On Friday I lobbed a grenade into a public Climate Change panel discussion at Vic.
The panel consisted of 11 academics and policy people from the university, the Ministry of the Environment, NIWA and GNS Science.
And what a tight and self-satisfied little group they were. All warmmongers to the core, with not a single inconvenient sceptic to spoil the illusion of settled science.
What a remarkable brainwashing operation our university is running in the name of education.
When I looked at the young students arrayed adoringly in front of the panel, I couldn’t help but feel rather sick at the state-sponsored indoctrination programme I’m helping to fund.
There were one or two attempts from the floor to break the self-affirming circle, but I thought I’d cut to the chase. After introducing myself as a Climate Scientology heretic, I asked the panel:
“What would happen to any enquiring student on your [Climate Change] course who dared to voice inconvenient questions about reports of fraud in the Nobel-winning 2007 IPCC report?
“Or about the 100 million Africans who are dying because of the doubling of food prices caused by the conversion of crops from food to biofuel?
“Or about how the previous speaker [I think Jonathan Boston] poured scorn on oil companies profiting from fossil fuels, but did not provide balance by referring to all the academics who profit by promoting global warming?”
Needless to say, there followed much fumbling and grumbling and scoffing and diverting.
And equally needless to say, I’m still waiting for my answer.
Outside the lecture theatre were the students’ glossy posters of their climate projects. All dutifully parroting the IPCC worldview.
Not one of them suggested these undergrads had been exposed to any sceptical viewpoint whatsoever.
Talking to these students about the presence of alternative scientific opinions was like debating democracy with a tour guide from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
I suggested to two students that the only fair thing to do, in view of the accusations of fraud being levelled at the holy UN body, was to urgently convene an international court hearing presided over by a panel of judges acceptable to both sides.
Boy, were these guys hostile to any hint of an impartial assessment of the evidence!
“But judges are biased!” said one. (What, and the IPCC isn’t??)
Maybe he’d heard about the British judge who found nine errors is Gore’s movie and refused to allow it to be screened in schools until those errors were fixed.
But I suspect he just didn’t want some annoyingly rational beak pouring cold water on his beloved religion.
Had I not seen it with my own eyes, I wouldn’t have believed how one-sided this seat of so-called learning is.
I can now quite understand how similar institutions like the University of East Anglia can become corrupted by their own unbalanced vision of the truth.