THE GLOBAL WARMING INQUISITIONAND THE SUPPRESSION OF "SKEPTIC" HERESYBy Tom DeWeese     Imagine living in a world where no one is allowed to think independent thoughts or take independent actions. Only pre-approved human response would be acceptable. To break the rule and engage in forbidden thought would result in terrible retribution, perhaps leading literally to ones destruction.      That's the kind of world apparently desired by the global warming Chicken Littles. It seems they are prepared to do anything to achieve it. Case in point is an outrageous letter to ExxonMobil Chairman Rex Tillerson on October 27, 2006. The letter was sent by two United States Senators, Olympia Snowe (R-MA), and Jay Rockefeller (D-WV).      The letter derides Exxon for helping to fund global warming "deniers," (a term the global warming crowd is using more and more these days to try to draw a parallel with those who deny the Holocaust). Said the letter, "We are convinced that ExxonMobil's longstanding support of a small cadre of global climate change skeptics, and those skeptics access to and influence on government policymakers, have made it increasingly difficult for the United States to demonstrate the moral clarity it needs across all facets of its diplomacy."      The letter goes on to say, "ExxonMobil and its partners in denial have manufactured controversy, sown doubt, and impeded progress with strategies all-too reminiscent of those used by the tobacco industry for so many years." The mention of the tobacco industry is not just a randomly chosen analogy. It's a heavy-handed threat that Exxon could face the same massive government attack on its very existence if it doesn't play ball. Threats of wind fall profits taxes and increased regulations being just a couple of the weapons in the government's arsenal.      The letter concludes, saying, "We would recommend that ExxonMobil publicly acknowledge both the reality of climate change and the role of humans in causing or exacerbating it. Second, ExxonMobil should repudiate its climate change denial campaign."      As incredible as the letter may seem to free thinkers and Constitutionalists, one must pause to understand the "new think" being foisted on our society. In the August, 2006 issue of The DeWeese Report, (Vol.12, Issue 7), I reported on the root of the new edicts on thinking, called "globally acceptable truth." This is not just an Ivory Tower intellectual exercise. Those who practice it believe the only way we can have a well-ordered society is for everyone to think and act in unison. Those who break the rules and think for themselves or take action contrary to the "consensus" are simply causing havoc on all of their well-laid plans.      Again, as I reported in August, this incredible idea is not just the silly ravings of a few lunatics. It is being accepted as the proper focus for major policy matters as they emanate from Congress and are parroted by the news media. The main source of such thinking seems to come from the Eden Institute, operating out of New York and with close ties to the UN.      The official use of globally acceptable truth is best described in a letter to the Eden Institute from Robert Muller, Assistant Secretary General of the UN. He wrote, "I am referring to the need to establish a body of objective, globally acceptable information to serve as a foundation for global education.Its (Eden Project) formula for identifying universally acceptable objective data is truly unique. It achieves this distinction by establishing a global standard for inquiry."  Translation: We will decide what is truth and all new information or scientific discovery will be judged on whether it matches this "globally acceptable" truth.     The last time human kind was strapped into such a mental straight jacket was during the Inquisition of the Dark Ages. The period was called the Dark Ages because it was an era of ignorance, superstition and social chaos and repression. Anyone caught questioning the doctrine or power of the church was labeled a heretic and found his or her way to the rack or into the middle of a fire while tied to a stake. The church, of course, was practicing its own brand of globally acceptable truth.      Today, the new heretics to the religion of global warming are those who question whether scientific facts support the dire warnings that are screaming from the newspaper headlines and from environmental groups' press releases. In fact, there is no better example for the practice of globally acceptable truth than the global warming crowd.      The letter to ExxonMobile from Rockefeller and Snowe is but one example of the dire tactics being used to stifle any debate on the subject. Just recently, the Attorney General of California filed suit against the world's three biggest care manufacturers for their complicity in creating CO2 emissions. As part of the discovery for the suit, the Attorney General demanded copies of any correspondence between the automakers and so-called "skeptics" of climate change. Message: you can't even talk to these people! 2006 has seen the church of global warming go into near panic at any sign of heretical  behavior.         It's absolutely incredible to see such panic, considering the global warming mantra is near universal. There are over 12,000 environmental groups in the country controlling over $20 billion in assets, all unified in spreading the climate change gospel. On top of their vast holdings, many of those same groups receive federal grants for "studies" and "reports" on their climate change findings. More grants, in the billions of dollars, are going to scientists willing to join the church and help substantiate the mantra in their "research."      Added to that substantial fire power is a willing news media which offers magazine cover photos of melting ice caps; and the efforts of the movie and television industry which lets no opportunity get by without some reference to global warming. Al Gore's own documentary has been in theaters around the nation for months. He is the guest on talk shows nearly every week.      The global warming message is literally everywhere. It indoctrinates our children in the classroom. It flows from the advertising messages of corporations, in their corporate social responsible ad to sell their environmentally-responsible products (for which research and development was probably paid for with federal tax dollars). Huge numbers of Hollywood stars and international political leaders have endorsed the mantra of the church of global warming. Billions and billions of dollars are being spent to influence literally every corner of the earth to accept global warming as a fact.       Countering this massive onslaught of globally acceptable climate change "truth" is a tiny, dedicated band of scientists, political leaders and non-profits that are seeking the real "truth." Their assets are literally in the low millions of dollars - simply a drop in the bucket when compared to the war chest of the climate change church. They don't have the medias attention. They don't have the ability to issue massive grants. Hollywood certainly isn't making movies to promote the "skeptics" point of view. And the federal government isn't allowing the contrary opinions in many classrooms.            So, with so much incredible fire power covering every possible exit, one must ask the logical question: why are the climate change crowd so scared of a few renegade groups and their measly few million dollars? The fact is, the "skeptics" are having such an impact on the debate because they are telling the truth.  The Church of Global Warming is wrong!      As George Orwell once wrote: "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." There is no greater hero in the revolution for climate change truth than Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. He has truly demonstrated the power one honest individual can wield.      Earlier this year (2006) Sen. Inhofe gave two explosive speeches on the floor of the Senate in which he attacked and exposed the unfounded claims and scare tactics being employed by the Global Warming crowd. The speeches were literally unprecedented in the decades-long climate change debate. And their effect was like a lightening bolt. Almost immediately some scientists began coming out of hiding to side with the Senator.      On December 6th, just as the Rockefeller/Snowe letter was being exposed across the Internet, Inhofe held a hearing on Capitol Hill exposing the "alarmist media." Said Inhofe, "Rather than focus on the hard science of global warming, the media has instead become advocates for hyping scientifically unfounded climate alarmism." His attacks have already forced 60 Minutes, CNN and other major media to at least give lip service to the "skeptic" point of view. More importantly, the Senator's efforts are putting the Global Warming crowd into near cardiac arrest.        It is important to not that the so-called "Skeptics" include Dr. Daniel Schrag of Harvard; Claude Allegre, one of the most decorated French geophysicists; Dr. Richard Lindzen, professor of Atmospheric Sciences, MIT; Dr. Patrick Michaels, University of Virginia: Dr. Fred Singer; Professor Bob Carter, geologist at James Cook University, Australia; 85 scientists and climate experts who signed the 1995 Leipzeg Declaration which called drastic climate controls "ill-advised, lacking credible support from the underlying science; 17,000 scientists and leaders involved in climate study who signed a petition issued by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine saying there is no evidence green house gasses cause global warming; and the 4,000 scientists and leaders from around the world, including 70 Nobel Prize winners, who signed the Heidelberg Appeal calling greenhouse global warming theories "highly uncertainly scientific theories."      These are but a few of the highly qualified "skeptics" deride by Jay Rockefeller, Olympia Snowe and Al Gore whom, they say, should not be given a voice on the issue.     There are lots of lies surrounding the Global Warming mantra. The biggest one claims there is "consensus" among scientists that human-caused global warming is a fact. There is no such consensus. Human survival demands that we listen to the "Skeptics" before they are burned at the stake by suppositious brutes like Jay Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe.Tom DeWeese is the President of the American Policy Center and the Editor of The DeWeese Report.   www.americanpolicy.org