The New American
by Alex Newman
The United Nations climate czar and various alarmist media outlets this week sought to dismiss as a “joke” recent comments by a top advisor to Australian leader Tony Abbott on frauduelent man-made global warming theories being used to advance global tyranny. In an explosive column, Maurice Newman, chairman of the Prime Minister’s Business Advisory Council, argued that theories on alleged human-caused climate change were not only bogus, but are serving as the basis for imposing a totalitarian “new world order” on humanity. Despite the uproar among global-warming theorists, UN bureaucrats, and the alarmist press, the evidence suggests Newman is correct.
In the column, published May 8 by The Australian newspaper, Newman begins by blowing the lid off a “well-kept secret” — the climate models purporting to prove that man’s practically irrelevant emissions of carbon dioxide are responsible for catastrophic global warming have been proven wrong. But that is not surprising, he wrote. “We have been subjected to extravagance from climate catastrophists for close to 50 years,” he explained, citing an array of examples of climate fear-mongers and media outlets warning of global cooling and other problems just a few decades ago. The more recent pronouncements of the alarmists are equally ludicrous.
In Australia, prophets of climate doom and gloom have been similarly exposed as quacks, he explained, pointing to a 2005 prediction based on computer models that could not have been more wrong. “We’ve swallowed dud prediction after dud prediction,” Newman observed. “What’s more, the [UN] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which we were instructed was the gold standard on global warming, has been exposed repeatedly for misrepresentation and shoddy methods.” He also blasted the manipulation of temperature data to suit the alarmist narrative, and NASA’s now-exposed untruths from earlier this year.
If the theories, warnings, and models have been exposed as frauds, Newman wonders rhetorically why the UN would insist on spending hundreds of billions of dollars on “futile climate chance policies.” The answer has already been provided by, among others, UN Foundation boss Timothy Wirth, who declared: “Even if the (climate change) theory is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.” UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) boss Christiana Figueres has also explained it all rather bluntly.
For instance, speaking in Brussels last February, Figueres declared: “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years since the Industrial Revolution.” More recently, blasting the United States and Americans’ elected representatives for not bowing down, Figueres claimed the ruthless Communist Chinese regime represented the best political model for fighting global warming.
“In other words, the real agenda is concentrated political authority. Global warming is the hook,” Newman explained, echoing the concerns of countless scientists and experts around the world. “This is not about facts or logic. It’s about a new world order under the control of the UN. It is opposed to capitalism and freedom and has made environmental catastrophism a household topic to achieve its objective…. Make no mistake, climate change is a must-win battlefield for authoritarians and fellow travelers.”
Newman noted that, having gained so much ground, the “eco-catastrophists” have no intention of giving up. In fact, at this point, they are backed into a corner, and to admit being wrong would be catastrophic for the establishment’s credibility — not to mention its dreams of a planetary “climate” regime with carbon taxes, wealth redistribution, and more. The totalitarian alarmists have already captured the UN and are “extremely well-funded,” as Newman put it and as a U.S. Senate investigation revealed. They also have a powerful ally in the White House and armies of “compliant academics” and “gullible mainstream media” outlets to push the climate tales regardless of the evidence. They have bribe money extracted from Western taxpayers and promised to UN member regimes for submission to the agenda, too.
But the consequences for humanity will be devastating, with former NASA climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer, for example, warning that the policies pushed by the “global warming Nazis” literally threaten millions of lives. Newman, meanwhile, noted that the “anti-growth policy prescriptions will needlessly prolong poverty, hunger, sickness and illiteracy for the world’s poorest.” The UN’s agenda also threatens free markets, prosperity, liberty, national sovereignty, and more, as The New American has documented extensively.
Despite those very real threats, under the guise of fighting the manufactured threat of man-made global warming catastrophe, Newman said there is a “real chance” that UN climate boss Figueres and “those who share her centralized power ambitions will succeed.” “As the UN’s December climate change conference in Paris approaches, Australia will be pressed to sign even more futile job-destroying climate change treaties,” he continued. “Resisting will be politically difficult. But resist we should. We are already paying an unnecessary social and economic price for empty gestures. Enough is enough.”
Figueres, who opened a recent UN climate summit with a prayer to the Mayan goddess of cannibalism, human sacrifice, and war, dismissed Newman’s concerns as “an attempt at humor.” “I really don’t take it very seriously because it doesn’t respond to the reality or to facts,” she claimed, conveniently ignoring all of the facts presented in Newman’s column. “We live in a world of free press and free opinion and, you know, if that’s the humor in Australia then that’s the humor in Australia … I have my own sense of humor. It’s quite fine.”
Of course, there is nothing funny about foisting a devastating global “climate” regime on humanity based on discredited computer models.” But for Figueres to address the facts — she said Newman’s comments were “really good fun” — would be to expose the entire UN “climate” agenda as a dangerous attack on humanity, and especially the poor, based on fraudulent “science.” Various Australian politicians also joined the bandwagon attacking Newman’s reputation, but without addressing any of the points he raised.
For years, The New American has also been exposing the UN’s pseudo-science as fraudulent. Top experts from around the world have ridiculed the UN’s “climate models” as embarrassingly wrong — they cannot even accurately model the past, much less the future. Every single UN climate model predicted warming, and yet, for more than 18 years, there has been none. This magazine has also been sounding the alarm about the totalitarian so-called solutions being promoted by global-warming theorists — outlandish attacks on liberty, the poor, national sovereignty, and even mankind itself.
In Australia, at least, voters appear to be catching on, giving a landslide victory to Abbott and his party, which campaigned on killing the carbon tax and reining in global-warming alarmism. In one of the government’s first moves in power, the ruling Conservatives delivered a blunt message to UN alarmists: No more “socialism masquerading as environmentalism.” In a policy paper, Abbott’s Conservatives also publicly refused to sign up for any new contributions, taxes, or charges at the UN global warming summit then underway. In the United States, meanwhile, polls show just 40 percent of Americans agree with the man-made global warming theory.
However, as Newman explained in his column, the UN and the establishment plan to push the climate hysteria hard in the coming months. With the crucial UN global-warming summit in Paris coming up later this year, globalists and alarmists understand that this may be their last chance to successfully shackle humanity to their UN-run “climate” regime. And with the theory imploding on the world stage and the establishment’s credibility on the line — along with its grandiose vision of carbon taxes and “global governance” to fight “global warming” — the attacks on skeptics will become more vicious and deranged. Humanity must stand firm.