Last week Austrian Broadcasting network ORF aired the controversial new film Climate Crimes in German.
Dr. Sebastian Lüning joins a discussion round on Austrian television. Photo credit: kaltesonne.de/.
Having seen the film in its entirety for the first time, I was truly horrified by the scale of the environmental destruction and mayhem brought on by the recent climate protection movement. It is truly madness at a whole new level and dimension. If you have the chance to see the documentary, then do so. You’ll be shaking your head throughout the film.
Indeed the level of destruction with respect to loss of eco-systems, biodiversity, erosion, etc. brought on by the “green economy” is far beyond anything man-made climate change was ever fantasized of causing by the year 2100. The current damage caused by the “green economy” is real, and it’s happening here and right now. Worse, it’s all taking place with the official green stamp of approval.
In the film, environmental economist Nico Paech says:
Climate protection as it is practiced now is throwing the baby out with the bath water.”
The green economy, intended to rescue the climate from a man-made climate catastrophe in a computer, is in reality systematically accelerating the wide-scale destruction of the environment today by at least a factor of ten.
Many greens are having their eyes opened for the first time, and are now grudgingly admitting that something has gone terribly awry. Wiping out the Earth’s eco-system to rescue the climate is not what they had in mind.
Yet they still refuse to acknowledge that they’ve erred with the climate science, and that all the destruction was unnecessary. They still insist the computerized catastrophe is real, approaching fast, and that we need to act rapidly. The only thing they’re admitting is that the “green energy” sources of hydro-power and biofuel are no longer options. In their view the human race is now in a dilemma because so many sources of energy must never be used. There’s no painless way out.
After showing the Climate Crimes documentary, ORF held a discussion round discussion round. The theme of the discussion round was what needs to be done to get out of the (imagined) energy dilemma?
Four experts joined moderator Michael Hofer were Kurt Remele (ethics and theology expert), Angela Köppl (economics expert in the field of environmental economics, energy and climate protection and Angela Kallhoff (philosophy). The other was co-author of Die kalte Sonne, geologist Sebastian Lüning. Clearly the discussion was not to focus on climate science. For moderator Hofer and the 3 other guests, the science is settled in their view, and there was no need to discuss it. Thus the discussion focused on environmental ethics and man’s responsibilities.
Most of the discussion round was filled with the usual “the end is near” crap. The three greenie guests kept reminding the audience of our generational, environmental and social responsibilities. They told us of the “massive impacts” humans were having, and about all the “dramatic destruction” humans were causing.
We were reminded it would be necessary to get along with much less, to save energy, and to scale back productivity and consumption. Kallhoff, for example, said the human species was “crowding out nature” and that we were “too individualistic and selfish”.
Moreover, the three green guests reminded the audience that climate change is real. Köppl insisted that climate change is settled science and that there was “a tendency to more extreme weather”. She added that “humans would have to scale back” and “that it would not be possible to rely solely on technology”.
Remele poked fun at Arnold Schwarzenegger, who a week earlier had flown in to Austria on his private jet and pontificated about the importance of living green.
Hofer even asked the guests if perhaps our Judeo-Christian religion was perhaps responsible for the earth’s environmental and climatic ills today, citing that the Book of Genesis, which tells us: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
Near the end of the discussion round, moderator Hofer asked each guest to tell us what has to be done to get out of the environmental dilemma. The three greenies were more or less unanimous, telling the audience that we will have to change our behaviour, get away from the model of growth, expand public transportation, consume less, and to even eat less meat.
Lüning, the only guest with a different opinion, said that it was necessary to get back to science and real environmental protection. In Lüning’s view, the discussion had been taken over by extreme elements on both sides, and that it had to get back to the center. He also encouraged more critical thinking, and that we not immediately believe someone just because they have a doctor title.
Earlier in the discussion round, Lüning commented that there was too much fear-mongering by a number of opportunistic parties, for example re-insurers. Lüning said that the huge environmental backfire we’ve seen in the green movement so far should say something about the science.
Lüning also reminded the other guests and Hofer that climate science is not settled, and cited a recent study showing soot was a far greater factor in climate than previously thought.
He also pointed out that much more could be done locally and regionally with far less money, and with a far greater impact, than to try to solve the globe’s problems by tweaking a single trace gas.
Lüning said: “There are lots of high impact things that can be done for relatively little money.”