The United Nations is at a crossroads.
President Trump withdrew from the World Health Organization, cut funds for the UN Climate Assembly and may evacuate more. [emphasis, links added]
He called the United Nations “underperforming,” which suggests it was a swamp to drain.
At this critical moment, it is reasonable to assume that the United Nations has justified its existence by focusing on peace and prosperity through data-based recommendations.
Instead, it has boldly worked to curb open debate on climate change while promoting prosperity-fighting policies.
The United Nations has partnered with the Brazilian government to launch a global initiative called the “Global Climate Change Information Complete Initiative”, which will promote the release of “verified” climate change information on media and social media.
To be honest, its goal is to “promote support for emergency climate action” – Revealing the goal is not to emphasize the broad scientific consensus that climate change is real, but to increase the allowed policy response.
As UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres clearly pointed out, “Emergency Climate Action” refers to a competition with zero net, extremism, and economic policy. Including wealthy countries pay huge sums of money for poor countries to pay climate compensation, brand new climate taxes and completely end fossil fuels within 25 years.
The unelected UN is engaged in pure publicity when determining the policy response you must choose.
Imagine if migration debates were to be regulated and only statements were allowed to support extreme policies that supported completely open (or closed) boundaries everywhere.
The United Nations overlooked the inconvenient fact that there are many important debates between climate scientists and economists.
Even after decades of extensive research, the huge uncertainty still has the warmth of carbon dioxide doubled.
Research by climate economists also shows that most current climate policies are very inefficient.
The United Nations will dismiss policy discussions, even facts, in the name of promoting a singular response to climate change.
We know this because the early work of the United Nations Initiative sheds light on its so-called “climate facts” that have shown its undisguised bias.
A “fact” promoted by the United Nations is that sea level rise may flood small islands like Kiribati.
Progressive media often repeat this claim, but ignores the extensive scientific literature, showing that almost every atoll, including Kiribati, is a stable or growing atoll—even the New York Times has evidence.
In Whoppers
Another UN “fact” is that climate change is a major threat to human health, as air pollution caused by fossil fuels kills about 8.7 million people each year.
Not only is this number more than double the World Health Organization (WHO) estimate, but the United Nations intends to confuse climate policy (to cut CO2) with a real solution that is cutting air pollution through chimneys and scrubbers on catalytic converters on cars.
The United Nations, in misunderstanding the threat to life, overlooked the death toll of climate-related disasters, has dropped by 97.5% in the past century, or the number of people dying from the cold is far more than the calories.
The United Nations also repeated the often-telling lies that renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuels.
They only measure costs when the sun shines or blows the wind to mask this misunderstanding, ignoring intermittent and unreliable costs.
The truth is, Countries without any solar and wind energy have lower electricity costs – in fact, on average, the cost of electricity is two to three times that of countries with solar and wind energy.
In other so-called facts of the United Nations, “Solar panels and wind turbines make the most of the land” (in fact, solar and wind are the most land-intensive forms of energy), and the transition to clean energy will create millions of jobs.
The latter is economically illiterate: In the United States, solar energy employed 35 workers produces the same energy as a natural gas worker can producewhich means gas is more efficient, as 34 workers are free to do other important tasks, thereby increasing social welfare.
A scheduled narrative
All of these lies illustrate the bigger problem: The United Nations will only “verify” claims and narratives (whether correct or not) “promote support for emergency climate action.”
The United Nations will not “verify” the fact that latest research on net zero climate policy costs and benefits shows that an average annual average of $4.5 trillion in annual revenues in the 21st century $27 trillion a year.
Indeed, this fact may be considered “disinformation” in the United Nations Orwellian world.
The United Nations is trying to control what people can hear, read and think about climate change, and social media companies like Meta reverse their years of “fact-checking” policies, which, Meta acknowledged, led to censorship.
The proposal of taxpayers to spend millions of dollars on poverty climate policies is certainly worth debate.
There is no place for the United Nations to suppress discussions.
If you want to survive, the United Nations and other multilateral organizations need to return to their roots to help humanity navigate the world for peace and prosperity.
They must understand that free and informed debates do not have any threat to this reason.
Bjorn Lomborg is president of Copenhagen Consensus, a researcher at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University and the author of “Falle Alarm” and “First There Things.”
Read more on New York Post
