In Switzerland, the federal Council (our government) follows a climatic policy that is in extreme compliance with the dogma established since more than thirty years: Humans are guilty of modifying the climate, they now have to change their behaviour to save the planet, here and now.

By its more than active participation to international institutions this official Switzerland positions itself as a champion of the rescue ordered by the climatic oracles.

As the reader of these lines will have understood I don’t support, in no way, this ill-founded, totalitarian, moralizing strategy that will have irreparably inequitable consequences for the development of the peoples on Earth.

Having taken time and invested efforts to understand the physical and socio-political phenomena related to this matter it seemed to me essential to expose my views, even if it means to be knocked down a peg or two if I am wrong. My site climate.mr-int.ch and this blog are a medium of this communication.

Twice I indicated to Prof. Stocker of the University of Bern (current No. 2 of the IPCC, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and now candidate for the vacant chair) the obvious error that he propagates in his lecture on climate modelling (see here). No answer, no debate, the error goes on.

I also asked simple questions to Prof. Knutti of the EPFZ (Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science,) another Helvetian contributor to the works of the IPCC and burning anthropowarmist; he did not even deign to answer my e-mail (see here).

If I were wrong it would be extremely simple for these two professors to put me back to my place, one of their assistants could easily do so. But they don’t. Would it be because I am not wrong and because they have no answers to my nevertheless simple questions?

Also, the federal Council recently decided to set a goal for the reduction of CO₂ emissions to 50 % below what they were in 1991. On this matter I wrote a reasoned letter to Ms federal Councillor Doris Leuthard (see here). More than a month later neither she nor any of her epigones of the federal office for the environment (OFEV) even acknowledged receipt of this letter.

It is to say that when we oppose their dogmas, the high priests, the “knowledgeable individuals” introduced to the transcendence of the thing, feel no more necessity of giving any consideration to a citizen of their country who exposes to them his concerns in a courteous and structured way. Their deafening silence is revealing high arrogance, embarrassment, or impotence, or the three at the same time. In any case they do not love the heretics.

On my side I pursue my path, which some of my friends find abrupt, difficult to follow and to explain. In this lies all the beauty of disinformation: the more a subject appears inaccessible, the more the guru seems able of thinking for us.

My caravan, made up of one only small wagon, is still moving on; dogs don’t even bark.