Oreskes’ Brave Old World

Source:  American Thinker

by Robert Ferguson

The effort to discredit global warming skeptics is warming up globally. Australian blogger Graham Readfearn reports on Naomi Oreskes’ speaking tour of Australia:

As a celebrated historian, Professor Naomi Oreskes is interested in the origin of things – where ideas start from, what drives them and ultimately who propagates them.

Oreskes, Professor of History and Science Studies at the University of California San Diego, has just arrived in Australia on a whistle-stop speaking tour promoting her new book, co-authored with Erik Conway, titled Merchants of Doubt – How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming.

The book, five years in the writing, ultimately concludes that much of the world’s scepticism on climate change – whether that be over the validity or certainty of the science of climate change, its causes or the need to act – is chiefly driven by a paranoid ideological fear of socialism and an unbending faith and belief in free-markets.

Put simply, free-market think-tanks such as the George C Marshall Institute, the Heartland Institute, The Science and Public Policy Institute and the Why-Can’t-You-Just-Leave-us-Alone-While-We-Make-Oodles-of-Cash Institute (not a real institute) don’t like industry to have to be held accountable.

Oreskes spoke to the ABC’s Lateline program on this brand of scepticism which also drove shoulder-shrugs over acid rain, tobacco smoke and ozone depletion.

Says Oreskes, “It’s part of this whole ideological program of challenging any science that could lead to government regulation, because it’s part of an ideological conviction that all regulation is bad, that any time the government steps in to ?protect’ us from harm, that we’re on the slippery slope to socialism, and this the ideology that you see underlying a kind of almost paranoid anti-communism. So even after the Cold War is over, these people are seeing reds under the bed.”

Has Oreskes’ snarky book indulged what Freud called “projection”? It is certainly demonstrable that her book’s “carbon footprint” and “greed” slams on skeptics are so filled with hypocrisy they “stink on ice.”

But this has to be the topper:

The book, five years in the writing, ultimately concludes that much of the world’s scepticism on climate change – whether that be over the validity or certainty of the science of climate change, its causes or the need to act – is chiefly driven by a paranoid ideological fear of socialism[.]

As an average six-year-old might ask, “Gee, ya think?” (See an in-depth response to Oreskes here.)

Does this sneering sentiment represent a strident admission by Oreskes — and by extension, her comrades in the real “denial” camp — that she has no fear of — nay, embraces socialism? Is she saying, along with Newsweek Magazine, “We are all socialists now!”? Does she believe (and hold in disdain the fact) that the American Founders also gained — after one of the most thorough, brilliant, and inspired studies in comparative governments and their flaws in “the course of human events” — a “paranoid ideological fear” of the Leviathan State?

Here are just a few more “paranoid” anti-socialists:

“Today’s debate about global warming is essentially a debate about freedom. The environmentalists would like to mastermind each and every possible (and impossible) aspect of our lives.” – Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic

“If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”- Samuel Adams

“When plunder has become a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.” – Frederic Bastiat

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.” – Lord Action

Is Oreskes is a Progressive leftist? Does she have no problem with the EU’s and the U.N.’s drive for “climate justice,” massive wealth destruction — smiley-faced “wealth redistribution” — Malthusian-driven population control (reduction), and the turning of every human on the planet into a conscripted, interchangeable brick for the “ruling class’s” construction of their utopian tower to heaven?

In SPPI’s recent paper, “Dr Rajendra Pachauri and the IPCC – No Fossil Fool,” Dennis Ambler reveals:

The UN narrative says that developed countries of the Northern Hemisphere must atone for their “climate sins” of generating wealth and comfortable lifestyles using fossil fuels, by scaling back their economies through a process of “Contraction” and then transferring much of that wealth to developing nations, to bring them up to the new lowered expectations of the developed nations, described as “Convergence. “

Thus will there ensue a just and equitable Global Community of Nations, all having equal shares of the so-called Global Commons of the atmosphere and the oceans and living sustainable low-tech life styles in a state of Climate Justice, guaranteed by the UN World Government. It has been aptly described by Professor Fred Singer as “taking money from the poor in rich countries and giving it to the rich in poor countries.”

Under this UN vision, consumption of everything will be controlled and rationed, globally, even to the point of individual allowances for energy use and carbon dioxide emissions.

So, what’s really bothering Oreskes?

Like those of Babylon’s tyrants before her, are Oreskes’ dreams troubled? Is she alarmed that, like Nebuchadnezzar’s three Hebrew civil servants, Americans and their elected representatives are turning a deaf ear to the “consensus” heralds’ daily shouting of “Fall down before the golden image! Everybody is doing it!”? As with Belshazzar, has her self-indulgent banquet been hushed by the sudden appearance of wall writings she cannot decipher?

That is to say, is she tormented seeing that the public is wakening to the real-world reality that since its inception, progressive, Radical Environmentalism has been a smooth skin stuffed with a filthy lie — that the left’s concerns are centered not on man’s place in or relationship to the modern natural world, but rather on his relationship to the ancient Totalitarian State?

That is to say, Environmentalism‘s serially contrived alarms, calamities, and apocalyptic soothsaying are not scientific, but political; its Leviathan-feeding prescriptions are not foundational upon science or data-driven policy, but rather upon policy-driven data: unidirectional fabrications advanced by self-interested propaganda, intense intimidation, and “thirty pieces of silver.”

The fog is clearing, and more are seeing that when confronted with choices between Truth and Falsehood, reality and deception, liberty and captivity, light and darkness, Oreskes’ “green” rabble of adherents, agents, and dupes never fail to shout in unison, “Give us Barabbas!” As Chesterton might phrase it, when it comes to individual liberty and personal accountability, the Oreskes crowd reflexively employ a special sieve forged in the fires of Hell that catches and holds fast all the dross and allows the gold to wash away.

Welcome to Oreskes’ brave old world.

Robert Ferguson is President of the Science and Public Policy Institute.

*************

Posted by: pavan

Nov 20, 07:48 AM


Isn’t this an admission that anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is all about big government control and socialism. If we embrace socialism, then we should embrace AGW. In fact, Liberals are primarily motivated by their desire to crush our freedom. Therefore, they support anything that gives more power to government. This includes environmental regulations, regulations in general, global warming, acid rain, higher taxes, etc. Everyone agrees that even if AGW is true, we can’t do anything about it. Completely shutting down the industrial sector would have a miniscule effect on AGW, but it would turn us into the USSA. Hence, that’s what Liberals want.

Posted by: PattyMor

Nov 20, 08:09 AM


Barack has the EPA strangling the United States industry by industry. From cow flatulence, dust, global warming it doesn;t matter what the excuse. We have become enslaved by our own government; behind that bright, wide smile.

Posted by: bobad

Nov 20, 09:23 AM


AGW was never about climate. Progressives use AGW (or any other real or fake crisis)as a mechanism to reward friends, punish enemies, and tip the scales toward Socialism. Take a look for yourself, and connect the dots. Every friend of the Progressives benefit from AGW-related legislation, regulations, and executive orders. The greens, Sierra Club, PETA, unions, anti-Capitalism and anti military groups, and Socialist organizations all get various rewards in cash and prizes. A smart Congressman could connect the dots, lay this all bare for the American people, and blow the whole scam out of the water. Unfortunately, legislators and regulators can’t be prosecuted. The only way to beat this is to wake up every voter.

Posted by: Dr. Dave

Nov 20, 12:32 PM


Plan on hearing a lot of comparisons to cigarette smoking in the months ahead. What’s ironic is that they make the association the wrong way around. Scientists who made their living working for Big Tobacco falsified data and hid data to protect their industry. The cause and effect relationship with smoking and lung disease had been conclusively worked out for over a decade before the Tobacco industry fought back. So what group of scientists today are falsifying data, hiding data or “losing” data to protect THEIR industry? Nobody stood to make a fortune if everyone quit smoking cigarettes. LOTS of special interests stand to gain as long as this eco-fraud has legs.

The AGW myth today is kept alive by grant-seeking parasites in academia, big business, big investors, politicians and NGOs. The “science” is spread over atmospheric physics, climatology, meteorology, paleoclimatology, geology, a little chemistry and every branch of biology possible. All with their palms extended for taxpayer money. In contrast, the “science” about tobacco and human disease was largely restricted to one branch of science – medicine. Those who sounded the alarm stood to gain nothing…except perhaps fewer patients.

Miss Naomi might have been smarter not to mention acid rain and ozone holes because history is quickly teaching us that these two eco-scares were bogus frauds. The threat of acid rain was overblown and easily eliminated with scrubbers on smoke stacks. The CFCs and a hole in the ozone theory was pure bunk…but some chemical companies got rich.

Posted by: Carlos

Nov 20, 07:32 PM


Whatever Prof Oreskes was celebrated for previously, the trash in this book would relegate it to the trash can, just like Holdren’s books before her . Where’s the objectivity, the critical thinking, the facts? It’s the same old scrambled wishful thinking that can’t see things the way they are, but rather in the glorified way they envision them in. She’s completely ignorant of her own, and mankind’s, severe shortcomings. She’s just another Tower of Babel builder and narcissist herself.

Posted by: ManfredHoffmann

Nov 21, 12:38 AM


We must remember that we “sceptics” are portrayed as either miscreants, dunces or crackpots on a daily basis by the global propaganda machine (basically the entire traditional news media) of the “warmists”.
Most people don’t pay much attention but basically believe the alleged “scientific consensus”.
Until they really start thinking about it. Even people with very little education who are a little street wise will smell that rotten fish pretty much right away. The whole Global warming or whatever it is called at the moment, has BS written all over it.
Give me your money and I’ll improve the weather. Come on! That would get you tarred and feathered in most societies throughout history.
It was just irresistable for the nerdy weatherman in the kiddycorner of campus to be promoted to the high priest of doom. Lots of money and the power to boss the whole world around. Almost the same for the motley crew of washed up old scoundrels from the 60’s who suddenly find themselves in government.
Easy game for good old organized crime and the assorted tin pot dictators of the poor climate victims of the thirld world.
We must not despair. Just talking to people about what carbon dioxide actually is really helps.
Lets see how far the left really has come with “global dumbing”.