• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

This week the Obama administration released its gloom and doom National Climate Assessment. According to the 800-page report, the carbon pollution created by Americans is literally destroying the earth as we know it. The report’s conclusion is in keeping with a federal document prepared by Vice President Al Gore in 1993 entitled, “A New Consensus for Prosperity, Opportunity and a Healthy Environment for the Future.” I disclose the details of this document in “Eco-Tyranny.” On page 62 of “Eco-Tyranny,” I quote from “A New Consensus”:

We Believe, Economic growth, environmental protection, and social equity are linked. We need to develop integrated policies to achieve these national goals.

The United States should have policies and programs that contribute to stabilizing global human population. …

Even in the face of scientific uncertainty, society should take reasonable actions to avert risks where the potential harm to human health or the environment is thought to be serious or irreparable.

The Council should not debate the science of global warming, but should instead focus on the implementation of national and local greenhouse gas reduction policies and activities, and adaptations in the U.S. economy and society that maximize environmental and social benefits, minimize economic impacts, and are consistent with U.S. international agreements.

What the Assessment does is cleverly push Gore’s notion of consensus despite “great scientific uncertainty.”

Now a bit about the man fronting the Assessment for the Obama administration, John Holdren.

Holdren is an ultra-radical; in fact as a former Stanford and Harvard professor he is a mentor to many prominent eco-radicals. Holdren, like all from the eco-left, believes there are too many people on the planet. He also believes that the United States Constitution allows for imposing a forced abortion policy upon the American people.

The following is from page 163 of my book “Climategate”:

Holdren’s unorthodox belief system is well-known and accepted among environmentalists, and his selection by Obama [as director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy] speaks volumes regarding the content of the president’s character and his plans to radically transform America. Holdren has written, “Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently server to the endanger the society.” [John Holdren, Anne Erlich, Paul Erlich, "Ecoscience" (San Francisco, W.H. Freeman and Company, 1977) p 837.]

Holdren has even advocated adding “a sterilant to drinking water of staple food” as a way to curb the population. However he includes this ghoulish caveat: “To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals.”

Holdren and Obama’s new Climate Assessment is simply more devious propaganda created by leftists with Ph.D.s who are willing to bastardize the scientific method in order to push their dangerous, anti-American, socialist agenda. They know that carbon dioxide is a variable gas that, in past periods like the Carboniferous, was likely 12 times more plentiful than today. They know human contribution to the atmosphere’s greenhouse gas supply equals a mere .116 percent. They know that the earth’s climate has only warmed .7 degree Celsius since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, and 88 percent of that warming occurred before 1940. And they know that the earth’s atmosphere has not warmed for nearly 18 years.

Why weren’t brilliant atmospheric scientists like Dr. Neil Frank, former director of the National Hurricane Center, and Dr. Bill Gray, the man who invented the art of hurricane forecasting asked to participate in this assessment? Why was the man who helped develop the U.S. weather satellite program, Dr. Fred Singer, excluded? How about one of the smartest guys in the astrophysicist community, Dr. Willie Soon? Oh, I forgot – they don’t believe the thesis.

Holdren and Obama would no doubt silently counter: Why let a few facts get in the way of an ideology?

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.