Confession is good for the dharma?

The long-time head of the climate alarmist Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change at the United Nations resigned recently due to allegations of sexual harassment.

Rajendra Pachauri

During his reign over IPCC Rajendra Pachauri preached doom and gloom and falsely predicted the disappearance of glaciers.

Pachauri has accused climate deniers of being anti-science, using the same derogatory terms as Obama, “There is, even today, a Flat Earth Society that meets every year to say the Earth is flat. The science about climate change is very clear. There really is no room for doubt at this point.”

In his resignation letter, Pachauri flatly stated what drove his zeal for stopping climate change and global warming, and it was not science.

“For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission,” Pachauri wrote. “It is my religion and my dharma.”

Saving the earth is a sacred duty, he says:



27 comments on “Confession is good for the dharma?

  1. NOTE: Climate change narrative is a neo-liberal plan to switch America into neo-socialism !


    Request your MAIL BALLOT…it’s easy and save gas by not going to the polls on Election Day
    Youtube on March 07, 2015, re. Henderson, NV Municipal Election DEBATE with EDDIE “EDUARDO” HAMILTON of Ward-1.
    From Ward-2, Debra MARCH & Crystal HENDRICKSON, held in China Town on a Saturday afternoon…

  2. Steve says:

    Nice link Eddie.

    Try this one instead.

  3. Steve says:

    Holy crap this is just not working is it?
    Lets try another:

  4. Steve says:

    And again!

  5. Steve says:

    OK I give UP!
    The vid is there and I can watch it but the link ALWAYS takes me to this one instead.

    Scroll down the playlist to find the Henderson one it should be number seven on the list.

  6. nyp says:

    I am trying to figure out what it is about having a passion for protecting the survival of the Earth’s ecosystem that is so objectionable to Thomas Mitchell. Any ideas?

  7. Excellent article Mr. Mitchell…at last this new “religion” has been unmasked for what it really is…and it would follow that FAITH…is what’s needed to swallow it hook, line, and sinker…NOT science…as we have been told by some of it’s prophets Pachauri, Gore & Nye…et al.

  8. Amendment X

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

  9. Steve says:

    I am trying to figure out why it is always gloom and doom with all these people who claim to have “a passion for protecting the survival of the Earth’s ecosystem”

    In fact, geologic evidence shows the “Earth’s ecosystem” has survived many more devastating events than another in a long line of changing climate cycles that occur naturally all the time.

    When are these alarmist individuals going to get it through their stubborn bones that all is NOT gloom and doom?

  10. nyp says:

    True. The Earth survived the destruction of the dinosaurs, massive meteor strikes, the advancement of glaciers over most of North America, etc. The planet can certainly survive the sinking of coastal areas and the destruction of midwest agriculture, and the associated civilizational disruption that will likely accompany unchecked global warming.

  11. Steve says:

    Thanks for proving my point…from both directions.


  12. nyp says:

    Abstract of “Near-term acceleration in the rate of temperature change,” a peer-reviewed scientific paper published today in the journal “Nature Climate Change”:

    “Anthropogenically driven climate changes, which are expected to impact human and natural systems, are often expressed in terms of global-mean temperature1. The rate of climate change over multi-decadal scales is also important, with faster rates of change resulting in less time for human and natural systems to adapt2. We find that present trends in greenhouse-gas and aerosol emissions are now moving the Earth system into a regime in terms of multi-decadal rates of change that are unprecedented for at least the past 1,000 years. The rate of global-mean temperature increase in the CMIP5 (ref. 3) archive over 40-year periods increases to 0.25 ± 0.05 °C (1σ) per decade by 2020, an average greater than peak rates of change during the previous one to two millennia. Regional rates of change in Europe, North America and the Arctic are higher than the global average. Research on the impacts of such near-term rates of change is urgently needed.”

  13. Steve says:

    “Research on the impacts of such near-term rates of change is urgently needed.”

    Yet, all we keep hearing from TV, politicians and vocal alarmists is climate change has to be stopped, now if not sooner. So everyone MUST buy a Prius, install PV and wind no matter the cost…as they stick their hands out looking for more money.

  14. Rincon says:

    Not at all, but you would think that Conservatives, of all people, would advocate removing subsidies on fossil fuels, but they are silent on the matter, indicating support for the status quo. At the very least, the gas tax should pay for most of our road costs. Ask a Conservative though, and they will say they prefer not to have such a user fee. There can be no other conclusion except that they prefer the road costs to be socialized as they are now. They also prefer to socialize the costs of all of the wars that would have been avoided if we had just gotten off the foreign oil habit in the 1970-80’s. Yet, believe it or not, they call themselves capitalists!

  15. Steve says:

    Everyone has their favorite corrupting influence.

  16. Barbara says:

    Rincon – What subsidies on fossil fuels are you referring to?

  17. Winston Smith says:

    Rincon, all federal subsidies, corporate or otherwise, are theft, and unconstitutional besides. They are fascistic in nature, as they chose winners and losers in the marketplace.

    All foreign aid is theft, and unconstitutional besides. That includes Israel, other Middle East regimes, and every other nation on the planet.

    Our (adopted) role as the World Police is unconstitutional.

    I could go on and on…and on…

    Feel better?

  18. Athos says:

    Why do men crave power?

    It gets them the girls! And the money which in turn, gets them the girls!

    What a great religion!

  19. Athos says:

    Rin, end all welfare! Corporate or individual! And institute The Fair Tax.

  20. Winston Smith says:

    Why is the world so messed up? Control Freaks and their obsession with PMS – Power, Money and Sex.

  21. Rincon says:

    Barbara: If you Google fossil fuel or oil, gas, or coal subsidies, you will find quite a raft load, but here are two articles: and
    One big one that might not make the list is the 1996 decision by the federal government to grant oil companies royalty free drilling in the Gulf. The figures I’ve seen bandied around are $65-90 billion net worth. Unfortunate that a government deep in debt would choose to give away a valuable asset.

    I already mentioned the socialization of the costs of recent wars and the unconscionably low gas tax, but there are also some unconscious subsidies not found on the Web sites. For example, every electric and water customer pays a “delivery charge”, which is the cost of maintaining the infrastructure. This is usually not based on the amount consumed, but is rather the same every month for every customer. People who own say, a one acre lot pay the same fee as people in a duplex on a 1/4 acre lot. It takes a lot more miles of pipe and wire per customer to serve a neighborhood of 1 acre lots that 1/4 acre duplexes. This means the small landowners subsidize the large landowners. The same applies to snow removal (admittedly a foreign concept in Nevada), street maintenance, storm sewer costs, garbage removal, postal delivery, etc. So how is this a fossil fuel subsidy? By making it relatively cheaper to own large plots and more expensive to own small ones. This contributes to suburban sprawl, which forces all of us to drive greater distances. It also exacerbates income inequality as well. Free parking is also a subsidy, albeit a private one. We also have zoning laws dictating large parcels in almost all communities which make it impossible for a family to live on a small plot. While not actually a subsidy, it’s worse because it removes individual choice.

  22. Rincon says:

    Winston and Athos: Perhaps a little radical, but fairly close to my view EXCEPT for the sex part. Beware. If this gets around, the Women and Liberals might institute compulsory neutering! To clarify one thing though, ending welfare is great if it is replaced with workfare, but allowing people to starve to death or eat out of dumpsters might be a bit much.

  23. Winston Smith says:

    If the federal government hadn’t signed onto NAFTA and GATT, maybe we’d still have millions of factory jobs, and at a decent wage.

    BTW, just because welfare is reduced or eliminated, doesn’t mean people will automatically starve. Without the federal reserve manipulating the currency, creating wars and depressions, and just generally being a$$holes, the 99% would all be better off. The real problem is the 0.0001% that control the global economic games that screw the rest of us.

    War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength

  24. Rincon says:

    I agree about the .0001, but to say that everyone in the country will be able to find a way to make enough to live on cannot be proven nor is there substantial evidence for your assertion. It is strictly a matter of faith on your part; therefore, it is religion.

  25. Rincon says:

    I just looked up the definition of religion. I’m surprised no one took me to task for this one. My use of the word can only fit the definition if I use a crowbar. What I’m trying to say is that sometimes, people have a belief system established and then follow it on every issue without regard to the evidence.

  26. Winston Smith says:

    Not to sound like I’m backtracking, but I didn’t say that, “everyone in the country will be able to find a way to make enough to live on…”, I said the 99% would be better off without the fascist/globalist banksters (primary shareholders of the private federal reserve) messing with us.

    We’d all benefit from having this huge leach removed, not only economically, but also politically.

  27. Rincon says:

    “…just because welfare is reduced or eliminated, doesn’t mean people will automatically starve.” Sounds like you expect everyone to be able to either make a living or suck off of someone else. I tend to concur about the leach. Unfortunately, running a simple gold and cash society is probably not workable these days, especially for the 1%. I think the best we can do is to tame the beast rather than attempting to kill it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s