Climate Activism: Climate Science’s Worst Enemy

When an advocacy group shifts its message to imply the use of force, it signals a weakness in its core argument

The unfortunate reality is that none—absolutely none—of our extensive climate actions to date have had any measurable impact on reducing atmospheric levels of carbon or methane.

When an advocacy group shifts its message to imply the use of force, it signals a weakness in its core argument. This was a crucial lesson we learned during the COVID-19 pandemic. The resort to force and coercion suggests that traditional methods—such as reasoned debate, rhetoric, and even propaganda—are no longer producing the desired outcomes.

Note: I have been told that this article is banned by FaceBook (and probably other venues) as ‘spam.’

My family and I enjoy watching YouTube videos as part of our evening routine before retiring for the night. Recently, however, we’ve been bombarded with irritating advertisements from an advocacy group called Science Moms. The commercial features scenes of families and children enjoying nature and the outdoors, accompanied by a narrative voice that asks the question, “If you knew this was your last best chance to protect all the places you love… what would you do?” The ad concludes with the taglines, “Climate change is taking the places we love. Stop unnatural disasters.”

Bombarding viewers with the same advertisement three or more times in one sitting surely must be an expensive way to promote a message. It’s not that I disagree with the goal of reducing mankind’s carbon and methane emissions—I agree wholeheartedly and have incorporated this ethic into my work for decades. However, this doesn’t mean I’ve allied myself with every advocacy group that uses this message as a front. So, I decided to take a closer look at who is behind this persistent propaganda.

When activist groups co-opt the name of science to assert that their opinions are superior to all others, it undermines both the credibility of scientific institutions and public confidence in them.

Brainless Karen Porn Employed for Marxist Goals

When you’ve reached the point of blaming the weather on those you don’t like, you’ve drifted into absurdity and lost the right to be taken seriously.

The species of question posed by Science Moms inside this advertisement is a form of rhetorical coercion called erotesis.

Erotesis – a rhetorical question posed to drive a point by stimulating a deep, instinctual response, often through limbic activation. One invoking visceral reactions or emotions like fear, sexual stimulation, envy, or protectiveness, while carrying an implied extreme or extremist answer.

The root Greek word used in this term is érōs (ἔρως), the same root from which we derive the word ‘erotic.’ In other words, this promotion constitutes a form of ‘Karen Porn.’ Erotesis is distinct within a group of rhetorical devices known in philosophy as hypophora. Hypophora encompasses various petitio principii question-and-answer structures designed to manipulate the audience. These include anthypophora (a question followed by a direct answer), antipophora (a hypophora framed in the negative), erotesis (a question evoking a visceral or implied extreme response), epiplexis (a question intended to evoke shame), and epitimesis (a question used to reprimand through comparison). All these forms of rhetoric involve posing a question, then providing the answer for the listener.¹ However, in the specific case of erotesis, there is an implied encouragement toward extreme measures.

This broaches the question therefore, who is the advocacy behind this encouragement to ‘extreme measures?’ Science Moms cites that it consists of “nonpartisan climate scientists and mothers,” funded through “grassroots and private donations.”²

As it turns out, the organization Science Moms is funded through the Potential Energy Coalition, which itself is tied to the Windward Fund and a consultancy called Arabella Advisors. The Potential Energy Coalition was initially a project under the Windward Fund, which is part of the Arabella Advisors’ network—a consulting firm known for managing a large amount of “dark money” for various left-leaning initiatives.³ The funding for Science Moms includes contributions from prominent foundations such as the $9.7 billion endowment William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, which supports goals of wealth redistribution, capital economy disruption, and global justice,⁴ as well as George Soros’s Open Society Foundations.

The way this funding is structured allows Science Moms to falsely present itself as a grassroots, nonpartisan group, though its financial backing is deeply rooted in well-coordinated global Marxism advocacy networks. Their goal is the overthrow of your form of economics and governance, and relegation of your home and family to be subject to third world hegemony.

So, Science Moms misrepresented the truth. They are both partisan and clearly not grassroots-funded in the slightest.

Serving The Dark Pentad

The unfortunate reality is that none—absolutely none—of our extensive climate actions to date have had any measurable impact on reducing atmospheric levels of carbon or methane. The science behind the reasons why can be found in this article.⁵

An ideology that cannot be defended by means of evidence and deductive logic, will inevitably be enforced by violence.

As we observed in our study of carbon emissions during the Covid-19 lockdowns in the West, a time where record levels of carbon emissions were released,⁶ China and India constitute likely 85% of total impact in terms of both carbon and volatile organic compound emissions globally—yet, absolutely zero funding flows into similar activist organizations in those countries. There is a reason for this. Their goal is the demise of those institutions and persons whom they hate, a set which includes you and your family. They operate upon the following principle, which was the first trick used on mankind.

Nothing is more damaging to the human spirit than the idea that one is a burden or offense to the world.

We learned inside a series of articles published earlier in The Ethical Skeptic, how the skilled employment of such artifices as Original Sin, Cataclysmic Mirage Theory (CMT), ontological blame, weaponized ignorance and knowledge embargo, along with the derivation of sustenance in the form of human suffering called loosh constitute a pentad of habitual dark spiritual practices on the part of the illegitimate rulers who hide from and abuse mankind.

Today, climate activism has ironically become one of the greatest threats to the integrity of climate science. It stands as a stark example of how well-intentioned efforts can veer into dangerous territory, while dark forces exploit these good intentions to advance their own agendas.

The Ethical Skeptic, “Climate Activism: Climate Science’s Worst Enemy”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 9 Aug 2024; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/2024/08/09/climate-activism-climate-sciences-worst-enemy/