I have long believed that the hysteria over global warming is an elitist-driven madness, but madness with a purpose. The end goal is rule by a scientocracy and drone bureaucracy that will gather power onto themselves, control the developed economies and lifestyles of individuals, as it stifles poor countries from developing and keeps them on the dole. And now there is evidence confirming my suspicions. From the story:
The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN’s role in all future climate change negotiations.
The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals. The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as “the circle of commitment” – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.
“Circle of the committed?” What, do they think they’re in a Dan Brown novel? Good grief.
December 8th, 2009 | 1:53 pm
“rule by scientocracy”
seriously?
Quite the Hollywood conspiracy theory – with Ben Affleck cast in the lead role and maybe a Tom Hanks cameo, then Denzel Washington swoops in to save the day while Nicholas Cage can play the villian.
A different perspective:
We are faced with enormous challenges in a world of nearly 7 billion people – energy, food, water, agriculture, climate, viral/bacterial pandemics are all uncertain and posse increasing challenges. Further, individuals demand a higher standard of living and seek to live longer. With more people comes more competition for resources and more people leading to more interaction and thus, conflict.
All of these problems can be best met by science, practiced by real scientists who dedicate their lives and countless hours to understanding nature and applying science for progress. Not clergy, not lawyers, not radio talk show hosts
We can get on board with science, or return to the dark ages.
December 8th, 2009 | 3:55 pm
David,
You are highlighting exactly what you are denying. Your point seems to imply that because scientists have the greatest knowledge, all decisions in life must come from their expertise. That’s the definition of technocracy, or scientocracy as Wesley argues. Just because someone performs experiments does not qualify them for holding positions of power any more than a vestment, a law degree or millions of radio listeners. Knowledge knows no monopoly.
You define progress in material terms. The problem is, the theory of gravity doesn’t define why public works are necessary, find funding to build bridges or argue over whether the bridge is financially justified. The scientific process doesn’t explain the meaning of rights, responsibility and governance. Just because people are debating the validity of a theory of a group of scientists doesn’t mean we are returning to the dark ages. That’s the entire point of science! It’s not a question of debating whether knowledge is bad, it’s whether that knowledge is correct and if it should result in the centralized control over society by a technocratic government.
William F. Buckley once said he’d rather trust government to the first 100 people in the Boston phone book rather than the Harvard faculty. I’m inclined to agree.
December 8th, 2009 | 6:19 pm
Remember the phrase, “limousine liberals”? What’s scary is that they aren’t BEING committed, like to institutions…because the inmates are running the asylum these days, or more like the crazies are doing what crazies do, calling others crazy lest they be locked up themselves…
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact