The blogosphere has started to buzz about alleged proposals in the European Parliament in Europe to criminalize climate science scepticism. Science progresses through scepticism and rigorous testing of hypotheses. Criminalising scepticism would be the same as criminalising science. It would be a going back to the Dark Ages.
Lubos Motl wrote a piece at his blog on these proposals and so I listened to the audio he has available. In the audio a name of an International Academy of Environmental Science http://www.iaes.info/ came up, and whose president is a Professor Abrami. I tracked this down and this is what I found:
Abami is invited to the EU in Brussels:
The European Parliament invited Abrami to explain his proposal at a meeting on July14th in Brussels.
The European Parliament Invitation written by Jo Leien to Professor Abrami of the International Academy of Environmental Science: http://www.iaes.info/pdf/Prof.%20Abrami% 20let.pdf. Excerpt of the invitation:
Dear Professor Abrami,
I am writing to thank you very much for your letter of 13th May 2010 in which you set out the background to the interesting proposal of the International Academy of Environmental Sciences for the creation of an International or European Environmental Criminal Court.
I would like you to present the proposal to the Environment, Public Health, and Food Safety Committee at its meeting on Wednesday 14th July at 4.30 pm in the European Parliament in Brussels, and thereafter to participate in an exchange of views with the members of the Committee…blah blah blah
The Meeting’s Agenda
Now here’s the agenda for the 14th July meeting: http://www.iaes.info/pdf/ordine%20giorno%2014-7-10_EN.pdf. The meeting agenda includes topics on biodiversity, and the notorious Pt. No. 14:
14. Presentation of a proposal for an International or European Environmental Criminal Court
Exchange of views with Professor Antonino Abrami, acting President of the International Academy of Environmental Sciences (IAES)
So here we see the EU wants to clamp down real hard with environmental regulation. It’s gaming to set up a dictatorship through environmental regulation. But readers can interpret this how they wish.
Abrami’s Hearing: What is he calling for?
What function could such a court have? Here is the link to the Professor Abrami hearing at ENVI Committee http://www.iaes.info/pdf/ENVI_REL_EN_%20HEARING_DOC2.pdf. Professor Abrami outlines the function of such a proposed court, and an overview of the projects and the urgency of its realization.
According to Abrami, there’s:
– A growing need for a coherent and coordinated body of legal regulations, bringing more restrictive limitations in human activities that are inherently dangerous for the ecosystems.
– The adoption of transnational investigations and jurisdictional instruments meant to enforce environmental protection.
Abrami says:
It is necessary to consider the development of the “thirst” for knowledge of preventive and repressive measures within a system of Justice that prescribes effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions.
Among other things, he asks:
Whether, and in what terms, great environmental disasters which destroyed eco-systems and /or human lives can fall under the category of Crimes Against Humanity?
I guess that means; “you mess with them bats, then you’re messing with the EU Justice”. That’s pretty radical. I certainly would not want to be that poor bloke who messed up on that BP platform.
Abrami is definitely calling for a draconian, radical clampdown for environmental protection. But in the hearing’s record I see no mention of clamping down on scepticism. I’m not a lawyer and I didn’t dissect the text. Maybe someone else will find something I missed.
In the meantime, I guess I can keep blogging without feeling like a criminal.
Abrami is one dangerous dude. His agenda is devolution.
Abrami is one dangerous dude. His agenda is devolution.
“Keep blogging without feeling like a criminal”: How’s about criminalizing bureaucratic EU duckspeak? Somehow these peculating dolts assume that anything they say succeeds by force of holy writ. Halfway decent private citizens have seen this time and again, most common in murderous totalitarian venues such as Stalin’s Russia, Hitler’s Germany, Mao’s China, and so on and on.
Always and everywhere, elitist Nomenklaturas concerned to exercise power and privilege at society’s expense end up by dragging everything down with them. “Climate shift” aka AGW is a transparent scam, Cap-and-Tax a criminal enterprise in its own right. Just who does this tribe of Warmist flatheads think they are?
“Keep blogging without feeling like a criminal”: How’s about criminalizing bureaucratic EU duckspeak? Somehow these peculating dolts assume that anything they say succeeds by force of holy writ. Halfway decent private citizens have seen this time and again, most common in murderous totalitarian venues such as Stalin’s Russia, Hitler’s Germany, Mao’s China, and so on and on.
Always and everywhere, elitist Nomenklaturas concerned to exercise power and privilege at society’s expense end up by dragging everything down with them. “Climate shift” aka AGW is a transparent scam, Cap-and-Tax a criminal enterprise in its own right. Just who does this tribe of Warmist flatheads think they are?
As soon as the cooling sets in and a Euro Politkommissar knocks at my door asking me: “Is it cooling? Confess!” i will happily say “Yes, Herr Politkommissar, it is indeed cooling.” and we will all be happy ever after.
Problem is, it will take 10 years of ever harder winters until they realize it’s cooling and not warming. We’ll just have to shut up as long as that takes.
Speak for yourself. While alterations in human energy use would take centuries to detectably nudge weather patterns, a few years of political suppression can wreak long-term havoc. The good men doing nothing route is a known loser.
As soon as the cooling sets in and a Euro Politkommissar knocks at my door asking me: “Is it cooling? Confess!” i will happily say “Yes, Herr Politkommissar, it is indeed cooling.” and we will all be happy ever after.
Problem is, it will take 10 years of ever harder winters until they realize it’s cooling and not warming. We’ll just have to shut up as long as that takes.
Speak for yourself. While alterations in human energy use would take centuries to detectably nudge weather patterns, a few years of political suppression can wreak long-term havoc. The good men doing nothing route is a known loser.
Thanks for the information. That is truly worrying.
In:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/envi/dv/201/201007/20100713_envi_criminal_court_v3_en.pdf
Establishment of an International or European Criminal Court: abstract
it is said:
The main priorities are:
Public health
Climate change
Biodiversity
Ecological damage
There are also these two comments by Spain’s PM Zapatero and the Patriarch of Constantinople in the same page:
5. “(…) I wish to take this chance to underline Spain’s strong commitment in the struggle against impunity in international crimes
through the International Criminal Court, (…) Spain will examine with particular interest the proposals to increase the types of international
crimes to include [b]new crimes[/b] against the environment within the scope of the Council of the States that sign up to the International Court (…)”.
7. “Our Christian Orthodox Church (…), pays much attention and is very sensitive to the dramatic climate changes and environmental
destruction caused by an ill-considered global exploitation of natural resources and the alarming danger of a route we continue to follow from
which there is no return (…)”.
—-
New crimes?!
Thanks for the information. That is truly worrying.
In:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/envi/dv/201/201007/20100713_envi_criminal_court_v3_en.pdf
Establishment of an International or European Criminal Court: abstract
it is said:
The main priorities are:
Public health
Climate change
Biodiversity
Ecological damage
There are also these two comments by Spain’s PM Zapatero and the Patriarch of Constantinople in the same page:
5. “(…) I wish to take this chance to underline Spain’s strong commitment in the struggle against impunity in international crimes
through the International Criminal Court, (…) Spain will examine with particular interest the proposals to increase the types of international
crimes to include [b]new crimes[/b] against the environment within the scope of the Council of the States that sign up to the International Court (…)”.
7. “Our Christian Orthodox Church (…), pays much attention and is very sensitive to the dramatic climate changes and environmental
destruction caused by an ill-considered global exploitation of natural resources and the alarming danger of a route we continue to follow from
which there is no return (…)”.
—-
New crimes?!