This is a short letter written to Canadian MPs and Senators, asking them an apparently simple question.
As you can see in this article, literally billions of dollars are being wasted in Canada on trying "to stop climate change" even though the science no longer supports the scare. Why do almost all Senators support this incredible waste of our scarce resources?
My reply to the questioner was as follows.
The very end of the article contains the answer to the question. The answer can be found in the philosophy that dominates the culture. The philosophy of a culture is set by its intellectuals in areas such as science, education, literature and politics. For decades now the dominant philosophy has been that of Emmanuel Kant, who created the philosophical system of nihilism - the denial that principles exist, that knowledge can be certain, that there is a right and wrong and that reason is useful in dealing with the world.
Thus, in science we see claims that there are infinite parallel universes in which anything and everything happens and nothing is certain, even measurements; in literature we see novels about depravity and nothingness in a book without heroes, clear themes or plots (Seinfeldian literature); in education we see fragmented curricula without integration and courses about minutiae producing graduates unable to think in terms of essential concepts, integrate broad concepts, identify truth; and in politics we see the rule or pragmatism, where no principles tie together different laws and the rule of whatever seems to work for the moment is dominant (see Obama's, McGuinty's, etc. policies).
An aspect of of Kant's philosophy is egalitarianism, which sees everything as equal, without regard for principles such as validity, correctness, truth, or value to human life. The environmental movement is based on the elevation of non-life above life, the valuing of nothing instead of something, and the consequent destruction of the values necessary for human life.
Since the enemy's power is based on ideology and morality, no matter how wrong or corrupt, and people are told that the ideas are moral, people will follow the ideology until death, in defiance of facts, unless they are presented with a better ideology and morality. Facts, to an egalitarian, do not exist or can be re-defined into the opposite of their true meaning. To this mentality, terminology is fluid, definitions are subjective, anything can be rationalized away. Facts alone cannot combat an entire morality that is consistently applied in all disciplines, especially now that a generation or two have been raised in an education system where this morality is thoroughly entrenched and almost unchallenged. People are rarely conscious of their moral foundations and so they are easy victims of those who profess to offer strong moral beliefs, especially when shrouded in the credibility of science.
Tom, the battle is truly one of entire belief systems. To win decisively and not simply see the battle shift to a slightly different terrain (such as the shift from pollution to species extinction to ozone depletion to global warming), we must attack the root philosophy with the power of moral certainty. The philosophy of Ayn Rand, based on Aristotle's work and the knowledge that has come since the enlightenment and industrial revolution, known as Objectivism, offers all the intellectual and moral tools needed to combat nihilism and I am an avid reader in this field. As a fellow opponent of environmentalism, I encourage you to do likewise.