Friday, March 22, 2013

Margaret Thatcher as the first climate alarmist

... well, the first influential one ...

I have always found her personal attitude to the global warming orthodoxy puzzling if not fascinating. In December 2009, in Berlin, her ex-aide Lord Monckton told me a mixed and confusing story about her real beliefs and about the role of the striking miners – an influence that Martin Durkin's documentary claimed to be important for her decision to create the octopus institutions that would become the IPCC etc.

In June 2010, in Nice, Christopher Booker painted a detailed picture of Margaret Thatcher as the first climate skeptic. She recanted some previous views of hers, I was explained, and at least in her book "Statecraft", she criticized the AGW movement in a modern way that resembles what we're saying these days.

But I have never known what were the views she actually recanted.

Benny Peiser sent us an excerpt from Rupert Darwall's book "Age of Global Warming" that is linked at the top, that will be released in one month, and that you may pre-order now.
Book excerpt: The first warmist (The Financial Post)
She gave a talk to the Royal Society in September 1988, just 3 months after Hansen's notorious testimony to the U.S. Congress, and in some sense, it was even tougher than Hansen's speech.

We're learning that it's the greatest issue of the present world that is comparable to the discovery of the splitting of the atoms (and I am sure that she meant the nuclei, not atoms) – holy cow – and that would require great sacrifices if we want to protect the future generations etc. In some sense, it almost looks like that the climate alarmists, undisturbed by any creative or original thinking, have simply copied their proclamations and their general ideology from Margaret Thatcher.

The excerpts says that she's been intrigued by the ideas about global warming since the mid 1970s – since the time when many leading senior climate alarmists we know today were afraid of a new ice age. If that's true, then Martin Durkin's story about the striking miners who created the monster can't be correct. I couldn't resist to find a video with Thatcher talking like an authoritative climate alarmist about the climate hysteria.

It's from the 2009 BBC2 program Earth: the Climate Wars. The prickly remarks she was saying were terribly deluded but one must admit that unlike the vast majority of the contemporary male politicians, she had the balls. She actually exhibited not only some originality through her ability to frame these deeply misguided ideas but also some courage – something that is unknown to the climate alarmists today – because there was nothing popular about these delusions in the late 1980s.

In fact, as the excerpt tells us, no TV station cared about her musings on the climate change when she addressed the Royal Society in September 1988.

At any rate, left-wingers almost never invent anything new. They're just taking random ideas pushed by the conservatives – preferably the ideas that have already been debunked and superseded – and promote them through their mass movement at moments when the only conceivable consequence is degradation of the economy and stagnation of the human society. They call it progress but progress – through the competition between the new ideas some of which may win – is one of the main things they viscerally hate.


  1. I have to disagree with this one "At any rate, left-wingers almost never invent anything new." To my judgement sigma 6 intelligent makes one more likely to appear as commie-hippie-gay and not stiff upper lip conservative. High concentration of fetal exposure to testosterone (clearly linked to political inclination) makes you better engineer, but not theor physicist, composer or Edison. These tasks requires more subtle and versatile skills. Algebra, combinatorial intuition, and linguistics are such a bitchy fields of ingenuity.

  2. Well the iron lady had if I remember correctly a degree in chemistry. Where modern chemistry has a firm empirical grounding. She must have had a good sense for spooting 'hot air' . But politics has never had nature as primary focus, so its in my humble opinion entirely possible that she where one of the prime movers of the modern global warming movement. I'll read the above mentioned book. Best regards and happy easter! /Fredrik

  3. "the discovery of the splitting of the atoms (and I am sure that she meant the nuclei, not atoms)"

    She displays her classical education. Atom, a word deriving from Democritus, means "not splittable", so splitting the atom is synonymous with splitting the nucleus. After all we have the chemically discovered atomic mass table and she was a chemist.

  4. Dear Anna, I am not understanding this excuse.

    I would say it's the standard confusion of nuclear physics and atomic physics - people usually don't understand that the latter deals with 1 million times lower energies than the latter.

    Concerning the excuse, the atom is splittable - one may remove the electrons from the nuclei - but even if one couldn't remove the electron from the rest, the splitting of the nucleus would still count as splitting of the atom, right? If the nucleus were divisible, so would have to be the atom that the nucleus is a part of.

  5. morals of this speech at the Royal Society ?

    that also The Iron Lady, just as me, is a human being, and can err immensely ...

    this doesn't prevent my thinking she was right on a lot of other occasions ...

  6. Lubos, you give this woman far too much credit. She was,is and remains a cretin. I'm from the UK, I know what I'm talking about. Sorry you're czech. You can admire her stupidity from afar. She championed 'climate change' as a political weapon against the far left. basta. She never thought about it beyond this very narrow scope. I don't care whether you thought she had balls. She was, is and will forever remain for any sentient UK citizen a fuckwit. And trust me I'm right wing. I know what i'm talking about