Wednesday, September 16, 2015
A Q&A session with the LaRouche PAC science team. What should a science driver aim for? Does Newton’s inverse-square law make Kepler irrelevant? How does Planck’s discovery of the quantum relate to Riemann’s work? Does money control science today? These and more. Questions? Email basement@larouchepac.com, or include your question in the comments section on YouTube.
https://larouchepac.com/20150916/new-paradigm-qa-creating-science-driver
The following is just the last ten minutes of the transcript. For the entire program, go to the link above.
BEETS: We got a question in via e-mail from Jonathan, who says:
“Hello, all. A lot of Americans find it hard to believe that the scientific community would lie about man-made global warming. Many believe that scientists have integrity and would lose their jobs if they lied, or that it’s a crazy conspiracy theory, and would never happen. The mainstream media, and the educational system tells us every year that man is causing the world to get too hot, with its emissions of too much CO2. So my question is, can you tell me who has corrupted and bought out the scientific community?
DENISTON: I could say a few things. The money is clear. There’s tons of money in the scientific domain. The running joke is that if you want to get your paper published, you have to put something in about how it’s going to affect climate change, or if you’re doing a study on …
ROSS: How ladies’ fashions in Guatemala have been influenced by climate change.
DENISTON: Automatic publishing your paper right there (cross-talk) … Another thing just to put out, it’s a myth that the so-called scientific community is even in total consensus on this. That should just be stated aside from all the fraud, and people who are getting bought off, and going along with this stuff. You hear in the media, you hear these people claiming 97% consensus, 98% consensus, and those come from actual studies that were done.
People wrote a paper, they did a study, they reviewed supposedly thousands of abstracts, and said, of the scientific literature that’s been published on the subject, how many agree with this issue. Oh, it’s 97%. Then some people, who had some brains, looked at those studies, and looked at the papers they claimed, and they said, well the consensus is, to actually be clear on what we are talking about, 97% of these papers agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and therefore human CO2 emissions can have an effect on the atmosphere.
There was absolutely not 97% consensus saying that the warming of the past century is predominantly caused by what mankind has done, and mankind’s continued activity is going to have catastrophic effects. Those are very different things. It’s one thing to say, we might cause the temperature to raise a tenth of a degree in the next century. OK, who cares? That’s not going to melt the ice-caps. It’s not a crisis. There is a consensus that CO2 is greenhouse gas and we’re putting it in the atmosphere. That’s not a revelation. That’s not a surprise.
On this particular study, it’s more in the range of 30% of people who actually agree that this is some catastrophe we need to deal with immediately. So that should just be put on the table to clarify the issue. There is not even in the so-called scientific community, not a 100% clear agreement that our actions are catastrophic and destroying the planet. We need to have dramatic changes of our actions immediately. Because that’s what we’re told. That’s what you’re being told. We’re being told that scientists are saying that. That’s not true. That’s a lie.
To get at the deeper issue, our society has gone through a cultural paradigm shift. We’re living in a society where the predominant cultural belief is coherent with this whole green movement idea. There’s an idea, a fundamental, emotional conception that’s taken root in society, that mankind’s inherent activity, mankind’s progress, scientific and technological development is inherently wrong, and is inherently going to bring us to destruction. Whether it’s putting a hole in the ozone, whether it’s using up all the resources, whether it’s causing the planet to warm, it’s just one after the other. It all finds a root in this green ideology, which is, and we’ve documented this through and through.
EIR just put out a special report on this subject entitled, Global Warming is Population Reduction, not Science, and you can find information for it on this website, on the EIR website. You should buy a copy. You should read it. You should study it. Because we present there very clearly the facts on so-called climate change itself, the reality that there is not clear evidence that CO2 is some major driver of the climate. Many other factors are the predominant drivers of the climate.
But more importantly, this comes from a British Malthusian population-reduction ideology. That’s where this comes from. Those are the people that founded the whole so-called environmentalist movement. This is the modern day Zeus. They’re using any excuse they can, and every year it’s one after the next, because they believe that there should be something on the order of one billion people on the planet, and most of those people should be peasants, who Prince Philip might go visit from his car, or watch from afar, and say the racist things he tends to say off-hand all the time to them as he drives by.
That’s the world view that this comes from. That’s the origins, and the real ideology, and the real strategic motivation of this whole climate change scare. So, they dump a bunch of money in it. People today that have the title of a scientist, there not all of a sudden, they’re not Jesus Christ, or something. A lot of these guys go where the money is, and they try and maintain their careers, and they try and get papers published, and they go with the flow. We need people who have the guts to actually stand up on truth and authority, and the people who do that get attacked, big time. That’s the environment we’re dealing with. Peoples’ careers get ruined. They can’t find jobs. If you become a denier.
FAN-CHIANG: You end up on the list.
DENISTON: You end up on a list. There’s open discussion about whether or not they could create laws where you could take legal action against people who are deniers.
ROSS: They might be the next drone targets.
DENISTON: It’s really an insane environment that’s been created, but it needs to be defeated, because the reality is that human existence depends upon progress. We need scientific advancement. We need economic development. We have to progress.
I think it’s interesting that, just to throw this in there, last week Jerry Brown, this nut-job, who got thrown into the Governorship of California, a total disgrace to his father, he just suffered a major defeat on his landmark climate change bill, where he was trying to get an 80% reduction of CO2 emissions, greenhouse emissions, 80% below what they were in 1990, achieve that by 2050. That was the bill he was pushing for. Twenty-one Democrats in California, of all places, it’s not Texas, this is California, twenty-one Democrats broke with Brown, and they voted with the Republicans to defeat this bill.
Who were these Democrats? They represented poor, middle class, lower class regions of the state. They’re saying, we’re sick of your all high and mighty green morality. We need economic growth. We need to support our people here. And I think that signifies a good clear dividing line on where the real issue lies. If you’re going to fight for the development for your people, your population, your constituents, improve people. Is that your priority, or maintaining some facade that you’re for the environment. You’re going to go with all this crap, while the people of California, and other places, are just suffering under these policies, and especially in the current economic depression.
So I encourage people to get the Report. The Report has extensive documentation on the science, what they call science, which is mostly just lying. It makes it easier for them. They just make stuff up and makes their case quicker. But then the real strategic motivation, the real policy behind this. You should get that. You should give it to other people. You should circulate it. This is a real battleground right now.
BEETS: To conclude here, this Report is going to be presented next week at the UN at a Press Conference and I think that just underscores this Paradigm Shift moment that we’re at, and that we really have the opportunity to make the change in the United States, go with this completely changed dynamic that’s being led by the intervention of Putin, of China, and so forth, and man has an opportunity to create a new condition in our species, which has never has never existed before, and throw the trash of the 20th Century out.
So with that, we will conclude for today. I would like to encourage everybody to keep sending in your questions via e-mail, YouTube comments, Facebook, and Twitter, and we will see you next time.
