One thing that has been brought to light with this global warming scam: we have been, and are continuing to be, lied to by those whom we ought to trust, be they scientists, broadcasters (in all their forms) or politicians. Now, it would appear, “bee deaths by insecticide” is not quite as honest as we thought.

The next question has to be: what else have we been lied to about? We all accept the Iraq war is another good example of a blatant lie (thank you, Phony Tony, perhaps the most egregious PM the UK has ever had), but what about Afghanistan? Or al-Qaeda? What about 7/7 or 9/11? The Madrid train bombing? What about the ozone hole – was it new, or just newly-discovered (i.e. it’s been there all the time, but no-one noticed it)? Could we go back even further, say, to… well, let’s try JFK, or Vietnam. It is well-known that the ostracism of Castro was primarily because he was the only leader in the Americas who would not do as the USA told him, and managed to thwart every attempt at subversion (the Bay of Pigs being the best example); all other countries of the Americas have had those leaders who “inconvenienced” Washington removed, by whatever means. What about those many, many events that no-one has ever thought to question – the assassination of Sadat; the rise of Amin, Pol Pot, or the continuing local power of Mugabe? When did the lies start, and how far have they extended?

And it is not just the political lies; what scientific “facts” are actually lies? We know that the bird-chopping wind towers do not save the environment, as the very environment they are meant to be saving has been destroyed by their installation. Nor are they giving us energy, free or otherwise, as they actually consume more than they generate. The “science” behind the dangers of smoking is also suspect, especially the scare about second-hand smoking (it has now grown to third-hand smoking, where the smoke has become sentient, seeking out victims, even penetrating through walls and along electric wiring); the proponents of SHS, when challenged to produce evidence to support their cause in a court of law, failed utterly. Similar lies are also being constructed around alcohol, sugar and salt (there are reports of people being admitted to hospital with salt-deprivation, and being put on a saline drip – but being fed a reduced salt diet, ’cos it’s healthy, don’cha know?). Perhaps we need to start questioning every known “fact” we are being told. Do blue whales really exist? Is the world really round? An idea to be scoffed at, perhaps, but who has actually seen the proof, and verified it themselves? Like Galileo before us, most of us accept it as fact, as our intuition tells us that it is a far better explanation than the interlocking spheres of before, but is it really the truth? Most of what we know is what we have accepted, when we have been told by people in whom we trust; our parents, teachers, TV presenters, journalists, politicians, writers. In fact, do all those writers really exist? Oh, yes, we may have met some of them… but all of them? Also, we only have your word that you have met them, and you only have their word that they are the authors.

Now that their lying has been exposed, the liars do not appear to understand why no-one believes anything else that they utter, and they continue to lie. Perhaps Orwell was more prescient than we have given him credit for, and every “fact” that we think we know has actually been carefully moulded, and is under continuous modification by a selected few in authority. Given the levels of deceit that is becoming ever more obvious amongst the politicians and other powers that be, it is easy to see why someone could get paranoid.

Entropic Mann: interesting how I moot that we are being lied to – and do you not consider the contortions that B-liar went through to take us into war (in his pathetic attempts to go down in history as a “war leader” á la Churchill & Thatcher) lies? – and you interpret that as conspiracy, and the implication that there is a reason (other than utter stupidity) behind it.

Anyhoo… Did you follow the link I gave? It does show that it does NOT take many to construct the lies, and then lead the influential by the nose for the desired outcome (a conspiracy, if you prefer). If you have some reluctance to consider that site, try this longer, more verbose site.

If the cap fits…

Thank you for showing that I can be so wrong – you can be rather bilious. I am only just waking up to the lying that has been going on; I thought Phony Tony’s fibs over Iraq were a one-off, but the more I look, the more I find: the Doll & Hill doctors study has been stripped down and debunked in front of my eyes; the threat of second-hand smoke has been thrown out of court – yet they are still being peddled in the MSM. DDT was banned on the basis of one book (Rachel Carson: Silent Spring), and many, many of the world’s poorest have perished because of that. Cholesterol? Bad for you; very, very bad for you… but, though its reasons unknown, it is necessary to our systems – so, “good” cholesterol and “bad” cholesterol. What is the difference?

So many of the lies have been tales of doom – as none of the doomsayers has yet been correct, quite why is anyone still listening to them:

”The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s, the world will undergo famines. Hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.” — Paul Ehrlich – The Population Bomb (1968)

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed — and hence clamorous to be led to safety — by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the urge to rule it.”

“The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses.”

Thank you, EM; the link provides us with labels to attach to many of the arguments used by believers: one reason they bandy the term “denier”, maybe? Certainly, the BBC are engaged in several of those points: name calling (they never hold back on opportunities to use the “denier” label); glittering generalities, transfer, testimonials, plain folks, card-stacking, bandwagons, either/or fallacy and faulty cause and effect. They can sometimes get all those into one news report!

BTW, I have never called you useful! *snigger*