Then there have been claims that just don’t fit in the carbon paradigm. For example, renowned Ottawa scientist Jan Veizer pointed out that cosmic rays, not greenhouse gases, cause global warming. His famous paper was published in Nature in 2000, but not many in the fraternity were willing to join the debate.

The point may sound outrageous but let’s face it. First, we don’t know the human steps that have or will have an impact on the climate. Second, we simply cannot control climate. The issue of global warming is, of course, a reality and needs attention but pressing the panic button and presenting outlandish scenarios of imminent doom smacks of dubious agendas. For example, the prescription for a low-carbon technology is vital but even in the Stern report it promises the developed world a big emerging market in the developing world.

Similarly, protocols like Kyoto are important but it also leaves room, as Stott points out, for the developed world to have control over the developing world — you must keep your rain forests, you must allow us to plant trees here, you must let us tell you... Very rightly, Stott sees a neo-colonial element in Kyoto, which many European countries are keen to exploit. In fact, global warming has always been as political as environmental. We all know — though most of us choose to ignore it — why one Margaret Thatcher had to invent the concern. She had something going on with the coal lobby.

Not much has changed in terms of the manipulation. The portrayal of the developing world, particularly China and India, as the emerging demons with absurd projections of energy hunger is another attempt at creating myths to push these agendas. Let’s not even comment on the idea of helping developing countries with aid to meet the demands of the anti-global warming crusade and then make them pay through their noses to buy low-carbon technology from the developed world.

... contd.