Watershed Conference…German Coalition Government FDP Party To Hold FIRST EVER Skeptical Conference

Hell must have frozen over!

Climate science skepticism in Germany now has spread from a few once marginalized groups over to the junior member of Germany’s coalition CDU-FDP government, the Free Democrats Party (FDP). Hat tip: Ökowatch.

Coalition government FDP party invitation questions climate dogma – announces skeptical climate and energy conference.

The FDP is holding a skeptic conference at the end of this month. This is the first time any political party in Germany holds a “skeptic” conference, and thus marks a watershed event in Germany when it comes to climate science skepticism. Make no mistake – it’s a clear signal.

It used to be that every political party in Germany, from the communists to the conservatives, accepted the science underpinning the man-made climate catastrophe. But that’s changing now. Germany’s Free Democrats (FDP) party appears to be breaking away from the blind, stampeding herd and is holding a conference that casts serious doubt on global warming dogma, which has gripped Germany for over 2 decades, and the direction of Germany’s environmental and energy policy.

Of course skeptical conferences have been held in Germany, but never has one been sponsored by a political party, let alone one that is in power.

Ökowatch writes that “a conference on the topic of climate organized by a political party is taking place for the first time in Dresden on June 30, 2012“. It is one that will offer an alternative view in the debate: The state faction of the FDP Saxony is holding together with ALDE, the Alliance of Liberal Parliamentarians in the EU, a climate conference titled: “Are we beyond rescue? Between climate catastrophe and eco-hysteria.”

Here’s what the above pictured invitation says:

Whether it is the ban of the incandescent light bulb, the mandating of E10 ethanol fuel, the planned energy renovation obligation for residential buildings, which was set up at the end of December 2010, or the attempt by a few overzealous communities to impose the mounting rooftop solar systems: Starting with the European Union and extending to the administration of German towns, eco-bureaucrats are always waiting to impose new, excessive demands and environmental standards.

Here no one seems to care that the energy-saving light bulbs will have to disposed of as toxic waste at a high cost, that the manufacture of a single electric car requires an additional amount of energy consumption that would be enough to fuel a compact car over its entire lifetime. Ecological hysteria and symbolism have come to dictate our everyday life. Just the requirement to renovate residential buildings could lead to costs of over 10,000 euros for each single family home. For many German homeowners, this will mean financial ruin. Apparently every mean is justified when it comes to protecting the climate, no matter the cost. The ends justify the means. Economic sense? Ecologic sense? – Don’t ask!

Among all this, the question of whether or not there is climate change, a global warming, and if so, is it really caused by man, plays no role.  Today a number of serious scientists seriously doubt the increase in global temperature, let alone the anthropogenic causes.

The FDP faction of the State Parliament of Saxony has decided, together with the Saxony FDP European Parliamentarian Holger Krahmer, to offer an alternative to the media-driven hysteria by holding a climate conference.

Our primary objective is to give scientists, economists and journalists, who view the green activism with skepticism and warn of incalculable consequences, a chance to speak out.

The speakers will include scientists Prof. Dr. Knut Löschke, Leipzig; Prof. Dr. Josef Reichholf, Munich; environmental economists Prof. Dr. Bodo Sturm, HTWK Leipzig; Dr. Benny Peiser, London; as well as journalist and publicist Michael Miersch of Munich.

See event website

Of course no one expects the mainstream media to cover this event, nor is that important in the end.

The skeptic movement in Germany is growing just fine without them. For years eco-activists, scientists, politicians and the media have tried everything to marginalize the skeptics: The result: the skeptics are winning and are stronger than ever.

Look at the progress: EIKE has held 4 independent international conferences in Germany, a number of blogs have sprung up, a new best-selling book by one of the founders of the eco-movement, Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt, came out earlier this year, and now the FDP party is is joining in and holding a skeptic conference – a first ever. So do we need the elitist media?

Don’t waste a single minute fretting about the absence of our drugged-up-on-green media. They live on another planet.

The blogs and Internet sites will report on this event and you know where to come to get informed. I do hope it will be possible to view the conference via webcam, or later on Youtube.

 

17 responses to “Watershed Conference…German Coalition Government FDP Party To Hold FIRST EVER Skeptical Conference”

  1. Wifman

    I have asked if this was going to be on YouTube, and the organisers answered me that they were considering taping the whole thing and putting it up, as well. However, they were not sure if they wanted to go with that.

    I guess they will want to be cautious, as the FDP is in a really bad spot at the moment, losing voters for their un-liberal EU politics (including myself). They have tested some different strategies on how to regain voter confidence in the different states, I guess this is one of them.

  2. Bernd Felsche

    How will the larger population receive the message that they aren’t guilty of climate change?

    Federal elections next year. If the FDP wants to be the biggest party in the Bundestag, then it must sustain some non-guilt-related environmental credibility; a rational-tangible environmental benefit; preferably encompassing aspects which confound the Greens such as the industrialisation of landscapes by wind “farms” and high-tension power line grids; they could double their vote in the West. Which won’t be enough for a clear majority; perhaps not even the largest share of the vote.

    The FDP has IMHO yet to integrate an institutional comprehension of how free liberal ideologies translate to those in the East. How those in the East “hear” the free-market, liberal ideology.

    That is fundamental to getting vote in those parts of the country; which are not only very different to the West, but also from each other. The essence of liberalism is that it embraces diversity as freedom allows the diverse elements to flourish to their optimum, without an outsider picking winners.

    What is uniform throughout, is that people most value what they have “built” by their own sweat. If governments can stay out of the way, people will do more of that because they’re not afraid of building something to which the authorities might object. An emphasis of the “minimum government” part of its ideology in the East may play well in the authority-infested landscape. (Getting State and local governments on board may be more difficult.)

    1. DirkH

      “If the FDP wants to be the biggest party in the Bundestag, then it must sustain some non-guilt-related environmental credibility;”

      The FDP fights for its survival; so this should better read: If they want to be in the Bundestag at all.

      Yes, when they manage to position themselves as “sane conservationists” they might be able to align themselves with the onedimensional German Ersatz religion.

  3. NeilM

    “Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one”

  4. alex

    Mr. Homo Sapiens, you have been accused of causing incalculable damage to the environment by burning hydrocarbon fuels emitting CO2 gas and thus causing catastrophic global warming.

    The jury is out. Please read your verdict:
    Jury: Not guilty and the verdict is unanimous.

  5. Ike

    I like the last sentence! :)

    “Damit seien Vorhersagen und Analysen zum Treibhauseffekt schwierig. ”

    found here -> http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/forscher-entdecken-riesige-luecke-in-chinas-co2-bilanz-a-838183.html

  6. ArndB

    The problem lies elsewhere!
    Spiegel writes (last paragraph): Die Folgen dieser falschen Statistiken sind weitreichend, schreiben die Forscher. Unter anderem seien daher die Annahmen zum weltweiten CO2-Ausstoß unsicher, was das Verständnis des Klimasystems erschwere.
    [Rough translation: Wrong statistics have far reaching consequences. Inter alias are the assumptions concerning the release of global C02 questionable /uncertain, which makes the understanding of the climatic system more difficult].
    WHAT a nonsense!!!
    What has the release of CO2 to do with:”… understanding of the climatic system”.

    1. DirkH

      I have no doubt that Der Spiegel understands nothing and precautiously lies about everything (with the outstanding exception of their geology guy), but didn’t find this particular piece of nonsense. Could you give a link?

      1. DirkH

        Oh, I see, Ike’s link from above. Strange, google news search didn’t find the phrase.

        Well, “Nature Climate Change”, the CO2AGW kamikaze mission.

        1. ArndB

          According the the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC, 1992, Article 1, para. 3.): “Climate system” means the totality of the atmosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere and geosphere and their interactions. ;
          which does not say anything more as: the interaction of nature.
          Discussed here: http://www.whatisclimate.com/

          1. DirkH

            The “researchers” talk about far-reaching consequences, well, if China has emitted far more than estimated yet it didn’t show up in the Mauna Loa curve, that just means that the carbon cycle has absorbed it, and probably, that the atmospheric concentration of CO2 depends only on the SST and not on human emissions.
            http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-co2/mean:12/derivative/scale:3/offset:-0.5/from:1980/plot/uah

            See Dr. Murry Salby’s argument:
            http://joannenova.com.au/2011/08/blockbuster-planetary-temperature-controls-co2-levels-not-humans/

            1. ArndB

              It seems to me (and: joannenova.com) that Roy W. Spencer already wrote “along similar lines” (published at WUWT, titled: “Atmospheric CO2 Increases: Could the Ocean, Rather Than Mankind, Be the Reason?” on 1/25/2008) as Murry Salby.
              Can the impact of CO2 be discussed without the heat transfer from the oceans to the atmosphere? The amount is huge at any time, which can be well observed in the Baltic Sea during the summer season, see an example here: http://www.what-is-climate.com/

            2. DirkH

              Yes, see also here
              Roy Spencer :
              “1. The interannual relationship between SST and dCO2/dt is more than enough to explain the long term increase in CO2 since 1958. I’m not claiming that ALL of the Mauna Loa increase is all natural…some of it HAS to be anthropogenic…. but this evidence suggests that SST-related effects could be a big part of the CO2 increase.
              2. NEW RESULTS: I’ve been analyzing the C13/C12 ratio data from Mauna Loa. Just as others have found, the decrease in that ratio with time (over the 1990-2005 period anyway) is almost exactly what is expected from the depleted C13 source of fossil fuels. But guess what? If you detrend the data, then the annual cycle and interannual variability shows the EXACT SAME SIGNATURE. So, how can decreasing C13/C12 ratio be the signal of HUMAN emissions, when the NATURAL emissions have the same signal???
              -Roy”
              http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/01/25/double-whammy-friday-roy-spencer-on-how-oceans-are-driving-co2/

            3. DirkH
  7. Wie draagt bij aan onkosten bezoek FDP-klimaatconferentie?

    […] = [];}Heeft ook de Duitse politiek een seintje gehad van de Bilderberg conferentie?Dankzij Pierre Gosselin van Notrickszone.com zijn we snel op de hoogte van een eerste belangrijke domineesteen die in de Duitse politiek valt: […]

  8. Pascvaks

    Government should only act decisively “If it is Smart and Cost Effective!”
    Government should never act “If it might be smart! If it may be prudent! If it could be wise! Or if the cost is unknown!

    A National Political Party that is for “Smart and Cost Effective” will always win votes! Germany should not ever move based upon any ideology, no matter if it be it global climate or saving the EU. If something is not possible, practical, or smart and cost effective today, wait, work, and save! Do not be impatient! A baby takes 9 months. Many other things of equal or greater value take much, much longer.

    Germans are known to be very smart, AND AT TIMES, very stupid. Be smart, not stupid, and spend wisely, vote wisely!

  9. Nonoy Oplas

    This is good news Pierre. The FNF, the German political foundation affiliated with the FDP, their Philippine office is supporting climate alarmism. I posted this news in their facebook group, cheers.