Now I get to one of the architects and a Godfather of 'slander as a weapon for scientific persuasion' and profit, Dr. Richard Lindzen.
I submit this text-book example of why he deserves that honorific. I found it in one of Dr. Dessler's video shorts, though the original is from an interview at the Center for Industrial Progress' "Power Hour." This is only 2:20 minutes long, but it says plenty.
Lindzen talks about environmentalists(there is no visual)
0:00 Lindzen: ... you're touching on something interesting, which is environmentalism, whatever it's nastiness and ugliness, it is largely an urban phenomena. And I think it really, really depends on people having no sense of what nature is at all.
It's not a people, nor a party - but Lindzen won't allow himself to recognize that. All he sees is enemies.
"environmentalism, political and ethical movement that seeks to improve and protect the quality of the natural environment through changes to environmentally harmful human activities; through the adoption of forms of political, economic, and social organization that are thought to be necessary for, or at least conducive to, the benign treatment of the environment by humans; and through a reassessment of humanity’s relationship with nature.
In various ways, environmentalism claims that living things other than humans, and the natural environment as a whole, are deserving of consideration in reasoning about the morality of political, economic, and social policies."
Lindzen: It depends on attracting people for whom nature itself is almost a meaningless concept, and they'll believe anything.
0:35 I think, how should I put it, in America it's much clearer than elsewhere, that these things have become right/left issues and you almost have the feeling with people like (John) Holdren and (Paul) Ehrlich and people on the left and their ilk.
Not the slightest curiosity of what these highly accomplished individuals might have to teach us. Instead our Dr. Lindzen has his litmus test and depends on slander for easy dismissal of voices he doesn't want to hear.
Why do we allow it?
Don't we need all sides to work out realistic solutions?
Lindzen: That their greatest enemy is prosperity, and ah, without, if you could get a prosperity and dependent population that would be docile.
But these people appreciate that we can't hide from the real harm all those wonderful modern marvels are causing to the web of life that sustains us.
And their "environmentalism" was/is their way of trying to achieve a sustainable society where our children could continue enjoying our prosperity - rather than the current guaranteed dive bomb into challenges and terrors we can't even imagine yet, that climate science denialism is steering us into.
Alex Epstein (past fellow of the Ayn Rand Institute.): And have a low environmental impact?
1:10 Lindzen: I don't think they care about it anymore than the Soviet Union cared about it, to be honest. It's just a vehicle. There's nothing in the environmental movement that if you look at it carefully is actually concerned with the environment, they just use it as a kind of device.
HELLO DR. LINDZEN it's 2015, wake up, the Cold War is over! Though this highlights Dr. Lindzen's problem, he's still trapped within the mind warp of the Cold Warrior and is blind to everything else.
Alex: What about the non-human environment?
1:35 Lindzen: Well like what? (in a tone bewilderment)
Alex: Well like the kangaroo rat that they save at the expense of a home.
1:45 Lindzen: What about a kangaroo rat?
Alex: I'm just saying that their core belief seems to be that they're willing to sacrifice human well-being to wilderness. Untouched nature.
2:00 Lindzen: Yeah, I think that's just a device, to control. I don't think it's a real concern. If you can pass a radical enough law about endangered species that's another mode of control.
Some information about this Alex character and his Randian for profit think tank:
"Center for Industrial Progress"