Ezra Levant exposes David Suzuki’s activism as ideological and not scientific.

In fact, it seems that Suzuki actually is startlingly scientifically uninformed for a person who’s celebrity is based on his science-based approach to climate. This really is worth watching right to the end.

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

12 Replies to “Ezra Levant exposes David Suzuki’s activism as ideological and not scientific.”

  1. David Suzuki is typical of the global warming believers, uninformed and unwilling to do the work to learn what they are talking about.

  2. Observing David Suzuki, it is like watching a Soviet Dictator. He throws at them: the four Noble Truths:

    1. The truth of dukkha (suffering, anxiety, unsatisfactoriness[a])
    The World Will Die.

    2. The truth of the origin of dukkha
    Those who disagree with Global Warming are only by those bought and paid for by fossil fuel companies.

    3. The truth of the cessation of dukkha
    All Politicians who disagree should be imprisoned

    4. The truth of the path leading to the cessation of dukkha
    Inter-generational crimes.

    As the Hindus were conquered by the Buddhists, so are the Socialists conquered by the Communists; like a knife going straight through their brains; blind-sided and so unable to stop it, because they were indoctrinated to have a brain-freeze when everytime as children they were shouted down for using words and thoughts that were politically incorrect, from vain-glorious pantyhosed mommas, feminized schools, sanitized media and sexualized governments.

    The Four Noble Truths.

  3. David Suzuki has a Ph.D in zoology. He is quite old also. I would not automatically assume that he has any great facility with statistics. To know whether Michael Mann was correct you have to know the dat ahe used anda quite a bit about stochastic series.

  4. > global warming believers, uninformed and unwilling

    I think that they might not even really consciously _believe_ what they are saying, but that global warming is like some kind of psychological vehicle their west hating minds made up to have a pretext to harm the west by requiring it to massively drive down all of its industries and increase energy costs.

    They arent just wrong in a scientific way, they arent even misguided in a religious way, they are more like a schizophrenic trying to kill himself and making up dozens of various crazy reasons to justify to himself why he simply has to do it. We have to let millions of Muslims in because we are racists, we have to shut down all industry to stop the warming, we have to break down family structures because marriage is sexual oppression, we have to get rid of Christianity because religion is mental oppression, etc. Whatever the pretext of the day, it somehow always leads to one of the pillars of western societie’s past success being removed and no stable alternative proposed to replace it. The long term intent is to ultimatively bring the whole thing down by sheer persistance.

  5. Cont’d
    Stochastic series requires about 2 semester of calculus based statistics before learning it. I just don’t think that David studied it. There are other ways to disprove Mann’s hockey stick. You look at their predictions of what would happen if the U.S. did not cut back CO2 emissions.

    Well they were cutback due to outsourcing, a bad economy, and people looking to save money (efficiencies; concern for their bottom line & not limiting CO2 so much).

    The point is is that the alarmists, the warmists, said if we did not cut back we were doomed. Well for however much we cut back China and India doubled down. So according to the histrionic warmists we are doomed. and yet they do not seemed as concerned about India and china as they do the West. And so we can all see it is a lie.

    It is about rent seeking scientist and control freak politicians and activists who wanna be part of the Big Boy club with all its’ privileges.

    Remember the ancien regime (feudalism) had 3 parts (monarchy, aristocracy & clergy). clergy were 2nd sons of the aristocracy very often. A nice closed system.

    Basically scientists like David are the clergy of the new troika. They provide the moral authority for the new troika.

    The unions fought for increased wages. Well the blue collar tech people and the lower and middle class have improved their lot. and we are getting a little bit to uppity. the TPTB cannot claim “Divine Right”. That is discredited. They cannot claim that we make to much. the unions just fought for that money last century. Instead they have warmning legislation whereby they can tax and regulate us back into a lesser status.

  6. DownTurn:

    I tend to think of Global Warming as the atheist-leftist version of revelations, or a mockery thereof. Essentially it reads that the sins of (capitalist) man will bring down the temple and end the world. Its cloaked in a veneer of scientific jargon so as to make it seem other than what it is, but having lived through Acid rain, scares, nuclear winter, (also by David Suzuki incidentally and good luck finding ANY videos of that, but he was on TV daily in the 70s warning that mans industrial activity was causing an ice age we should be well in the middle of now), killer bees, ozone layer depletion leading to catastrophic collapse of species, and more I can’t even remember, I think its safe to say they all had one thing in common.

    Industrial, free, capitalist man’s ‘sins’ from a commie POV, was causing the end of the world unless we repented, stopped all our successful activities and gave all power to 3rd world savages. In fact submitted to them and their superior cultures utterly.

  7. I am with you and downturn eeyore, the left things up these things to hurt the west and when they go belly up they depend on their willing allies in the press to cover for them.

  8. Eeyore you mention Revelations, do you know tht Revelations was written in a code so the Romans wouldn’t know what was said and that we have lost the code to decrypt the message?

  9. Richard: Why would Romans write something in code so the Romans wouldn’t know what was said? Isn’t the bible pretty much a product of the Council of Nicea in the 4th century and the bible 100% approved by Constantine?

  10. At the time it was written the Christian sect was either a fully proscribed sect or a partial proscribed sect. Something, I don’t know what was so sensitive that the Christians were afraid of more attacks if the Romans found out about it. After all most Christians didn’t want to be thrown to the lions in the arena,