## Thursday, November 11, 2010 ... //

### Pogrom against German climate realists

Seventy-two years ago, on November 9th-10th, 1938, German Jews and their assets were attacked throughout Germany in an event known as the Crystal Night.

This old kind of fascism is dead in the country - at least in the mainstream - but other kinds of fascisms are only beginning to thrive. To commemorate the anniversary, the Green fascists in the Parliament have launched an assault against all German climate realists:

Grüne machen mit Klimakatastrophen-Zweiflern den Sarrazin (Die Achse des Guten)

Automatic translation to English

No Tricks Zone's report (Pierre Gosselin)

Germany gets ugly with climate skeptics (Anthony Watts)
A letter not too tastefully titled "Deniers of climate change in the coalition government" (it used to be "Jewish elite spoiling the Aryan lives") signed by the whole Parliamentary faction of the Greater Green Party was sent to the government one week ago.

In the letter, the green people complain that the influence of climate skepticism is rising in the U.S. as well as Germany where some people even dare to listen to Fred Singer. Imagine the crime! ;-)

Thanks to Pierre Gosselin for the most usable translation of the green theses.

To fight the trend, Ms Renate Künast, Mr Jürgen Trittin and "friends" are "asking the federal German government":
1. Is the German Government aware of a scientifically published paper that has been subjected to peer review that questions climate change caused by man, and that is supported by scientific data?
I am not sure whether the German government dares to know but if they do, they can also point out this list of 800 peer-reviewed papers that fits the description above. Of course, some of the papers were also co-authored by Fred Singer.
2. In the view of the German Government’s Leadership, is there a scientific discussion on whether climate change is taking place and whether man has a decisive impact on climate?
You bet. Your own Kristallnacht letter is another piece of evidence that the discussion is boiling more than ever before. Right now, it seems more likely that the answer to the question about man's major influence is pretty much No.
3. Is the German Government aware of the publications from American physicist Fred Singer on the subject of climate protection? How does the German Government view the scientific reputation of Mr Singer in regards to climate protection?
Again, I don't know whether the German government has any clue about these topics. My own guess is that the German Government is dominated by ignorants who simply have no idea about these matters. But yes, they should know him and his work because it is important.

By the way, it's nonsensical to describe papers about the drivers of the climate as papers about "the subject of climate protection". Climate protection has no room in science - it belongs to extremist advocacy groups. Science is about learning how things work, not about designing orthodoxies how things such as the climate should be "protected".
4. For the German Government, do the arguments made by Fred Singer and other arguments presented have merit and are they “enlightening”? How do you assess the statements by Mr Singer that “Politicians that are embedded in climate change are more dangerous than climate change itself”?
If they dared to hear them, the arguments would surely make lots of sense. But the government would also have to be courageous enough to say so. Surrounded by lots of green fascists, I am afraid that those hypocritical German politicians are cowards. Moreover, admitting that they - the politicians - are more dangerous than the imaginary threats would also be somewhat suicidal and it needs a special courage for a politician to admit so.
5. Is the German Government aware of the ideas Mr Singer has previously promoted? What’s your view on the fact that he, for example, questioned the hazards of passive smoke, or that he contested the ozone layer was damaged by CFCs, or that he trivialized acid rain? With this background, how does the German Government judge the credibility of Fred Singer’s activities with regards to climate protection?
It got a little bit too personal, right? The hazards of passive smoke or the mechanisms controlling the ozone layer remain covered by uncertainty; see e.g. Ozone hole theory faces lab problems. However, even if someone managed to be convinced that everything is settled, these questions have nothing to do with another question - about man-made climate change.

There are clearly lots of AGW skeptics who believe that the passive smoking and freons are harmful. I've seen the effects of acid rains and hated them. But of course, people have different opinions about various complex matters. How the German government could possibly judge Singer's credibility about EF because of his opinions about AB and CD remains incomprehensible to me. Moreover, they just take Fred Singer out of context. He's surely neither the only climate skeptic nor the ultimate template that all climate skeptics are obliged to reproduce. (Sorry, Fred.)

What these Green fascists want is to attach a new yellow star to Fred Singer's skin - and to the skin of anyone who has ever met him and exchanged some information or friendly sentences. I am honored to belong to this group of people so you can't be surprised that I am personally offended by this outrageous attempted witch hunt.
6. Is the German Government aware of who financed Mr Singer for his activities? Is the Federal Government aware of the funders who -like Exxon und Koch Industries in the USA - fund the activities of the climate change deniers in Germany?
I suppose that as a professor emeritus of environmental science at the University of Virginia, he is getting the same salary as other - especially distinguished - emeritus professors. I am sure that green fascists are probably not happy but the institutionalized science works in this way and Fred Singer deserves much more than he is getting from that system.

Fred Singer is an amazingly active Gentleman so he may also have other sources of income - such as speaking fees. At any rate, the exact composition of Fred Singer's wallet is clearly not the green folks' business. By the way, lots of big corporations - including oil companies - as well as governments pay lots of money to various green groups. This is what should be investigated if anything should.
7. Does the German Government share the opinion that events with Mr Singer provide a forum for the pure interests of the fossil fuel industry, and thus enhance their unscientific work and unserious activities?
Haven't they already said the same childish thing about Big Oil before? Do they think that if they repeat a vitriolic comment about the "fossil fuel industry" several times, it becomes less essential?

The fossil fuel industry is an essential sector of the economies of the modern societies. If the fossil fuel industry were liquidated, it would be incomparably more harmful to the mankind than if all members and apologists for the climate hysteria movement were made to disappear overnight. So why do the latter feel so much self-confident in their irrational attacks?

However, it's just the truth that virtually no part of the climate skepticism has any direct links with the "fossil fuel industry". I have no such links and I am sure that most people who actually matter don't have any such links, either. On the other hand, the relationships in the world are complicated so it's statistically guaranteed that some skeptics have some links of this kind, much like the other side has. And what?

Do those green folks think that just by finding someone in a big group who has some contacts to a large group of people - which arguably includes the majority of the world population - they can discredit this group? Or why do they keep on repeating these irrational and insulting incantations? Such remote links may impress the voters of the German Green Voters because those people are unable to think. But these labels can't make a (positive) difference among the rational people.
8. Are there voices within the German Government who question the anthropogenic causes of climate change?
You bet. But do the green comrades also want their addresses so that they could "confront" them? You can't do it. About 1/2 of the politicians actually disagree with the alarmist ideology although most of those in Germany remain silent. Even if you were given all the names, you couldn't do anything because there would be too many of them.
9. How does the German Government view the activities of the European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) with regards to climate change? EIKE is supported by Fred Singer. In the Federal Government’s view, does the Institute work on the scientific question regarding the subject of climate change?
I am baffled by the idea that the German government should have common attitudes to detailed questions about life such as "the activities of EIKE". It's clearly just one institute doing things that are, to say the least, 100% legal. Do the Green comrades expect the government to promise a 100% loyalty to the One Thousand Year Green Empire? Should the government vow to fight against everyone who is not a perfectly green mouldy piece of scum?

I personally praise the work of EIKE and I am sure that most decent German politicians praise it, too.
10. Is the German Government aware of whether climate denier conferences are also being financed by public funds, for example by the Liberal Institute of the Friedrich-Naumann-Foundation?
They're not called "denier conferences": they're the only proper conferences about key climate change drivers on the German territory. Not sure whether they are also funded by public funds but they surely should - unlike the crooks in the Green Party.
11. In general, does the German Government approve of the use of public funds for spreading the ideas of climate deniers like Fred Singer?
Clearly, public funding for science should be ideologically neutral, so if there are funds going to people whose conclusions are convenient for the Green fascists, there must also be a public funding for the equally achieved researchers whose conclusions are inconvenient.

I am more interested in the question whether the German Government still intends to protect basic human rights, privacy, and ideologically neutral attitude of the government to its citizens and corporations.

In particular, will the government do its best to protect the life, assets, and dignity of the institutions and people who are being threatened and blackmailed by this letter? Will the German policemen shoot quickly enough to neutralize the green radicals once they switch from disgusting verbal attacks to physical attacks?

The German environmentalism has showed to be on the same path as the German national socialism in the late 1930s and it's time for the German Government to take notice of this inhuman and aggressive movement.