CLINTEL gives members of parliament a shot in the arm and proposes how to get the economy back on its feet without utopian experiments

After lifting the COVID-19 lockdowns, national parliaments must oppose the impracticable green agendas of supranational organizations to construct a utopian Earth. Instead of spending trillions of dollars on fighting the unpredictable changes caused by natural variability (‘autonomous changes’), parliaments should focus on adapting to those changes. Dear members of parliament, with all due respect,  do not fight against climate change and virus outbreaks, but adapt to the consequences. The world must move from top-down mitigation to bottom-up adaptation.

Believing computer models is believing the makers
Decisions about the comings and goings of society are increasingly taken by poorly informed politicians who have a rock-solid faith in the outcome of computer models and immature technologies. The belief that people can solve all problems with supercomputers – the ideology of constructing a utopian Earth – has grown strongly in recent years. By linking computer-controlled policies to supranational governance, experiments are started to engineer a ‘perfect’ society in which idealists believe all current global problems can be solved.

But the reality is very different. The climate debate in recent years and the coronavirus chaos of today show that the prophesied blessings of a politically engineered world do not exist. We are collectively being pushed into the wrong direction. National parliaments have become puppets of the megalomaniacal supranational organizations, as created by the UN and the EU.

The illusion of total engineering
Unfortunately, we see that the marketing of this foolish ‘total engineering concept’ is in full swing. Predictions of computer models are embraced by supranational bodies, translated into global policies and then adopted by national governments.

However, experience has shown that these computer predictions and centralistic policy guidelines lead to false conclusions and impossible solutions. They promise certainties that do not exist and advocate measures that are counterproductive.

Critics who point this out are silenced. Topical examples are the climate debate and the corona crisis.

Natural variability is unpredictable
Climate change and virus outbreaks obviously are very different forms of natural variability (one is gradual and one is abrupt) and they have completely different emergence processes –microbiological versus macro physical. Yet, both have in common that they are unpredictable and after identification they have consequences that require similar actions from a control point of view. Here is a brief explanation.

Natural variability in terms of climate change
The Earth’s history shows that climate change is caused by a complex combination of natural forces, which are beyond the human ability to control. UN’s climate agency IPCC coordinates global scientific research on the cause of climate change with the aid of computer models. In the past decades these models have predicted extreme global warming due to anthropogenic CO2 emissions, but in real life these predictions never materialised.

Despite the hard fact that predictions were always wrong, the IPPC concluded that human CO2 is the culprit. By continuously repeating that we are heading for an irreversible climate crisis, citizens have become frightened and national governments feel morally obliged to adopt the low-carbon IPCC policy. In recent years it has led to great social unrest and outrageous costly climate measures without any measurable effect. Again, these are hard facts.

Natural variability in terms of virus outbreaks
The history of pandemics shows that virus outbreaks are caused by unpredictable changes on a microbiological scale. Coronaviruses are constantly changing themselves by undergoing a complex genetic recombination. This leads to new genotypes, followed by unexpected outbreaks. Like climate change, humans have little influence on this.

Unfortunately, policy-advising virologists turned out to have also inadequate knowledge of how ‘corona aerosols’ do spread from human to human, being crucial physical knowledge for making effective measures.  Similar to the climate debate, computer predictions were presented with great certainties, but they generally put citizens on the wrong track.

Think of the contradictory flows of information about the seriousness of the breakout, the importance of wearing masks, the necessity to carry out tests, the immunity of children, the need for closing national borders, etc., etc.

In November the COVID-19 virus broke out in the Chinese city Wuhan, in mid-January the models of the UN Health Organization WHO told the world that no human-to-human infection could take place and even in February the WHO did not start ringing her alarm bells. Just as in the climate debate, critics were silenced (think of the Chinese doctor Lee Wenliang). Instead of providing the world with reliable advice, citizens were frightened and national governments were morally forced to adopt the confusing WHO measures.

We should pay tribute to the health care providers who continued to diligently do their work in this political chaos.

CO2 molecules versus corona viruses
Do you know that in ‘sustainability circles’ a causal link is made between the emergence of climate change and the emergence of corona outbreaks? And – it is hard to comprehend – with arguments like ‘climate punishment from God’ and ‘Nature strikes back’.

IPCC and WHO, why did you let this come so far? CO2 molecules are building blocks of life and corona viruses are building blocks of death!

Don’t behave like a modern Don Quixote
Mankind cannot control the cause of natural variability that drive the autonomous changes on our planet, such as forces from inner earth and outer space, climate change, extreme weather, emergence of new viruses, etc. Therefore, we should not try to predict and stop them. If we do it anyway, we behave like a modern Don Quixote. We have to learn to live with these autonomous changes, identify them early and then adapt intelligently.

Adaptation is the way to go
If we agree that mankind cannot stop climate change, we automatically say that the focus must be on adaptation.  Here, adaptation means taking early measures against the consequences of higher temperatures and rising sea levels. Experience with climate policies shows that mitigation never has saved one life, but adaptation has saved the life of millions!

If we agree that mankind cannot stop the outbreak of new viruses, we automatically say that the focus must be on adaptation.  Here, adaptation means taking early measures to prevent spreading and to increase immunity. If we had taken adaptation measures in terms of ‘early detection of the Wuhan outbreak’ directly followed by ‘watertight isolation of the Wuhan area’ we would have saved the world from a global crisis!

Experience shows that adaptation to change always works, whatever the cause of the change may be. Forms of life that were unable to do so have not survived.

Changes are part of life
The success of future societies will depend on the ability to adapt to change (‘adaptation’). By trying to predict and stop autonomous changes with impracticable engineering agendas, we are collectively heading into the wrong direction, characterized by terrifying stories and senseless measures.

By taking advantage of the corona chaos, supranational bodies are sneakily trying to push through their idealistic green deals. However, the real priorities are very different. We urgently need a realistic energy policy that includes the latest nuclear alternatives and we urgently need a realistic pandemic policy that emphasizes early detection and fool proof source isolation.

Spot on the horizon
Dear members of parliament, CLINTEL would like to give you a shot in the arm by offering in these difficult times a spot on the horizon: “Don’t become puppets of supranational organizations and ignore false prophets who destroy with their utopic deals the global economy. For a strong recovery, acknowledge that autonomous changes due to natural variability cannot be predicted and cannot be stopped.“

In particular, mankind cannot predict and stop climate change and mankind cannot predict and prevent the emergence of new viruses. Therefore, follow an open and practical policy: “Stop with top-down mitigation and go for bottom-up adaptation after lifting the lockdown.”

Guus Berkhout
President of CLINTEL