Purves, founder of the Purves Foundation. WWF is well known for its cute little panda emblem, but there’s nothing naive or artless about WWF. Claiming that agriculture, land clearing, overgrazing and overfishing “are the main pressures on biodiversity”, its aim is to reduce fishing to zero and run farmers and graziers off their land by making it untenable to live on. Without human input, land cannot generate an income.”
We can expect these activist groups to continue with their promotion of radical environmentalism, along with their stance against industrial activity, linking this with (imaginary) catastrophic global warming. After all, there is a great deal of money in it for them.
Dave Foreman from Earth First was quick to support Strong’s philosophy: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
“We must make this place an insecure and inhospitable place for Capitalists and their projects – we must reclaim the roads and plowed lands, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness tens of millions of acres of presently settled land.”
Foreman’s contempt for humans and their achievements are found in his book: Confessions of an eco-warrior:
Greenpeace co-founder Paul Watson appears to be another Green Zealot who is prepared to be deceptive. Watson is on record as saying:
“It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”
Steve Sawyer, described as Political Director of Greenpeace International, was quick to exaggerate the need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions:
“Without urgent measures to rapidly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, the possibility of limiting the temperature rise below a dangerous level will have disappeared within a decade.”
Glenn Beck in his book “An Inconvenient Book” quotes Michael Oppenheimer from the Environmental Defense Fund:
“The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization we have in the US. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.”
Keith Farnish, environmental writer and activist would also like to see extreme action taken against all aspects of civilization:
“The only way to prevent global ecological collapse and thus ensure the survival of humanity is to rid the world of Industrial Civilization… Unloading essentially means the removal of an existing burden: for instance, removing grazing domesticated animals, razing cities to the ground, blowing up dams and switching off the greenhouse gas emissions machine.”
Environmental reporter Jim Sibbison was formerly a public relations official for the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In 1988 he admitted:
“We routinely wrote scare stories… Our press reports were more or less true… We were out to whip the public into a frenzy about the environment.”
Jack Trevors, Editor of the magazine: “Water, Air and Soil Pollution” revealed his political bias:
“The capitalistic systems of economy follow the one principal rule: the rule of profit making. All else must bow down to this rule… The current USA is an example of a failed capitalistic state in which essential long-term goals such as prevention of climate change and limitation of human population growth are subjugated to the short-term profit motive and the principle of economic growth.”
Judi Bari, organiser of Earth First would agree:
“I think if we don’t overthrow capitalism, we don’t have a chance of saving the world ecologically.”
Campaigner for Friends of the Earth Emma Brindal said:
“A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources. Not protecting Earth from manmade CO2 emissions or natural and manmade climate change – but redistributing wealth and resources, according to formulas that self-appointed ruling elites decide is “socially just.”
In 2010 Kevin Andrews described the Green’s agenda, saying:
“What is at stake in the Greens ‘revolution’ is the heart and soul of western civilisation, built on the Judeo-Christian/Enlightenment synthesis that upholds the individual -with obligations and responsibilities to others, but ultimately judged on his or her own conscience and actions – as the possessor of an inherent dignity and inalienable rights. What is also at stake is the economic system that has resulted in the creation of wealth and prosperity for the most people in human history.”
Ben Webster reported how:
“Friends of the Earth, a registered charity, avoided restrictions on political activity by claiming that its anti-fracking campaign was being carried out by a non-charitable company called Friends of the Earth Limited.”
In 2015 Friends of the Earth was accused of scaremongering to raise money by suggesting that sand used in fracking could cause cancer.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison expressed his concern to the Queensland Resources Council in November 2019, saying that:
“A new breed of radical activism was harrying those in mining and businesses associated with it. I am very concerned about this new form of progressivism… intended to get in under the radar but [which] at its heart would deny the liberties of Australians.”
Dr. Aynsley Kellow from the University of Tasmania observed that the “lawfare” engaged in by environmentalists against the Adani Mine, on environmental and native title grounds had delayed the project several years with the argument that the site had a large population of Black-Throated Finches that would be threatened by the mining operation. This despite the fact that the 2019 Red List shows that the Black-Throated Finch is not even threatened or vulnerable.
It is becoming increasingly evident that a number of registered charities, claiming tax-free status are undermining the Australian economy and threatening jobs. The anti-coal organization 350.org CEO Blair Palese appearing to encourage protesters to break the law when, at an event in Sydney in April 2016, Ms. Palese said the organisation was urging supporters to take part in the blockade of Newcastle Harbour to prevent coal shipments leaving. She said:
“It’s a big ask. We’re asking some people to get arrested. We’re asking some people to step up, join the event, be in kayaks and boats, literally blockade that day and be part of a flotilla that will say no more fossil fuels out of that port.”
In 2014, India’s Intelligence Bureau noted how Greenpeace activists were campaigning against coal-fired and nuclear power stations when nearly 4 million Indians are still living in poverty and need inexpensive, accessible power to lift them into a higher standard of living. The Intelligence Bureau noted:
“Greenpeace has been growing exponentially in terms of reach and impact, volunteers, movements it supports and media influence. Activists have been focused on ways to create obstacles in India’s coal based energy plans and methods to pressure India to use only renewable energy.”
Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment led the Canadian delegation to the Kyoto climate change negotiations and pushed for action on the Kyoto Accord. Apparently, Stewart didn’t worry about the odd deception. She commented:
“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
The spectre of socialism is always behind those claims of concern for the Earth.
Naomi Klein clearly stated her position in her book: “This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate.”
“What if global warming isn’t only a crisis? What if it’s the best chance we’re ever going to get to build a better world?”
“We cannot change the laws of nature. But we can change our economy. Climate change is our best chance to demand and build a better world.”
“Forget everything you think you know about global warming. The really inconvenient truth is that it’s not about carbon-it’s about capitalism. The convenient truth is that we can seize this existential crisis to transform our failed economic system and build something radically better.”
Apparently, as far as Klein is concerned, a better world means more socialism.
So here we have further proof that the UN and its supporters are seeking global governance whilst promoting their socialist goals to penalise successful, wealthy nations and re-distribute their hard-earned wealth.
Additionally, we have environmental groups who seek to de-industrialise the world and dramatically reduce living standards. Perhaps of more concern is the number of influential people who would like to see population control, if not the total elimination of humanity. For instance, the Club of Rome opines:
“The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man.”
John Davis, Editor of the Earth First journal appears to have a very poor opinion of humans:
“Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.”
Christopher Manes, also from the Earth First journal agrees:
“The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing.”
Dr. Reed Noss from The Wildlands Project also thinks little of humans:
“The collective needs of non-human species must take precedence over the needs and desires of humans.”
As does Dr. Paul Ehrlich:
“A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer.”
Ted Turner, founder of CNN and a major UN donor also thinks the population should be stringently controlled:
“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
David Brower, a founding member of the Sierra Club has suggested how the human population should be controlled:
“Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”
The Club of Rome proposes specific numbers:
“… the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million people but less than one billion.”
As did the French explorer Jacques Cousteau (1910 – 1997):
“In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day.”
Some individuals, such as the UK’s science reporter Susan Blakemore would like to see disease take its toll:
“For the planet’s sake, I hope we have bird flu or some other thing that will reduce the population, because otherwise we’re doomed.”
“Finally, we might decide that civilisation itself is worth preserving. In that case we have to work out what to save and which people would be needed in a drastically reduced population – weighing the value of scientists and musicians against that of politicians, for example.”
Former President of the organisation People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) Ingrid Newkirk is happy to see the extinction of humans:
“The extinction of Homo Sapiens would mean survival for millions, if not billions, of Earth-dwelling species. Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on Earth – social and environmental.”
John Davis, Editor of the Earth First journal also sees disease as a good population controller:
“I suspect that eradicating small pox was wrong. It played an important part in balancing ecosystems.”
The UK’s Prince Philip has an even more bizarre wish:
“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
Presumably, he would allow the Royal Family to flourish and we don’t know how he responded to the news that Prince Charles tested positive for Coronavirus (COVID-19) on the 25th March 2020.
The French philosopher Pascal Bruckner in his book: “Save the Earth, Punish Human Beings” that:
“Environmentalists are prone to pessimistic misanthropy. Some can even be paraphrased – or indeed quoted – as thinking all would be well if Homo sapiens became extinct overnight.”
The extreme environmental group “Extinction Rebellion” has made its position clear regarding the value they place on humanity, with the following poster being displayed around the UK:
David Graber, scientist at the Rocky Mountain Institute also subscribes to the virus wish:
“We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon the Earth. It is cosmically unlikely that the developed world will choose to end its orgy of fossil energy consumption, and the Third World its suicidal consumption of landscape. Until such time as Homo Sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.”
Dr. Paul Ehrlich has even more disturbing thoughts, suggesting:
“The addition of a temporary sterilant to staple food, or to the water supply. With limited distribution of antidote chemicals, perhaps by lottery”.
So we have a significant number of influential people who would like to see a dramatic reduction in the human population along with the stifling of economic growth and the re-distribution of wealth from successful economies to developing nations. Not surprisingly, the IPCC now has several green groups and celebrity activists supporting their aims.
Fortunately, an increasing number of politicians have come to realise that any restriction of inexpensive, reliable hydrocarbon energy is a restriction on freedom and our standard of living. It is becoming clear to more people that the “global warming” alarmism aka “climate change” aka “extreme weather” aka “climate disruption” was never about a better understanding of climate science, rather it has always been about promoting the UN’s socialist cause and the radical environmentalist quest to stop economic growth whilst dramatically lowering global population.
The scene was set and science was about to be hijacked and manipulated by UN officials and radical environmentalists for political/ideological reasons known as “The Noble Cause.” This has led to what many scientists now believe is the biggest fraud in the history of science with former Professor of Climatology at the University of Winnipeg, Dr. Tim Ball being explicit:
“The argument that global warming is due to humans, known as the anthropogenic global warming theory (AGW) is a deliberate fraud. I can now make that statement without fear of contradiction because of a remarkable hacking of files that provided not just a smoking gun, but an entire battery of machine guns.”
“Carbon dioxide was never a problem and all the machinations and deceptions exposed by these files prove that it is the greatest deception in history, but nobody is laughing. It is a very sad day for science.”
Dr. John Happs M.Sc.1st Class; D.Phil. John has an academic background in the geosciences with special interests in climate, and paleoclimate. He has been a science educator at several universities in Australia and overseas and was President of the Western Australian Skeptics for 25 years.