From No Trick Zone

By P Gosselin

German experimental physicist Prof. Gerd Gantefor explains in a recent video why he’s being made a climate denier by the fanatic parts of the climate movement: because he sees no evidence of tipping points nor the end of civilization. 

And also, he warns of a dictatorial monster by the movement.

Prof. Ganteför begins by distancing himself from the term “climate denier,” which is imposed from outside and intentionally associated with a dark past.

He differentiates between two main groups of people who are labeled as climate deniers: 1) Individuals who deny global warming and question the human cause (e.g., blaming the sun or clouds), negate the greenhouse effect, or dismiss the warming as normal climate fluctuation, and 2) people who fear a loss of freedom and prosperity or doubt the effectiveness of radical, national measures given the global nature of the problem.

As a Professor of Experimental Physics and former lecturer of a major course on Energy and Climate in the Master’s program in Physics, Ganteför emphasizes his deep understanding of the subject matter. He states that he is economically and intellectually independent (retired and funded by crowdfunding).

Says manmade climate warming is real, but…

Ganteför’s core theses are that warming is happening and is man-made due to CO2 emissions and that it is a serious problem. But what gets him in trouble is his confidence that humanity will not become extinct because of it. That’s enough to get labelled a “denier” by the German radical climate movement.

Ganteför also expects the 2-degree limit will be exceeded, as a timely global energy transition will not occur. But he feels the consequences can be managed with reason, science, and technological capability—not through self-restriction or regression. He sees no evidence for the often-cited “tipping points” in the main reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and calls these extremes.

Movement is concerned with the transformation of society

Ganteför views himself as the “natural enemy” of the radical wing of the climate movement because he exposes their true goals. According to his analysis, the radical movement is not primarily concerned with the global climate, but with the “transformation of society” toward eco-socialism and the “end of capitalism”.

He argues that climate apocalypse panic serves as a vehicle and a weapon to enforce unpopular, expensive, and, in his view, dictatorial measures (such as bans) that are concentrated on his own country (Germany), even though the problem is global.

He criticizes the movement for using personal attacks and threats because they lack substantive scientific arguments against him, as he relies on the plausible statements of the IPCC and exposes exaggerations.

Freedom just as important as climate protectin

The distinguised professor stands for democracy, freedom, and personal responsibility and rejects “non-negotiable” bans (German: alternativlos), which he views as dictatorial. He is in favor of measures implemented with the people, not against them, and considers freedom to be just as important as climate protection.

He proposes addressing the climate problem through international collaboration and agrees with the five guidelines published by civil society and business associations, which call for more effective and efficient climate policy. These include:

• Comprehensive international cooperation.
• Realism and pragmatism in international solidarity.
• Use of natural and technical CO2 sinks.
• Elimination of overregulation.
• Ensuring societal acceptance and economic viability.

He concludes by affirming: “I am not a climate denier, but I fight the radical arm of the climate movement before it develops into a dictatorial monster”.