Green Socialists on Mars

mvWe live in a strange world in which the weather is a subject of furious political debate. People have been arguing about the weather ever since the first rainstorm caught the first man without the umbrella that he did not yet know how to make, but they didn’t hold political debates over it.

For the last fifty years, the anti-weather side has been insisting that the world is headed toward a Frostean apocalypse of ice or fire. The calm biblical assertion that “Seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease” was replaced by the terrifying certainty that the planet would soon turn into Mars or Venus; either too hot or too cold.

The end of weather was here. Instead of stable rhythms and cycles that might last for months or centuries, there was a runaway weather apocalypse that would culminate in unlivable conditions.

The doomsday predictions roll out daily without any regard to scientific or experiential reality. The more the predictions fail to match up, the more urgently Warmists insist on action. The harder it snows, the more articles appear warning that snow may soon be a thing of the past.

Never mind the weather; the end of weather is almost here.

There is a fearful logic to the Warmist creed. Of all the planets, moons and assorted rocks drifting through our solar system, only one is inhabitable by man. It is easy to assume that, but for the grace of random chance, the Earth might be just as uninhabitable as Mars or Venus.

Mars and Venus inspired more than a series of bestselling books about gender relations. They also convinced the Warmists that Mars and Venus are what the Earth would become.

“Venus is too hot. Mars is too cold. But… our congenial climate may be unstable. We are perturbing our poor planet in serious and contradictory ways. Is there any danger of driving the environment of the Earth toward the planetary Hell of Venus or the global ice age of Mars? The simple answer is that nobody knows,” Sagan wrote in Cosmos.

Carl Sagan, who had done much to popularize unscientific paranoia about nuclear winter and global warming, assumed that planets were more fragile than they are and could be undone by a nuclear exchange or even by a few coal plants. Sagan had even warned that the Gulf War’s oil fires would lead to a miniature nuclear winter.

They did not.

Integral to the doomsday model was the belief that Mars and Venus were planets that had once been very much like our own. Sagan, who had spent so much time decrying the primitivism of the medieval mindset, had adopted its geocentric assumption that Earth was the baseline and that Mars and Venus were failed earths.

“The surface environment of Venus is a warning: something disastrous can happen to a planet rather like our own,” Sagan wrote.

Sagan, who had predicted that Venus was a hot and dry desert due to a runaway Greenhouse Effect, did not have a very good track record on that planet… or on this one. But it was not the first time that distorted geocentric perceptions of Mars and Venus would influence Earth.

In the 19th century, Percival Lowell, a popularizer of often bad science and an earlier version of Sagan complete with anti-clerical and pacifist views, became obsessed with the idea that Mars was an inhabited world whose native race was facing extinction because the planet was losing its water. After the Martian canals had been completely discredited, Lowell’s obsessions were dismissed as the error of a lone individual; but that was no truer of Lowell than it was of Sagan.

Socialist science fiction had become a booming field in the late 19th century. Bellamy’s Looking Backward had envisioned time travel to a Socialist American utopia in the year 2000. Novels such as “Politics and Life in Mars,” “To Mars via the Moon,” “A Prophetic Romance” and “Red Star” envisioned culturally superior Martians demonstrating their advanced Socialist societies with income equality, planetary labor unions and pacifism to the human race.

In the Russian “Red Star,” the Lowellian canals are a Communist triumph over inhospitable nature anticipating the USSR and Communist China’s disastrous dam projects. The German writer of “Two Planets” envisioned the advanced Martians invading Earth to impose their superior Socialist society on human beings.

The Martians, like Global Warming, were a tool of radical social change.

In “A Message from Mars”, a turn of the century novel, play and film, a Martian visits the most selfish man on earth to convert him to “Otherdom” teaching him to share what he has with the less fortunate. In “Unveiling a Parallel,” a reactionary man visits Mars to discover how well a progressive society can work.

In the Martian Socialist utopias, the aliens lecture human beings on our selfishness, urging us to cast aside nations, religions, private property and monogamy and build our own Socialist utopia.

An inhabited Mars became a fictional conceit for envisioning an ideal society. Global Warming serves the same purpose, providing a fictional framework that can be used to reconstruct human society along more progressive lines. The only difference is that Warmists have gotten further along in imposing their delusion and their plans on the world than the Lowellians ever did.

It does not matter to its proponents, inside or outside the scientific community, whether the planet is warming or cooling, any more than the existence of Martian canals was pivotal to the Socialist Martian utopias. The bad science is only a means of advancing bad politics.

Or as Lowell wrote, “The fact gives us but a flat image. It is our reflexions upon it that make it a solid truth.” Global Warming is another of those “reflexions” that led Lowell to see a dying ancient Martian civilization in the sky contrasted with a modern dystopian Earth dying of its industry and its wars.

Lowell’s Mars was dying of “Global Cooling.” Earth is dying of “Global Warming.” The crisis of the Martians forces them to band together to manage the water they have left and abandon selfish preoccupations with capitalism and nationalism. The Warmists warn that unless we embrace global government, the excess water stored in icebergs will flood the world.

The loudest advocates for Global Warming use Venus as a model for a failed Earth.

“The Venus syndrome is the greatest threat to the planet, to humanity’s continuing existence,” James Hansen declared. “If we burn all the coal, there is a good chance we will initiate the runaway greenhouse effect.”

Hansen’s Venus syndrome is a modern echo of the old Martian obsession. Earth will lose its oceans unless it undergoes radical social and political changes.

Lowell’s Mars and Hansen’s Venusian Earth are crisis societies in which survival demands the abandonment of selfish desires such as heating your home or driving to work. It mandates a progressive society where the collective good reigns supreme and the leaders hold unlimited power until the ordinary people become progressive enough.

Global Warming is the culmination of the Martian utopias. Either we become Socialist Martians or die on Venus.

There is no more basis for Venus syndrome than there was for the Martian canals. Both depend on wishful thinking and misinterpreting data. The real threat to humanity does not come from the climate, but from the ambitions of other men.

We do not face a crisis of rising oceans or temperatures, but rising ambitions and egos. Our troubles do not come from Mars or Venus, but from the evil dreams buried in the hearts of men.


Don’t miss Ann-Marie Murrell‘s video interview with Daniel Greenfield on Robert Gates’ Revelations Confirm Horowitz’s “Party of Defeat,” Abandoning Iraq, How Americans Died For a War Obama Didn’t Believe In, The Release of Terrorist Lawyer Lynne Stewart, and much, much more:

Part I:

Part II:

To sign up for The Glazov Gang, Click here.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

  • camp7

    We’ve morphed from primitive minds extolling the weather to modern egos exploiting the weather. So what’s really changed, except for the weather, again.

    (psssst… I’ve got inside information that Martians are cool with Southern Cal and Venusians are warming up to the Twin Cities.)

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Hope they get there before the Somalis do.

      • truebearing

        Too late.

  • DogmaelJones1

    Then there are the fantasy worlds of “Avatar,” ecological paradises in which blue beings with tails live in perfect harmony with their environment. Yeah, right.

    • BS77

      While I believe global warming or that idiotic term climate change ( ie. weather) is a fallacy, global warming or cooling is not the problem…it is the population explosion …this is what is destroying our planet. According to some “misanthropic” authorities, planet earth reached the optimum maximum carrying capacity for people back in the 1800s……. sorry to rain on yer parade.

      • herb benty

        Ha! ha! Look, BS77, here’s something for you…I took earth’s total population and divided that into the total square feet of Washington State. Everyone in the whole Earth would have around 900 sq.ft. per person, 1800sq ft per person on 2 levels. I realize that is too crowded to live like that, however, you get the idea. The cities may be too crowded on Earth, but the Earth can hold Trillions of people. You commend yourself for not falling for the climate hysteria, then immediately climb on the “population bomb” fallacy. God said, “seedtime and harvest will continue until the end of the world”. There are very real dangers out there that will harm us long before the weather or numbers.

        • GopherNo83

          Trillions of people on earth?
          With 1 trillion humans herb, where do the wild animals live?
          Oh right, who gives a sh*t right, as long as we have grocery stores and gas stations, all is ok in DenialLand…

          • truebearing

            Let me guess, you’re a Minnesota liberal. Who else would identify with a gopher?

            Let me ask you a question: why do you humanists, who criticize religion, but constantly champion science and mankind’s ability to create utopia, simultaneously demonize mankind for the problems we’ve caused by scientific advancements? We’re both the saviours and the bete noire of Earth. Doesn’t that strike you as contradictory and profoundly stupid?

            Careful now. Think before you answer.

          • GopherNo83

            Nope, not a Minnesota Liberal. Not a liberal at all. I don’t belong to any polarized camp. I do criticize religion – easy to do since they are falsehoods invented by men a long time ago. Their time on earth is passed. Christianity, Judaism, Islam, completely useless.

            To answer your question: Science is a fantastic tool to allow us to understand and control our environment. But apply this to 7 billion humans (and counting), and we disrupt the biosphere equilibrium from where we come.

            So there you have it. As Yoda would say: Too much of a good thing science is… If we had control of our population, globally, with only 20-30 million humans, we would have NONE of our current problems.

            Careful now truebearing, don’t let your god-fearing ultra-right-wing stance cloud your judgment.

          • truebearing

            I’ll bet that 20-30 million includes you, right?

            Since you’re such a fan of science, you might be interested in the opinion of some scientists that 100 million humans would be a population that would put human existence in jeopardy. Your unscientific 20 – 30 million seems like a misanthropic death wish.

            Since you have appointed yourself as god, maybe you should explain how we go from 7 billion to 20 million. Certainly you plan to do your part and set an example by dying, but we’ll need more who believe like you to do the same. Someone as rational as yourself wouldn’t expect the unenlightened to voluntarily give up their lives, would you? They will need to see some selfless leadership, and I’m suggesting that you are the man to do it.

            The reason you criticize religion is because you have problems differentiating between religions, you’re arrogant, and have too high an opinion of your own intelligence. To categorically deny the existence of God from a perspective as narrow and uninformed as that of the limited capacity, short-lived human mind is the definition of hubris. Because you can’t prove something doesn’t effect its ontological status. it simply proves your limitations.

          • Western Canadian

            That people as criminally ignorant and criminally hate filled as the gopher exist, is the source of all of our problems. Stupid and ignorant people….. like him, who hate all religions except his own, and wish for the death of members of all the others have more blood on their hands than all other sources of grief combined. If he had any functioning brain cells, he would be dragging those who filled his head with dreck into court, charging them with child abuse.

          • GopherNo83

            Hate filled? Nope wrong WC, I’m concern filled. Something you probably have no clue about. You seem to have a lot of hate though.

            The likes of me source of all YOUR problems WC? What problems are there in DenialLand WC? Please elaborate.

            Hate religions, no. They are simply irrelevant and a distraction from the important tasks at hand. Pray for me WC, that way, you can do diddly-squat but feel as if you did something useful to help my poor soul.

            Wish of the death of other members? Are you insane? I’m an atheist, I wish for religions to disappear so humans can free themselves from the lies they want us to swallow.

            The rest of your rant is typical angry/frustrated person. Why are you angry/frustrated WC?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            How old are you?

          • GopherNo83

            How old do you think I am ?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Late teens?

          • GopherNo83

            I take this as a compliment ofm. It means my position is fresh, idealistic and youthful.
            Sadly, it’s been a while since my late teens…

          • objectivefactsmatter

            I understand completely.

          • BagLady

            What did Mae West have to say on the subject?

          • truebearing

            Atheism is a belief, not a science or proof. It is the stance of small minds desperately wanting to be omniscient. If you can’t even see the contradictions in your own beliefs, how can you pretend to know God doesn’t exist? You’re a fruit fly with a life that lasts an infinitisemal amount of time, in the scope of eternity. Get off your childish ego trip and learn some humility. At least then you will have some wisdom.

          • BagLady

            No it is not! And who gave you the omniscient right to decide who has humanity and wisdom and who has not? Clearly, in your narrow vision of things, only those who believe exactly as you do have these attributes. Shame on you.

          • GopherNo83

            Atheism, FYI, is to reject the God concept formulated by men a long long time ago.

            That you swallow the God concept hook, line and sinker is testament to your conditioning truebearing.
            Religions are on the decline everywhere, deal with it. Why? Because they are proven false and man-made time after time after time. Your eyes are shut.

            So truebearing, pray some more. Pray to your imaginary friend, to make things all right. Pray to the same being you believe tortures dead souls in the hell he himself built to punish those unworthy of his graces.

            That a sentient human, with minimal cognitive functions can still believe this make-believe crap is just beyond me.

            No wonder we are in a growing social, economic and environmental mess of our own making when weak-minded “faithful” like you still believe our earthly lives are but a test to merit the promised paradise from the creator!

            You know Islam trtuebearing? Mohamed understood this very well, he bonified the “heaven” concept with 72 virgins. Too bad you’re a christian truebearing, if you were Muslim, you’d had an orgy in your afterlife.

            That is, if you please your god enough to earn it.

            Keep living the dream baby!!!

          • BagLady

            You are right, of course. To be Atheist is to take an absolute, immovable stance. To be religious has similar drawbacks: pigheadedness, comes to mind. Surely, one must be agnostic and open to all new ‘discoveries’

          • GopherNo83

            -Fine, make it 100 million. Sold.
            -We go from 7 billion to 20 billion by reproduction. Massive, unchallenged reproduction. Like bacteria in a petri dish. You know what a petri dish is right?
            -I’ll die for sure. Like you. Like all of us. Thing is, if we slow birth rates, let’s say be imposing a one-child per woman policy, world-wide, then all humans can procreate and in a few generations, the global population decreases. No hate-filled genocide.
            -I categorically deny the existence of God because there is categorically no proof he exists. I categorically deny the existence of unicorns and centaurs. Do you, if so, why? I categorically refuse to be force-fed religions by the sheer fact I was born in a Christian family, therefore, I have to accept the God thing. If I was born in a Hindu Family, I’d be Hindu. They can’t be ALL true. They all thrive on child conditioning and not questioning scriptures. We are past this. Well, some of us are.

            Keep living in your right-wing hate-filled religious delusion true bearing. And don’t worry about the earth, God has a plan for us all right?

          • truebearing

            There is no categorical proof God doesn’t exist, either. Your “proof” is actually an admission of your close-minded, intellectual laziness, not to mention spiritual bankruptcy. Your conclusion is based on a belief arrived at with little effort, no sense of wonder, and certainly no scientific facts. You aren’t smart enough, nor will you live long enough to understand enough of this world to come up with a proof of God’s existence, or lack of existence. It is a matter of non-intellectual knowing, intuition, or in some cases, experiences that convince many of God’s existence.

            A young women who worked for a janitorial service that used to clean my office is a perfect refutation of your simplistic theory on why people believe in God. Some evenings, when I was working late, she’d come in to clean and we would talk. Eventually, she disclosed her sad childhood, where she was seriously abused in many ways. She was also not allowed to go to church because her parents were atheists, not to mention evil. She somehow still believed in God and yearned to go to church. I asked her how then did she come to believe in God, and she told me that she had from early childhood. wanting to escape the poverty of her chidhood, she was working three jobs so she could save “a lot of money.” I finally convinced her to quit at least one job and go to technical school, which she did. She got her degree eventually in electrical engineering, got married to another engineer, is making a very good income, and has children that she loves and treats with the respect and kindness she never had. And she regularly goes to church and is thankful to God. She also destroys your cynical theory. How does your theory explain her early and sustained belief in God? Clearly it doesn’t. I guess you do believe in unicorns in your own stupid way.

            You think the aswer is in self-appointed know-it-alls like yourself deciding how people will live and how many children they can have. Maybe those people will decide how many people like you will live. I hope you’re ready to accept the same outcome you have proposed.

          • BagLady

            How does your theory explain her early and sustained belief in God?

            I’m having trouble following your logic. It was you who gave her access to a better life, not God. He seems to have let her down throughout her life. The fact that she still believes in Him seems more to do with indoctrination than a personal beneficial relationship.

          • cxt

            Odd…..the only “hate” seems to be coming from YOU. It it hate you insigated.
            Hate directed at religious people. Hate directed at “right-wingers.”
            Hate period.
            Even odder……I don’t belive in unicorns either but yet I don’t feel the burning need to log onto websites and denounce unicorns and those that do.
            You seem to spend a lot of time denoucing things that according to you are not real.
            Not sure that is “rational” thing to do.
            I mean would you find it rational if I logged onto this discussion and went crazy over Cerberus?
            Or would you find it odd that I invested so much energy in a mystical being?

          • truebearing

            BTW, you didn’t answer my question. Try again.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “To answer your question: Science is a fantastic tool to allow us to understand and control our environment.”




            1.imaginative or fanciful; remote from reality.

            “novels are capable of mixing fantastic and realistic elements”

            synonyms:fanciful, extravagant, extraordinary, irrational, wild, absurd, far-fetched,nonsensical, incredible, unbelievable, unthinkable, implausible,improbable, unlikely, doubtful, dubious; More


            extraordinarily good or attractive.

            How about working on objectivity?

            “So there you have it. As Yoda would say: Too much of a good thing science is… If we had control of our population, globally, with only 20-30 million humans, we would have NONE of our current problems.”

            LOL! Which particular science fantasy led you to that conclusion?

          • cxt

            As opposed to “falsehoods” invented or promolgated by you fairly recently???? ;)

            Im also not sure the statement “NONE of our problems” holds much water.

            “Smaller problems?”……quite possible. “NONE” strikes me as hyperbole.

            IMO most of “our” problems has less to do with raw numbers and more with how we behave.

            As an example–even with fewer people we would still have to deal with smug, self-assured “elites” whom consider it their moral duty to rule over and control those they deem “lessor.”

            Also not sure religion being “completly useless” is all that accurate.

          • BagLady

            Everything was ticatiboo until the Dollar became a god to be worshiped by the American Dreamer. The Dollar grabbed science and molded it to It’s own advantage, focusing on the most profitable/destructive research. In the meantime, earth can wait until the eleventh hour before we redirect our energies/wealth to saving Her from our own greed.

        • BS77

          Who wants to live on 900 sq ft? Perhaps you like that Orwellian type of world……..your suggestion that the earth can sustain TRILLIONS of people is ridiculous. Just another billion or so and we are done……The earth simply cannot support Ten Billion humans who take every resource there is…the fish in the sea, the forests, the land, the air, the rivers…We are already coming close to exhausting the planet of wildlife and open wilderness. Africa is a mammal extinction zone. There are only 10% of the elephants there were in 1900. Face reality dude.

          • BagLady

            It is not overpopulation that is decimating the elephant population, nor the whale. It is not food ‘hunters’ going on ‘safari’ to shoot one of the ‘big five’.

            I see the Chinese are being blamed for much of the illegal poaching trade and researchers are not wrong. However, I do believe much more could be done in China itself among the middle classes who are responsible for the trade. I found them very keen to understand our ways and amenable to change. I reckon they could easily be turned from elephant tusk, black rhino horn and shark fin soup etc.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            A lot of Jihadist groups are self-financing with ivory hunting. They have the weapons and the manpower.

          • BagLady

            True, but their market is still China. There was a time, not so long ago, that we westerners treasured our Chinese ivory: tiny carvings within carvings. No wonder it’s valuable.

            I still believe they can be dissuaded and guided into carving something else.

            They are all (rather sadly) very pro western medicine and few are taking up the long and arduous study of traditional Chinese medicine that should never be underestimated. We lost our own traditional herbal knowledge because of Christianity. Don’t let’s lose it again.

            Just as in Ayurvedic medicine that mixes pure herbs with psychobabble, it’s a case of extracting the science whilst still bearing in mind the power of ‘thought’.

            Perhaps Green Peace could do more if they took a more ‘democratic’ approach instead of the aggression that seems to be their weapon of choice. I’d be in Beijing mixing with the rich kids; turning their heads. The knock on effect would do far more good than rocking up in a little boat and spraying paint on a whaler.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            I doubt that will happen any time soon. Animal rights is in its infancy in China and value is placed on authentic materials, not plastic.

          • herb benty

            BS77, I was only showing that People are not “falling off the earth”- there is lots of room and resourses. And how on earth do you know the number of people this world can support! Earth has millions of sq. miles set aside for your precious animals. Most species go extinct without any help from people. Only enviro-loonies expect the # of elephants to remain constant, the climate to stay the same as always. Only in human minds are we close to catastrophe. War is coming NOW and mankind will be on it’s way to extinction, so, if your alive, you’ll get your wish of less people soon enough.

        • BagLady

          I did the same with arable land. Each and every one of us has 2.5 hectares of the stuff. Now that’s a fair bit of land and more than enough to feed an average family.

          It is not that we can’t feed everyone, rather we don’t feed people who gave up their allotments for a mess of porridge and now can no longer pay their way.

          • herb benty

            America, is capable of feeding the world, however, people get in the way. Islam is itching for a world war, the Communist world is egging Islam on to attack us. The amount of people will soon be “thinned out”, so all our machinations will be moot.

          • BagLady

            Whether you believe in God’s hand or just the natural order of things, Mother Earth has a way of redressing the balance following our many attempts at destroying Her.

            If you look at the figures following ‘big’ wars, where our boys died in their hundreds of thousands, millions even, the Fibonacci Scale suddenly swings from the perfect balance of male to female births (1: 1.618….) to predominantly male births until such time as the ratio is recovered and the birth rate reverts to predominantly female.

            Strange and hard to argue.

          • herb benty

            Mother earth? Her? The Earth was created as our home, it is not a being, a mother or a she. “Predominately female”?

        • Lightbringer

          {sarcasm on}
          Oh, but if you put all seven-point-some billion of us into Washington State, then the latte-drinking elites there would have their pristine, all-natural, organic environment uglified!
          {sarcasm off}

          • herb benty

            “Overpopulation” is fake. Another leftist “crisis” that just happens to require us to give up our independence and be ruled by Brussels( who “progressively” is now allowing child euthanasia). Atheism ends up evil, every time.

          • Lightbringer

            Absolutely, Herb. “Overpopulation” is a myth. As the population grows, so does our precious human capital, the most valuable of resources. More people, more extremely intelligent people, hence more solutions to any problems we encounter.

          • herb benty

            Well, leftists don’t like ingenious individuals that are responsible for our high standard of living. The “collective” is the only thing on their minds, that’s where the mass votes are.

          • Lightbringer

            Of course. iPads for them, caves for us.

          • herb benty

            90 million living in caves in China can’t be wrong! This admin. loves their commies.

      • GopherNo83

        Right you are BS77 – We are 7 billion humans (and counting) and we are having already a measurable impact on key biosphere health indicators. But answers like herb benty bring me to despair as to how deluded we humans are on what we are doing to the biosphere.

        7 billion humans living like we did 1000 years ago? Would not be a problem. But 7 billion humans living with cars, oil, 55″ TVs, paved roads, and every thing we may desire for our comfort and economic growth? Heading for disaster.

        Simply look at the “herd health” of non-human large mammals ANYWHERE on the planet. Aside from livestock, they are ALL perishing… except for the few that have adapted (somewhat) to our changing ecosystems like the Florida gators – as long as said gaters are not stupid enough to venture to close to a human nest.

        Lions, tigers and bears? Oh my, won’t be long before they are a thing of the past. Rhinos sold as aphrodisiac powders in Asia, Elephants as ivory decorations…

        But hey, all is well in DenialLand where herb lives…

        • truebearing

          look at it this way: most of those who are responsible for the destruction of various species are deeply superstitious and have no grasp of science. Kind of like enviro-nit-wits.

          Why not take a page out of the Left’s Book of Human Solutions and starve them all to death? Or gas them, or do what Obama’s science czar advocated and have them all sterilized? Then the Wildebeests could provide more food for the lions, cheetahs, and hyenas, and you’d have more wildlife programming to watch while you get high. Of course, NatGeo will no longer be able to depress everyone with their relentless propaganda, but the crocs will be happy.

          Maybe teaching people about morals and ethics would help immensely in allowing large populations to coexist with wildlife, but that would mean liberals and leftists would automatically be unnecessary, having zero knowledge or experience in that category. They would be completely unproductive, come to think of it. I guess that means, by their own rule, they should be denied health care and food, since they will have outlived their usefulness…as if they ever had any.

          • GopherNo83

            You believe in God truebearing, you are also “deeply supersticious”. Hence your hateful responses to someone, like me, who challenges your beliefs.

      • bigjulie

        Aaaaahh…but back then they had no way of reckoning with the emergence of McDonald’s or Burger King! We can now eat forever…!

    • BagLady

      Ha, I see you ridicule the world of avatars DogmaelJones1 (not your given name I presume). I love my avatars. I can flit from subset to subset of societies, in the guise of one or other of my personas.

      • DogmaelJones1

        “Dogmael Jones” is the name of a barrister and member of parliament in the Sparrowhawk novels. “Dogmael” is Welsh for “Bringer of light to children.” I hope I have brought some to you.

        • BagLady

          Thank you. I am going to the First World soon and shall revert to reading good novels as soon as they become available. Something I have not been able to do for a couple of years.

          There is no better record of history than the novel.

  • The Facts

    It sure is a good thing Mr. Greenfield’s body of work has outpaced that of Carl Sagan. One thing you can always rely on is that better, more insightful authors will compose a series of well-received and thoughtful books that are much better than the authors they disagree with.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Much like your work of trolling a website on the internet has outpaced the articles written on it.

    • cxt

      The Facts
      Weird…….I thought Lefties liked deconstruction of books–esp. those of old white dudes.
      I guess I got confused between the official line and the official–unofficial policy, ;)

      • The Facts

        Good point. No. I think Marxist deconstruction of books is stupid.

    • Norbert Haag

      It is not about better,but about facts that disprove theories to the mere status of fairy tales and its belivers to,well, just that, belivers

    • truebearing

      I see your plan. You call yourself “The Facts,” but attack anyone who provides them. You’re trying to corner the market on idiotic irony. Have at.

  • fritzidler

    I know Mr. Greenfield’s theme is climate change, but he forgot to mention the bigger reason the left is obsessed with proving there once was life on Mars. To prove evolution of course. Me, I don’t have a problem with evolution. Or God. But the left thinks if they find life on Mars they will have dis-proven God.

    Though I sometimes ask UFO enthusiasts, if the government knows aliens exist, why are we sending probes to Mars?

    What’s more, when we went to the moon, liberals either thought we shouldn’t, or said the whole thing was a let down. Or out right mocked it, like Kurt Vonnegut. Which of course baffled me to no end. I was too young to realize they hated the sight of achievement. Especially America’s.

    And keeping with Ann Coulter’s calling liberalism a religion, the alien thing is just part of that. If they are not fancying themselves as our saviors, they are hoping the aliens will be.

    And it just occurs to me: did the aliens have to deal with climate change too? If they did, they were in bigger danger of socialists killing them, than climate change. So much like us.

    • BagLady

      Life on Mars might go a long way to disproving the fables of the Bible, mostly written thousands of years after the events and riddled with historical inaccuracies, but I don’t see that it would disprove the essence of God.

      • herb benty

        The Bible is famous for being accurate, and true. It was written as God inspired them to write, Period. Our Creator is not an “essence”, He is very real and looks after His Words to us.

        • BagLady

          As researchers pointed out just yesterday, the Bible goes on about people on camels when, in fact, this phenomenon did not take place until centuries later.

          • herb benty

            Voltaire, that famous French Philosopher, proclaimed,” In 100 years there will be no Bible”. And 100years later, that man’s house was used by the World Bible Society to print Bibles. “Researchers” that hate the Lord always “find” what they are looking for. Before God gave the Bible, people were riding camels. Your pitiful attempt to nullify God is not wise.

          • BagLady

            Don’t tell me. Tell the archaeologists, the scientists that have disproved these anecdotes.

            Does this really nullify God? Good heavens, get a grip.

          • Mister Lackey

            Hey genius, when you read that Old Book, I’d suggest you keep a mirror handy and every time it mentions a particular person, or group of persons, doing really stupid things, take a look at yourself and contemplate how those stupid human tricks apply to you: because that Book’s telling you a story about yourself.

            Don’t believe it? Then you go on living your ignorant, relatively meaningless, stupid life, and maybe we’ll all get to read about you in the next edition (while reading about ourselves, too).

            Ugly human nature is such a difficult thing to overcome. We’re all guilty every day, but unlike you some of us don’t wallow in it.

          • BagLady


          • herb benty

            I tried to answer her, but up came the “closed” sign.

          • herb benty

            Get a Grip? Look BL, Abraham, Lot etc are talked about riding donkeys. There are pictures in Egypt in stone that show camels from at least 2000 BC. Your inference was that the writers made up camel riding. Archeology has shown the Bible to be true on ALL counts.

          • BagLady

            There well maybe pictures of camels pre 2000 BC, but none of them shows riders upon them. Horses, mules, camels and asses were all beasts of burden. It was much later that they were used as a means of human transport; just ask Montezuma.

            Don’t fret. It would be quite natural for historians of that time to make such mistakes, after all, they did not have the advantage of the internet.

            Did Mary ride the donkey or walk beside him?

          • Mister Lackey

            Herb, there’s a large body of folks who think they’re smarter than the previous generations; who think by virtue of the fact they were born, they are smarter than all their predecessors.

            They don’t truly appreciate the scientific methods, but they’ll point a trembling finger at you for offering traditional points of view. Look at the global warming/climate change/climate disruption agenda: they’ll throw out thousands of years of observation and insist they own the knowledge and the wisdom, and try to forcibly submit everyone to the Big Lie. Dullards!!

            Their stupid ideas and bend for revisionism are what create the Hitler’s and the Al Gore’s of the world.

          • herb benty

            So well put Mister! “If we don’t learn from the past…”

  • BagLady

    In the meantime, the East has begun it’s lung-busting jungle burning season. All those new palm-oil plantations springing up everywhere should help the environment.

    • A Z

      You mean like in Malaysian and Indonesia?

      • BagLady

        I do indeed. I must search to see if Son of Suharto is still picking up the $millions from the devastation.

        The World Bank was given the responsibility of protecting much of the virgin Cambodian jungle, but saw fit to handing it to an Australian mining company “for exploration purposes only.” This relieved the World Bank of their contract to provide protection of the virgin forests and indigenous wildlife. 90% of the guards lost their jobs as protectors and the ancient redwoods made haste on the back of trucks to the port of Sihanoukville.

        I am far more concerned with AID and the deviousness of it’s aim than overpopulation.

        • A Z

          Malaysia is run by people like Mahathir (2003-2009). It is run as a Muslim theocracy. I spent much time away from home and I did not have the option of getting back in a day and go through Heathrow airport.

          But we did have a satellite dish attached to our ship for the 1st time. It was a luxury. It was a big deal. Many the layers of bureaucracy need to approve the ship alteration and the $) It was worthless.

          So we turn on the TV and dial to the only channel we can get as we passed through The Straits. It is half a dozen guys in skull caps talking about Islam in Malaysian. That is pretty much the whole country. The Malaysian Muslims parasitically feed of the ethnic Chinese entrepreneurs. Malayasia is one of the countries that stand shoulder to shoulder with other countries in the UN and condemn the U.S.

          Ditto for Indonesia. They persecute Christians in Aceh province. They are ethnically cleansing aboriginal people in New Guinea. They send refugees to Australia on hopes of it becoming Muslim.

          So I don’t care.

          • BagLady

            Just like the Indians in Africa, the Chinese have taken over the financial sector of Malaysia. Hardline Islamism was not noticeable until 9/11. Until then, it was an easygoing multi-cultural society with harmony between faiths.

          • A Z

            Sorry but I passed though those straights in 1991.

            The guys in the skull caps had already taken over the culture.

            You became aware of Islam to a greater degree in 9/11. it does not mean it was not already there.

            The World Trade Center was already blown up once in 1993. what was that? Was it a case of “No harm, no foul, so let’s forget and move on”?

          • A Z

            So If you sit down with a group of Malaysian Chinese who have left the country, how long could you keep up your mental charade?

          • BagLady

            All this in the last decade. Fifteen years ago you would not have described the area so. The Chinese, thanks to their industriousness, controlled the business sector but the Muslims controlled politics. Most Malaysians were westernised in their dress and liberated financially. There were only small pockets of segregated, covered women out in the sticks and Christians lived happily next door to Muslims.

            The same thing can be said for Indonesia. The majority of Muslims were no more ‘devout’ than your average ‘Christian’. Never bowing down nor visiting the mosque. Jeans, T-shirts and long pony tails were the norm. Earning money was the name of the game, not religion.

            What caused the wave of Islamism in the area? That is the question.

          • A Z

            I passed through the straights in 1991. The guys wearing the beanies already had control of state run TV and it was an Islamic affair. That was 25 years ago.

          • A Z

            “What caused the wave of Islamism in the area? That is the question.”

            15 years ago it just about the time of 9/11. Is that where you are going?

          • BagLady

            I based myself in Yogyakarta from ’96 to ’97 and travelled most of the main islands. I had no need to worry for my safety.

            East Timor: now there’s a different disgusting story. You can just here the Generals in the board room: “OK, we’ll let them go their own way, but they must be made an example of. We can’t have islands demanding independence just because they’re being abused and the one-way traffic of wealth is no longer acceptable. We’ll have chaos.” Hence the bloodshed that followed, instigated by the panel of international ‘planners’ with Indonesia given the role of ‘teacher’ and Australia the role of ‘saviour’, arriving just a few moments too late to actually save anyone.

        • A Z

          I guessed correctly based on my knowledge of rain forests and current events. I asked a rhetorical question.

          I read quite a bit about the orangutans in Borneo and Sumatra. anthropologists studying them have proven they have culture

          Evidence For Orangutan Culture

          I don’t care. You would be the person in France going on and on about preserving some forest, when the Germans were invading in WW2 and had plans to level all forests to grow crops. Yet in the run up to the war you could not be bothered to stand shoulder to shoulder with your fellow citizens to prevent it. You have your sheet of music. Emphasizing forest preservation over confronting the Germans would would fit your Leftist sensibilities. The same is true now. You are a reasonably intelligent Brit who is quite daft.

          Orangutans Said to Exhibit Hallmarks of Culture

          Orangutan Culture Develops Like Human Culture

        • A Z

          I can spend too much if my time propping up orangutan refuges and other good works only to see greater forces wipe them out.

        • A Z

          No forest is virgin and people should be able ti cut down the mightiest trees.

          That said, if they clear cut or cut to much they will change the character of the land and the number of species.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      Perhaps you might wonder why these maniacal socialists don’t protest to expose any non-Western examples of “environmental rape?”

      Maybe the NWO won’t let them. Instead what they do is blame Western consumerism for buying tropical wood when in fact they’re burning the forests to grow cash crops. That instead of putting together a free market system where people are increasingly rewarded for working on their productivity through education and skill building.

      There’s no middle class in those areas doing this crap and they’re dominated by crony capitalists. A lot of the money comes from China. I guess the NWO also runs China.

  • jtrollla

    Socialism is a fantasy. And socialists live in a fantasy universe where reality is confined to the space inside their skulls.

    • BagLady

      If Socialism is a fantasy (and therefore does not exist) it is logical to argue that there is no such thing as a Socialist…. except by your warped interpretation

      • Daniel Greenfield

        Hollow Earth was also a fantasy. Hollow Eathers did and do exist.

      • jtrollla

        Socialism exists as an idea. Just as democracy is an idea. The idea of socialism proscribes a society that cannot exist because it runs completely contrary to human nature and in order for it to function, even minimally, requires totalitarian control.

  • carpe diem 36

    the climate discussion started by little people with time on their hands. like the Kennedy brothers and Prince Charles, who did not do a useful thing in their lives, as Prince Charles has never put on his own socks. they wish to feel big and important, and they think that they can influence weather, or climate, or rain or snow. if they did not have their obsession with weather what would they do all day? they do not need to work, they are provided for thanks to their parentage, so they want to lead “useful productive lives”. the climate is a perfect activity for them. they can make speeches and be on TV with their vacuous pronouncement. as long as they just talk it is fine with me. but when the idiots running gov’t policies listen to them to the detriment of the human race it becomes necessary to shut them up.

    • BagLady

      Prince Charles has spent his entire life as a farmer. How dare you suggest that he knows nothing on the subject whilst you, (urban) vomit your jealous bile against wealth while offering nothing constructive in return.
      Your vitriol suggests unhappiness with your lot and I suggest you get out of there (wherever you are). Flush out the poison and get a new lease of life.

      Just suggesting….

      • carpe diem 36

        i stand by what i said.

      • A Z

        Does Prince Charles turn a profit as a farmer? Coming from money, a lot of money, it makes the entry cost lower. You do not have the same costs, cost structure if you do not have to borrow.

  • truebearing

    I clearly don’t understand these brilliant Martians like the leftists do, but if these Martians were/are so advanced, why didn’t they just abandoned Mars, after ruining its climate, and come to Earth, where they could have easily conquered humans, taken totalitarian control, and made us work for their collective for pennies, like true socialists always do?

    Or why didn’t the oh-so advanced Martians and Venusians move their planets respectively closer to and further from the sun — using big, advanced plasma/dark matter/laser/quasar outboard motors — since any being that has evolved beyond a ground sloth knows that the sun is what determines global temperatures? Even the ground sloths probably know that, but apparently Carl Sagan didn’t.

    Why aren’t the warming hucksters babbling about the poor Mercurians? Remember that incredibly advanced race that built its inter-galactic empire on Mercury, only to be scorched and blown away by SOLAR WARMING? Alas, only a few escaped to Venus, where for some strange reason they were mining coal and burning it as fast as they could, despite surface temperatures that exceeded 300 degrees. Too bad Carl Sagan wasn’t there to advise them that they didn’t need anymore heat.

    It’s also too bad that Carl Sagan didn’t know about the “Goldilocks Theory.” Well, maybe he did, but it wasn’t helpful in scaring people into buying his books. It also puts the rest of the enviro-nit-wits on the run.

    • BagLady

      The world seems to be infinite and the idea that we are not replicated somewhere beyond our Milky Way doesn’t seem logical.

      It would be very interesting to see how they are handling their parallel universe, given the infinite choice of direction. We too could have made different choices……and still can

  • blert

    Modern Progressives, at bottom, have adopted Taylorism, and see themselves as managing a policy assembly line that will efficiently produce unending improvements, Heaven in our time.

    The Principles of Scientific Management were thought to be the Tablet for modern man.

    It’s not a coincidence that Taylor dedicated his tome to America’s first progressive president, Teddy Roosevelt.

    In an irony lost, the Progressive Movement always bonded to the dominant party. That is, it’s always been the party of big, bigger, biggest government.

    • BagLady

      There you go again, sub-dividing the already sub-divided. Not happy to just label progressives’ as per Roosevelt’s vision, you add a new dimension that deviates from the ‘progressive’ ideology and creates yet another layer to be argued against ad infinitum.

      It goes against the ‘global’ vision so many here advocate..

  • wileyvet

    I think James Carville may be a Martian.

    • bigjulie

      No way!! No Koonass would ever eat Martian food!!

    • objectivefactsmatter

      MIB is not science fiction. Watch the films to find out the home planets of may famous people.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    A lot of “space alien” fiction is barely masked leftist propaganda.

    Spoiler alert:

    Ender’s Game was a recently released joke about how bigoted and militaristic humans are in contrast to virtually all other beings.

  • Dyer’s Eve

    You hit the nail right on the head again, Mr Greenfield. All the apocolyptic Venus and Mars scenarios for Earth are useless and pointless. Why? Well, even a child can look at a map of the Solar System and can see that Venus is closer to the Sun compared to Earth and that Mars is farther from the Sun than Earth. Surely even a cretin can see that distance from the Sun is the major player here. Venus and Mars also have other problems that Earth doesn’t have. I suggest people consult reputable sources for further detail. Even NASA’s website will illuminate this for you (even lefties). Just Google it!

    • Daniel Greenfield

      But… but what if burning coal shifts the orbit of the earth closer to the sun.

      Don’t argue. It’s settled science.

      • Dyer’s Eve

        Surely you’re taking the piss out of me. Maybe not. No science is ‘settled’. Lord, no. Active science is everything.
        In the face of Islam, it’s all we need!!!!