The Weekly Standard - much cited elsewhere, is running a piece telling us why the climate sceptics (or "deniers") are winning. And indeed, they probably are – they have never really recovered from Climategate 1, and all the other "gates" that piled in on top of it.

It is said of the British, however, that we tend to lose all our battles except that last, this winning the war. Climate sceptics, on the other hand, now seem to be in danger of reversing this process – winning battles but losing the war.

View full article here

Not 'quite irrelevant' I would suggest. More 'necessary, but not sufficient'.

Fundamental principles like scientific truth work slowly, and usually have a hidden rather than overt influence. They work because they're right. For instance, there is probably no real need to spend a lot of time fighting proposals to run major parts of the country on Wind Power - there is no way that this can work technically. A lot of money may be wasted and fields ruined, but it just isn't going to happen, because it can't.

Similarly, it is vital to get the science behind this climate scam understood and correct, if only so that we don't waste more time and trouble fighting proposals which can never happen....

"energy security"

That little phrase takes me back…

Wasn't this the mantra during the 1970's when the oil was about to run out and we were all heading for an ice age?

I agree with that and I think the bigger picture works the same way. Governments take more upon themselves, but the more they take on, the worse they do it. They kill the goose that lays the golden egg. The big state with the government controlling everything can't work and has failed before.

As for the windmills, it's a case of the government spinning off into a microcosm of folly and as Lincoln said, "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.".

Doesn't this confirm the Alinsky quote : "The issue is not the issue"? What they are doing is precisely what Mr Alinsky trained his marxist thugs to do in the USA. Whatever advances the 'cause' is of use. The cause being complete victory of socialism/marxism/fascism/collectivism/progressivism or whatever the left might choose to call themselves, over liberty.
I'm just pleased there are people still willing and able to fight the battles against these evil people. I wish I was.

Yes, I would hesitate to call the constant knowledge based rebuttals "irrelevant".

The target for final victory has to be the fatally corrupt UN. Behind the UN are the dynastic Banksters: Typically the four families behind the City of London.

Oppenheimers
Schiffs
Warburgs
Rothschilds

The centralisation of power depends upon the removal of accountability, hand in hand with Blackmail, bribery, secret societies (like the police), and corruption generally.

The agenda is not pretty and it will demand great sacrifice to beat it: How can it be otherwise with the evil twinning of Bankster owned politicians and party politics?

Certainly. one of the main targets has to be the UN ... the font of [most] evil. In effect, we are dealing with ambitions to create global governance, where climate change is just one of man means to an end.

I have just read Ambler's report in full and it does make very interesting reading. I thought about printing it off and giving it to people I know to let them know what is going on. Unfortunately, they are like the masses - just not interested in what is going on and, without them knowing, how the west is being turned into one big socialist state, run by the UN.

It is interesting how Gore etc are linked to each other. Why hasn't there been a TV programme about this and how these socialists are so interlinked? Would any TV company want to produce such a programme? Do the masses really care? I hope that one day before I pop my clogs, people will finally realise what is happening and there will be a revolution like there was in 1989 will the fall of the Berlin Wall. However, it will take a huge seachange of thought amongst the masses who are more concerned with what Cheryl Cole is up to.

I hope you've all visited http://www.junkscience.com.

Lots of stuff there on Gleick and related matters. I'd forgotten about the site until I was going through my bookmarks to remove obsolete stuff. Well worth a look.

I would agree with you but with the exception that the global governance model has already been created. The objective now is the extent of its influence.

Anyone fancy a game of digital bucking bronco? See how long your comment can stay on this board before it's thrown off. Doors open at 3.45pm Tuesday:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/b ... ve-q-and-a

Ah, right! Yet another variation on the "Evil Jewish Bankers rule the world" nonsense.

How charming.

Ignorance is bliss I suppose, for the weak minded.

I'm with Bagua on this. If any cabal was secretly steering events then they simply couldn't be as incompetent as the daily headlines show.
The other problem is that by dreaming up Boojums to hunt one takes one's eyes off the ball and so misses the bastards in our midst.
The pressure for small economy driven government is growing, but entirely outside the MSM.
Our focus needs to be highlighting BigGuv BS, be it massive waste of taxpayers money or sneaky intrusive legislation.

Which contains Because that paragraph would never appear on this blog, I don't know if I can trust the rest of the paper. http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/image ... rnance.pdf

Rebutting warmist arguments is like continually snatching dangerous objects out of a toddler's reach. It feels Sisyphean, like an infinite game of Whack-A-Mole, but the alternative is worse. Most sceptics were recruited by observing a battle being won. I think the battles are certainly worth fighting so long as people are constantly reminded that warmism/biodiversity/energy security etc are all just means to an end. If you bomb all the roads leading to that end, the end won't be reached.