Le 18 novembre 2009
« Climat : assez de mensonges et de manipulation ! »
Monsieur José Manuel Barroso
Président de la Commission européenne
1049 Bruxelles, Belgique
Sur la base de l’argumentation ci-après, intellectuellement et philosophiquement étayée, dénonçant les mensonges et la « croyance au miracle » des humains du XXIe siècle dans leur arrogante prétention d’établir à terme sur la planète un climat « sur mesure » pour l’éternité, je vous invite à prendre connaissance de la teneur du courriel adressé le 16 courant au Secrétaire Général des Nations Unies, Ban Ki-moon, ainsi que des documents annexés.
A ce courriel, en effet, était jointe ma lettre du 2 courant à Barack Obama, expédiée en envoi recommandé avec accusé de réception, laquelle était accompagnée du courrier du 9 courant adressé au GIEC, également en envoi recommandé avec accusé de réception, dont les récépissés postaux sont à votre disposition. Pour faire bonne mesure, le 12 courant, j’ai informé Nicolas Sarkozy de cette correspondance également jointe à cet envoi.
En conséquence, comme vous disposerez de l’intégralité de mon argumentation, ou presque, il vous restera à soulever vos éventuelles objections sur le fond et à développer vos arguments contraires, intellectuellement, voire scientifiquement, et philosophiquement étayés.
Dans cette éventualité, je vous remercie de votre attention et vous prie d’agréer, Monsieur, mes salutations distinguées.
Annexe : A - Courriel du 16 novembre à Ban Ki-moon
November 16th, 2009
“Lies and manipulation on the climate”
Mister Ban Ki-moon
Secretary-General of United Nations
I invite you to consult my letter of November 9th to Barack Obama, sent in registered packet with acknowledgement of receipt, for drawing his attention on the lies and the " faiths in the miracle " of our time, in its claim to establish on the planet a customized climate for all eternity - and it, once for all !
This letter was accompanied with the mail of November 2nd to the IPCC, also sent in registered packet with acknowledgement of receipt, the copy of which appears below that to president Obama.
Consequently, as you will have the completeness of my argumentation denouncing the current superstitious scientistic faith, I would be grateful to you, in case of discord on very precise points, for becoming known your possible objections, and better still to expose your opposite arguments, intellectually and philosophically supported.
Looking forward to your possible contrary arguments, I thank you for your attention and ask you to approve, Sir, my best regards.
Appendix: Letter of November 9th, 2009 to Barack Obama
November 9th, 2009
« IPCC: I ACCUSED! »
Mister Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
For avoiding to the current humanity to turn darker straight ahead in the wall and to sink into the ridiculous in front of the future generations, the nearness of the world Conference of Copenhagen on the climate gives me the opportunity to draw your attention on the contemporary global "lie" in its " faith in the miracle” to establish on the planet a "customized" climate for all eternity: TOMORROW, always TOMORROW, but only TOMORROW!
Indeed, this deceptive scientistic promise, similar to those of the ideological superstition, results only of our superstitious thinking, which succeeds in persuading the human beings in their power to transpose the Ideal into the everyday life, that it is about the future of the world generally, or about that of the climate in particular.
I tried in vain up to here, in the national level, to alert in particular Nicolas Sarkozy by my letter of September 18th, 2008, then Jean-Louis Borloo, French Minister for the long-lasting Environment, on January 20th, 2009, as well as most of the hexagonal makers of opinion, any confused circles [Media, politicians, intelligentsia (claimed intellectuals, pseudo-philosophers) and environmentalist associations], among whom names and proofs of sending of my mail are at your disposal.
For lack of answer of these so-called "elites", I addressed directly the members of the IPCC because of their immense scientific responsibility and of their global implication guaranteeing for this contemporary "swindle" to ask the following question:
« In an universe, which is perpetually in movement, and where EVERYTHING is in a constant movement, that is the SOLE cause of the unceasing transformation of all the things of our world, human beings included, HOW would-it be possible to definitively stabilize anything and thus to establish on the planet a custom-made climate for all eternity, excepted by stopping this movement itself, precisely? »
In several e-mails always without answer this day, figured notably that of last September 17th, entitled without ambiguity " IPCC: CHECKMATE?! ", which aimed at denouncing the silence and the refusal of these international scholars to discuss on a question nevertheless all over the world guaranteed by the official Science. I invited them in particular to refute my demonstration by means of arguments scientifically and philosophically supported, as well as give evidence of it my letter of 2 inst., sent in registered packet with acknowledgement of receipt - so as whoever or to yourself, obviously, to demonstrate the opposite on possible litigious points, as I had respite to demand it throughout this mail to contradict me!
I join this document to allow you to judge quite at leisure my whole argumentation in its slightest details, and so can refute them possibly on the scientific and philosophic plan. Consequently, I restrict to highlight here the main lines of my presentation establishing the lies and the "faiths in the miracle" of the Superstition generally, and the scientism in particular in its arrogant person claim to master the climate of the planet "at our convenience": WHICH ONE, moreover, so as to believe the human beings in measure to agree on the rain and the good weather in particular, and generally on what is good and bad, that is really on what is good or bad for their selfish interests of all kinds, individual or collective?!
"ALL" the lies of the world - those of yesterday, current and of tomorrow - always base themselves on the deceitful postulate of the Superstition in its diverse modes of expression, because it consists by “taking the relative as absolute", that is to present fictitiously as absolute, as reality or the absolute Truth, the only relative contents thought in and about our world. The scientistic superstition does not escape it, since it makes absolute its theories and its hypotheses, while the Science is for ever condemned to express only the "relative truths" till the end of time.
So, leaving this false premise, the superstitious thinking under all its forms does not hesitate to jump the abyss, nevertheless for ever unbridgeable, which separates definitively the practice, the daily reality, the "relative", from the theory, the Ideal, the "Absolute", as it goes away of the current superstitious faith in our claimed power to master "absolutely" the climate of the planet in our way, by locking its ceaseless variations.
I want for proof the comments of Yann Arthus-Bertrand declaring in a feminine monthly magazine, in June, 2008: "It stays in us ten years to save the planet" - clearly said: "In ten years, the apocalypse will be mastered"! ! ! We do not thus have for a long time to wait - less than nine years, today! - to verify this prediction, and they will still be billions of individuals to notice or not its eventual realization. Now, as well as the humanity waits in vain, for more than two centuries, for the advent of the ideal freedom and the absolute equality on Earth, are not enough resounding declarations for reaching them, no more than for mastering the climate - in view of the above-mentioned assertion, I can’t really see, moreover, how the human beings would reach there within decade!
Be that as it may, we master NOTHING in our world. NOTHING depends on our claimed free will, otherwise the infinite problems of the planet would not remain durably unresolved, and our world would have effectively become a paradise! We have thus only the obligation to adapt ourselves permanently to the infinite connection of the infinity of the causes and the effects, led by the perpetual motion of our universe and all the things which constitute it. In the infinity of its forms and its degrees of speed, the movement is the fundamental cause of ALL which happens in our world (natural phenomena, events history, collective actions and individual acts) by the ceaseless transformation of EVERYTHING, to which we have to adapt ourselves willy-nilly, as well as testify of it, at the global level, infinite and constant reforms introduced in all the States without exception to try to follow so-so the movement, even if they are always running late on it!
In conclusion, I think of having put you so in front of your immense global responsibility in the only choice which is imperative on the subject, according to THE absolute eternal Truth. So as to demonstrate the opposite, obviously, in front of an obvious error so heavy of consequence for the humanity, it seems preferable to backtrack instead of pursuing pointlessly a for ever inaccessible purpose, because as says it the classic art Latin expression: « Errare humanum est, perseverare diabolicum »
Nevertheless, if you do not share my opinion, what is your most justifiable right, you have to demonstrate the opposite on very precise points of discord, because only the Reason, the demonstration, has a justifiable validity against the Faith, the "faith in the miracle".
Looking forward to your possible contrary arguments, I thank you for your attention and ask you to approve, Sir, my best regards.
Appendix : Letter of November 2nd, 2009 to IPCC
November 2nd, 2009
« I ACCUSE: Enough lies and manipulation of the world’s opinion ! »
C/O World Meteorological Organization
7 bis, Avenue de la Paix
CH- 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
[To the attention of Rajendra K. Pachauri, chairman]
On September 2nd, then 6th, of this year, I sent you e-mail, forwarded on the17 of the same month, to ask you a question based on an argument with eternal validity in relation to the climate generally and to its variations in particular, but I am obliged to notice that this communication remains without answer to this day - and for good reason, no doubt! Indeed, I intended to denounce the contemporary global warming "swindle.”
However I do not mean the eventuality of global warming as such, because the Earth has already known of such phenomena in the course of the centuries and the millennia, but rather the arrogant claims of the people of the 21st century, which will be a laughing stock to our more or less distant descendants, if by any chance, they have any knowledge of it. Plainly, today’s earthlings imagine themselves capable of imposing their laws upon the eternal strengths of the nature, on which depend in particular the climatic variations, and of dominating them so as to, at the end, establish on the planet a "customized” climate for all eternity.
Nevertheless, if such is not the real intended purpose, I would be grateful to you for indicating to me the end aimed for, as well as its possible term. And I thank you all the more in advance in that I still wait on this precise point for the answer of Jean-Louis Borloo, French Minister for the long-lasting Environment, to my letter of last January 20th sent in registered packet with acknowledgement of receipt – to this day, indeed, only the postal receipt holds place of refutation, as it goes moreover with my postal mail of September 18th, 2008 to Nicolas Sarkozy on this question, since here also the official receipt of the Élysée acts as the only solidly supported refutation!
Certainly, the camp followers of scientism, spared from too much scrutiny from the media, the intelligentsia (self-proclaimed intellectuals and pseudo-philosophers) and the environmentalist associations, the spokesmen of the superstitious scientism, none of these ever pause from their campaign to persuade, with some success, in this "miracle,” as evidenced by the recent European ballot. Nevertheless, if I speak deliberately of superstitious scientism, in other words of science led astray by this current environmentalist hypothesis, quite like the claims about the beginning of our world from a hypothetical big-bang, it is because I identify this materialist metaphysics as one of the modes of expression of Superstition, like religion, idealistic metaphysics, or spiritualism, ideology and moralism, by "the relative taken as absolute".
This process, intellectually dishonest and philosophically absurd, consists in making pass fictitiously – deceitfully! - for absolute, for reality or the absolute Truth, the merely "relative" contents thought through and about our world. This trick of superstitious thinking results only from the confusion of the faculties of our human thinking: 1) the practical understanding, which serves us only for living and for directing us in our world of things, and 2) the spiritual thinking, which is the way and the voice of the absolute ONE. The first faculty, indeed, is confined forever to its "relativity", and thus it can never claim to say anything whatsoever about the absolute, as contrasted with real spiritual thinking - nevertheless, it continues to superstitiously mix its relative points of view with the eternal absolute Truth !
Spiritual thought expresses itself through the authentic mystics like the Buddha and the Christ, in their authentic words, not as corrupted by Superstition usurping their names for falsely making the great spiritual thinkers out to be founders of religion, which they did not want to create. IT is also found in the "true" philosophy of the absolute ONE, and foremost amongst its great philosophical thinkers are Plato, Giordano Bruno, Spinoza and, more recently, the German Jewish philosopher Constantin Brunner (1862-1937), their spiritual heir.
I do not enter here, however, into an exhaustive philosophic debate to demonstrate and justify the reality of superstitious human thinking, where the relative is taken for the absolute, but I do not refuse to discuss it, if you were prepared to so arrange for it. I restrict myself for now to underlining that all the modes of expression of superstitious thinking base themselves on the claimed coexistence of "two" absolutes, namely a God, or a creative principle (primus motor of Aristotle, first agent of Avicenne and of Averroès, even the so-called big bang of contemporary scientism), AND our world considered wrongly by the quasi-totality of the human beings as an “absolutely absolute” reality. Nevertheless TWO absolutes coexisting, that is an absolute impossibility by definition, and as demonstrated more geometrico by Spinoza in Ethics I.
So the scientistic superstition, or materialist metaphysics, is also characterized, today as yesterday, by taking as absolute the theories and hypotheses of Science, while, in actual fact, it is forever limited to express only "relative" truths, susceptible to be ceaselessly questioned until the end of times. In spite of this obvious fact, scientism enjoys the blind trust of the quasi totality of the human beings, believing in the certainties of the science to "absolutely" know and understand our world - regrettably TOMORROW, always TOMORROW and only TOMORROW, in Saint Glinglin!
This misplaced trust in science is exactly the same as that put formerly in the advent of communism, and, today, in the efficiency of human rights to attain a freedom and an equality "so-called absolute", which everything about the state of the world refutes for ever. That is why, to paraphrase Yves Montand speaking about socialism, I assert about scientists: "They believe in science in a religious way, as I believed in it myself in a religious way." - but it is forbidden to no one, obviously, to demonstrate the opposite! From there to here, the naivety, the credulity, the "intellectual debility" of our period will continue to base itself on the medieval slogan: "Credo, quia absurdum "!
If you dispute all this, which is your most justifiable right, it will be necessary at least to demonstrate your opposite point of view. Indeed, I let you imagine, on the basis of the evolution of scientific knowledge during the last millennium, what will become, in thousand years, of the hypotheses and theories of our contemporary science, of which we are so proud and so trusting, precisely because we fictitiously consider them as “absolute” truths. Nobody, obviously, has or can have, today, the slightest valid idea of the scientific knowledge of the distant future in which our time will represent nevertheless, in its turn, the "obscurantism" of thought in its religious, ideological and moralist superstitious beliefs - but also scientistic!
Besides, as the ecologist discourse is for the main part a cross between environmentalism and politicking, as can discerned even at the European Parliament, I cannot help but make the analogy of scientism with ideological superstition, all the ideologies without any exception. Indeed, the same confusion between the relative and the absolute allows scientism and ideology to foster belief in the possibility of introducing the absolute into the relative, of transposing the Ideal into everyday life, and so to obtain on Earth a "customized", or ideal, climate for the one, and an ideal society for the other one - and this, in a world, where EVERYTHING is relative, and NOTHING is absolute, except, obviously, contrary demonstration!
Regrettably, as it always goes with all the "beliefs in miracles" of superstitious thinking, not only the hoped result is always remitted to TOMORROW, necessarily; but by waiting for saint Glinglin, we shall have done a lot of lying, and falsified a great deal of opinion, as it is the case with the current ecologists, who will remain naive, deceived and deprived until their last day! If you also dispute this point of view, not only will it also be necessary to demonstrate the contrary, but I can assure you that you will not see personally - and nor will any of our contemporaries - the advent of your climatic fancy. Rest assured, nobody will ever see it, but it is not forbidden to you to provide proof of the contrary, or provide even a robust demonstrative argumentation in favour of your thesis, in answer to my fundamental question repeated below!
The absence of robust arguments, which I am already betting on, should be enough to end all the superstitious "nonsense" of our times about the means to remedy the global warming merely through the "miracle" of our so-called free will. This free will is nothing other than a supplementary deceitful intellectual and philosophic "aberration”. Indeed, contrary to the belief shared by the quasi totality of humanity, the future of our world does not depend on our imaginary "free will", by virtue of which it would be enough to merely wish for being successful. It depends rather on what Spinoza names "necessity", and which led an intellectually honest politician, namely Mikhaïl Gorbatchev, to declare: "Nothing can be made outside the frame of a superior necessity." [Cf. Le Point, n°901, 24 - 31 December 1989].
Gorbatchev's superior necessity is nothing other than Spinoza’s "necessity", and it invalidates definitively the common idea, according to which our human free will would be enough for doing what we want - but it is forbidden to no one, obviously, to demonstrate the contrary! And the facts, both internal and external, already confirm that the Barack Obama’s lying slogan of the presidential election campaign, his "Yes, we can" to be precise, does not confirm the effectiveness of our so-called free will for changing the world. It changes enough without us, permanently!
[Les défauts de présentation, constatés après envoi, sont indépendants de ma volonté]