GUNPOINT SCIENCE: UN push to criminalize climate change skeptics demonstrates tyranny of scientific dictatorship

(NaturalNews) Just how desperate have the global warming hoaxers become? Desperate enough to make sure you agree with their position even if it means enforcement at the barrel of a gun.

The Daily Sheeple reports that a "democratic" panel of the "democratic" United Nations believes that the "science" behind so-called climate change is so "settled" that disagreement – even that which is based on real science, not ideology-influenced phony "science" – should be outlawed, banned and criminalized.

The Sheeple continued:

When you're dealing with one of the most controversial debates in modern history, a little tact is in order. Or at least it should be with global warming, because contrary to popular opinion, it is not a settled science. While the majority of people in most countries believe that it's happening, many of them don't think that it's being caused by human behavior.

No scientific consensus

Further, the site noted, anyone who says that there is a "consensus" in the scientific community is not being honest, either. There is an oft-repeated claim by many who mindlessly push the global warming agenda that 97 percent of all scientists agree it is occurring and that mankind is responsible for it.

In reality, that figure comes from an overly vague 2009 questionnaire that was answered by just 79 climate scientists, The Wall Street Journal pointed out last year. Moreover, it ignores the fact that more than 31,000 other climate scientists and researchers have signed a petition stating there is no clear-cut evidence industrialization is causing climate change.

In other words, when it comes to "climate change," "global warming," and "Man-caused climate events," there is no scientific consensus.

"You could say that none of this is important, because something can be true even if nobody believes it," The Daily Sheeple noted. "In our world however, consensus is the closest we can get to the truth. If everybody agrees on something, then there's a very good chance that it is a fact."

Even if there is no consensus – as President Obama and every other left-leaning politician and political entity the world over proves – that doesn't stop governments and global institutions from implementing public policies based on faulty science. Such policies tend to make believers out of more people, who figure that if government considers such data valid enough to use it as the basis for its policies, then it must be real.

New science tyranny

Nevertheless, there is always going to be a segment of society that isn't buying into the propaganda. They must be circumvented in some way, but how? How does a "free society" do that? The answer is through persecution and, if necessary, prosecution.

That was the impetus behind a secretive UN-funded legal conference when it met in September to discuss climate change and how the International Court of Justice ought to handle it.

According to the Telegraph, the international powers that be are tired of being questioned on this subject and arguing about it. However, what they are really tired of doing is having to explain away obvious discrepancies to their theories and wild predictions of doom and global destruction that have never come true (and never will).

The Telegraph described the internationalists' plan to silence, via force of law, the global warming doubters:

The purpose of this strange get-together was outlined in a keynote speech...by Philippe Sands, a QC from Cherie Blair's Matrix Chambers and professor of law at University College, London. Since it is now unlikely that the world will agree in Paris to a legally binding treaty to limit the rise in global temperatures to no more than 2 degrees C from pre-industrial levels, his theme was that it is now time for the courts to step in, to enforce this as worldwide law.

Welcome to the new science tyranny: thought control and opinion control by international courts, enforceable with the barrel of a gun. Which should make you wonder: is this really about climate change or people control?

Sources include:

TheDailySheeple.com

WSJ.com

PetitionProject.org

Telegraph.co.uk

NaturalNews.com