In an article that appeared in the Sunday Telegraph on Dec 27th 2009, Pier Akerman frankly and unapologetically lamented the emptiness of Australian PM Kevin Rudd’s character in a scathing commentary on the global warming scam and the apparently failed Copenhagen summit, which, Rudd failed to comment on in the aftermath of the debacle. Akerman’s perceptiveness on this occasion was refreshing in the world of the MSM (mainstream media) and its usually pitiful coverage of issues that really matter. He wrote: “Not only did the so-called scientists that Rudd and the UN relied on produce fraudulent data [see Climategate], but they also endeavoured to remove from the literature reproduced on the internet information site Wikipedia—a most unreliable source at best—all scientific data that contradicted their false hypothesis.” According to Akerman, climate scientist and Wikipedia editor William Connolly, a member of the team behind the RealClimate website which purported to demonstrate the existence of human-induced global warming, has been shown to have edited more than 5,000 articles that appeared on the Wikipedia site to eliminate solid scientific evidence that disproved the claims embraced by the UN’s favoured team. Further, under Rudd, Australia’s own peak scientific body, the CSIRO, has seen its international reputation irreparably damaged because it, too, instituted its own bizarre censorship of scientific opinion which challenged that being dictated from the PM’s office.”
It does not take a genius logician to realise that when a cabal of scientists are trying to convince the public of a supposedly legitimately proved scientific phenomenon, whilst simultaneously suppressing and censoring all evidence to the contrary, that something is seriously amiss. Why play dirty and silence legitimate dissent if your science is sound? The history of scientific corruption and censorship is fertile ground for discussion, but so vast that we need eschew it here. Climategate is a loud and clear reminder that it is alive and well for anyone who had forgotten the fact.
Brilliantly, Akerman proceeds to finish his analysis of the inexplicably high level of popularity Rudd enjoys with this: “Now…Rudd promises to reintroduce his infamous tax bill, still without offering any proof that humans have affected the natural climate cycle of the globe, still without presenting any evidence that anything Australians do (including destroying their economy) will alter the Earth’s temperature by one thousandth of a degree. This may be why his popularity remains so high. Australia likes winners – and when it comes to scams, Kevin Rudd is King Con.”
In 2009 because of his grounded and sensible intervention in Rudd’s plan to introduce a “Draconian new tax regime”, based on overhyped and fraudulent scientific data, opposition leader, Tony Abott, achieved something rare in Australian politics: He actually achieved something. A totally insane and unjustifiable new Draconian tax plan failed to manifest thanks in large part to Abott’s dissent towards the manufactured ‘consensus’ regarding AGW. The question many Australians must surely ask themselves now is: “How will Rudd try to next foist such ludicrous tax measures upon us if he doesn’t succeed in the short term?”
Years ago, former US government-contracted whistleblower, the late Phil Schneider (who was murdered after he began speaking out on what he knew), described the UN as a “stalking horse” for Global Government. That statement has rung more and more true ever since, demonstrated saliently by the AGW scam designed to induce a gullible global population into accepting a carbon tax on life itself (we are carbon-based life forms, remember?), administered by… an unelected global government; a planetary dictatorship, in other words. The UN in all of this, of course, favoured the fraudulent data provided by the IPCC and its pseudo-scientific con artists, evidently in the hope that the grand AGW hoax would precipitate the changes needed to officially institute a New World Order. Maybe next time, boys. Apparently the public isn’t quite as stupid or gullible as its political “leaders” would prefer.
*Note: As an aside, I’d like to express my disgust at the ignorance and/or corruption of many of our politicians. Joe Hockey only a matter of days ago expressed his view on global warming (which I heard on radio), demonstrating a disturbingly wanton disregard for a little thing called factual reality, when he said that, “the science is settled” regarding the purported reality of GW. That qualifies as gross negligence in my view. And THESE are our “representatives”??? Posted by The Grand Illusion at 5:04 AM