Some German professors are beginning to speak up against the climate shenanigans. Take for example Prof. Dr. Dr.Knut Löschke, physicist, who gave a speech on Climate Policy titled “Give Reason Another Chance!” at the University of Passau last Friday. Ralph Bärligea has the story at eingentümlich frei.de.
Bärligea summarizes Löscke’s speech. Here’s an excerpt:
Man-made climate change as a hypothesis is in the end one that has never been confirmed by any single experiment and does not harmonize in any way with existing physical theory. But even so, the hypothesis is implemented in real politics. Representatives of the IPCC do not shy away from using fraud and falsifications in its effort to fulfill its political agenda: which is to show that man influences the global climate. This is proven by the Climategate Scandal, and an especially crass example of a falsification that Professor Löschke introduced in his presentation. By spreading the hypothesis of man-made climate change and the “solution proposals” for global “climate control”, dangerous limits that go beyond the absurd have long since been over-stepped.”
Löschke thinks the whole climate issue is a dangerous political sham and called on the public: “Wehret den Anfängen!“ This is a call to defend against a dangerous movement. Those are the milder points he brought up.
At the end of his speech Professor Löschke compared the “international climate regime“ to the socialist regimes in Germany. According to Bärligea, up to 8 people walked out.
So, some are speaking up in Germany, and doing so loudly!
Well done! I say.
Knut Löschke is a university lecturer, business owner and a member of the supervisory board at the Deutsche Bahn AG.
12 responses to “Professor Knut Löschke: IPCC Representatives Do Not Shy Away From Fraud And Falsification”
The “dam of silence” is about to break wide open!!!!!…….all it takes is for one small crack to appear and the whole thing explodes!
The article mentions that the local AStA, a council of students that exists in every German university, and is elected by the students, protested against the “polemic” of the Professor against worldwide socialism. Usually, the AStA is dominated by lazy soft-sciences types who are more interested in socialist policies than in getting their diploma, and many of those later go on to make a career in the many leftist parties Germany has to offer. Their only objection to people like Che Guevara is that he was a little too right-leaning for their taste.
So, being heckled by them is a badge of honor.
It certainly is an honor. And the fact that they got up and left shows that he got under their skin and they could not counter his FACTS.
The Wall Street Journal has an ‘opinion’ piece signed by 16 scientists that “There’s no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to ‘decarbonize’ the world’s economy.” It reads a little stiff — academic like — but makes good sense.
WSJ has a 6min interview up with Princeton physics professor William Happer , one of the 15:
Nice guy. He says he got a lot of e-mails by fellow scientists complaining “Why didn’t I get a chance to sign this letter?”
Perhaps someone on this site has thoughts on why the WSJ was used for this 16 man piece. Surely it is not without a reason. Does it make sense to put articles against the moneygrabbers directly into the hands of the leading moneygrabbers? I don’t get it.
The WSJ – and only the front page and the op-eds. – is/are 50% what is read by Anyone Who Is Anybody – the other half being the NYT. 2nd place goes to lateb night shows. Learnéd Journals of Natural Philosophy, magazines & the internets come a very long way down the list.
After the populist USA Today, the WSJ has the largest circulation in the USA. The mean income of WSJ readers is probably 10 times that of USA Today readers. In fact, many renewable energy industry execs read the WSJ.
I don’t understand your term “moneygrabber”. People who make money in private industry perform highly useful services and produce good products in exchange for the money that you say they grab. They earn it, and nobody is forcing you to buy their products.
The government on the other hand, sponges from those that create the wealth, taking half of your money and giving you very little in return – except for higher tax bills and regulations the next time around. You tell me who the real moneygrabbers are.
It’s a different set of money grabbers.
WSJ had a good coverage of climategate and the IPCC scandals.
Aha: “A candidate for public office in any contemporary democracy may have to consider what, if anything, to do about ‘global warming’.” Is there by any chance some election coming up in the USA?
[…] Professor Knut Löschke: IPCC Representatives Do Not Shy Away From Fraud And Falsification from NoTricksZone by P Gosselin Like this:LikeBe the first to like this post. […]