- Home
- Canadese groene goeroe David Suzuki: 'Environmentalism has failed'
Canadese groene goeroe David Suzuki: 'Environmentalism has failed'
David Suzuki heeft in Canada een status die vergelijkbaar is met die van Al Gore in de VS.
Suzuki was vroeger een briljant wetenschapper en vooral wetenschapspopularisator op radio en TV, maar later ontpopte hij zich als bevlogen milieuevangelist. In een buitengewoon interessant en begripvol interview met Jonathon Gatehouse van Macleans, getiteld: 'The nature of David Suzuki. In his final stretch, the worlds most famous environmentalist is beset by doubts and doubters', toont Suzuki zich thans ontgoocheld over de resultaten die de milieubeweging tot dusver heeft geboekt.
Een van zijn permanente critici, de Canadese klimaatscepticus Tim Ball, is van oordeel dat hij dat mede aan zichzelf heeft te wijten door steeds maar weer loos alarm te slaan. Ball schreef daarover op zijn blog onder de titel: 'The effects of Environmentalist and Climate Alarmist crying wolf begin to appear'. Ik pik er een aantal passages uit.
It occurred to me The tail always wagged the dog: Now, because of political correctness, the flea on the hair on the tail wags the dog.
Cover story of the November 25, 2013 Canadian weekly magazine Macleans pictures self-appointed Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki. The caption reads: 'nvironmentalism Has Failed. 'David Suzuki loses faith in the cause of his lifetime.'
He doesnt realize hes the cause of the failure as a major player in the group who exploited environmentalism and climate for a political agenda. Initially most listened and tried to accommodate, but gradually the lies, deceptions and propaganda were exposed. The age of eco-bullying is ending. Typically Suzuki blamed others for the damage to the environment and climate but now he blames them for not listening to him. He forgets that when you point a finger at someone three are pointing back at you.
Environmentalism was what academics call a paradigm shift, which Thomas Kuhn defines as
a fundamental change in approach or underlying assumptions.
a fundamental change in approach or underlying assumptions.
It was a necessary new paradigm. Everybody accepts the general notion it is foolish to soil your own nest and most were prepared to participate. Most were not sure what it entailed or how far it should go. Extremists grab all new paradigms for their agenda but then define the limits for the majority by pushing beyond the limits of the idea. Environmentalism and the subset climate are at that stage pushed there by extremists like Suzuki. Instead of admitting the science is wrong they double down and make increasingly extreme statements, just like the IPCC. It underscores the political rather than the scientific agenda. For example, Suzuki, apparently frustrated that politicians were not listening to his demands for action on climate change said they should be jailed. ...
Suzuki heeft later laten weten dat hij deze opmerking niet letterlijk had bedoeld. Maar ja, het kwaad was toen al geschied.
His television series became his undoing as a classic example of how extremism is its own undoing. Its why Suzukis exploitation of environmentalism, as he defines it, caused failure. Most programs in the series were unjustified, misleading condemnations of different components of society. I identified some of the misinformation in a presentation to farmers in Saskatchewan a few years ago. Afterward a woman told me that a month earlier she would have disagreed with my comments. Now she understood because Suzuki did a program on farming and as a farmers wife she knew how wrong and biased it was. Each new program exposed another segment of society to the deception. This created a populace open to and not surprised by the exposure of his hypocrisies. The same is happening to climate alarmism as more and more segments of society are negatively affected. His actions and climate driven energy policies close industries, decimate communities, cause job losses and force business closures, virtually all unnecessarily.
As Suzukis campaign to use environmentalism for a political agenda fails he lashes out, blaming others for the failure. It parallels what is happening in the climate alarmist community. The comments and claims become more extreme, but achieve the opposite of their goal. It is necessary to consider the further negative effects of their exploitation and deceptions. What is the damage to the credibility of science? Can we pursue environmentalism with rational, science based, prioritized policies?
Lees verder hier.
Kortom, overdrijving ondermijnt de geloofwaardigheid van de milieubeweging. Dat is jammer.
Voor mijn eerdere DDSbijdragen zie hier.
Ga verder met lezen
Dit vind je misschien ook leuk
Laat mensen jouw mening weten
