Why Do Experts Lie About Something They Call Carbon “Pollution”?

Why Do Experts Lie About Something They Call Carbon “Pollution”?

We continue our series of trying to understand the Expertocracy, our form of government, and its uses of propaganda to further the goals of our rulers.

Lying is a common tool used by rulers to manipulate public opinion. Its use is constant, and its presence is not a function of government type, though its amount is.

FDR’s managerial government—we were not yet an Expertocracy—lied constantly, earnestly, and wickedly to induce the public to forget what they knew about Russia and embrace war (if you don’t already know about this part of our history, I’ll cover it in a future post). Wilson a generation earlier, with a nascent managerial government, did the same service to juice the country into the first world war.

Wilson, more than FDR, believed in the cause of the war, because he longed for the Expertocracy (he didn’t call it that), a world united and ruled by science and rationality. FDR was more monomaniacal, and surrounded by more communists, but was far from averse to the idea of Expert-led rule.

John Mearsheimer in Why Leaders Lie tells us that rulers in democracies lie the most to their peoples. Which we all know that by now. But he also thought leaders lie to get people to do what the rulers think is best for the people. That may have been so in a managerial society. It is not so in an Expertocracy.

In Expertocracies, rulers lie to get people to do what is best for rulers and Experts, the people be damned. There is no other explanation for open borders and mass invasion, hacking up children to delight perverts, and the purposeful sabotaging of food and energy production, to name just three of many insanities.

The other day we had a video by Twitter’s new CEO advocating masks. In song. As I said then, there is no way this woman could have known anything about masks. She never investigated the literature, which was abundant and produced over a full century, all showing the uselessness of masks in stopping the spread of respiratory bugs. Which must mean she heard the propaganda and was wholly taken in by it. Of course, her primitive thinking aided in her, and many others’, ardency: “It’s a mask! Masks block!”

And it was propaganda, a lie. The video of the Fabulous Fauci at the beginning of the panic on 60 Minutes has him telling the truth about masks. Don’t bother, he said, truthfully. But the attitude of not bothering, if widespread, would lead to calm. Calm was not desired. Panic was. So he switched to lies and said you must not only wear a mask, but two, and you must never, ever, never again shake hands with anybody. (How many already forgot that?)

All lies. Not even masterful lies. Blunt, crude, idiotic lies. And do we even need to retell the whoppers he, the CDC, and nearly all rulers told about how if you were vaccinated you couldn’t get sick and couldn’t pass on the disease?

How about the viscous ugly murderous lie that drugging kids will “stop” their puberty so they can decide later whether to dispute the “gender” they were “assigned at birth”? And the lies that millions and millions of foreigners illegally entering the country is “enriching”?

And the obvious and stupid lie that carbon dioxide is “pollution.” CO2 is now called, in a ridiculous and lazy lie, “carbon” (sans “dioxide”), rulers tiring of having pronounce the full two words, they lie about it so often.

Before we get to that detail, we must distinguish levels of lies, which is the same as depth of belief. A liar has no belief; those taken by the lie often have the strongest belief.

Rulers pick Experts who provide ideas useful for rulers. Rulers then use these ideas in their propaganda. Top Experts are often somewhat cynical about their ideas. But mid and lower level Experts will have sincere belief in them. After all, it is they who work on the ideas, giving them flesh. The public, the target of propaganda, pumps out True Believers, like Twitter’s CEO.

The level of belief, just who is lying and when, makes it difficult to push back against the lies. It is a waste of effort to try and teach a ruler or top Expert that his lie is a lie. He already knows this. Of course he does! Watch this interchange between a Senator and a minor ruler. The Senator tries, in vain, to get the ruler to admit the lie that sabotaging energy production (after a $15 TRILLION payout to oligarchs) will do nothing to change the climate. The ruler likely believes some of the theory behind the lie, and thinks that lying is a price worth paying in service to the theory. But it’s just as obvious he is lying, and that he knows everybody else knows he is lying, yet etc.

Can you imagine trying to convince Biden, or those that tell him what to say, that “climate change” “solutions” are preposterous lies, designed only to enrich rulers and accumulate power? Well, lots of luck, as the kiddies say.

You might be able to demonstrate, after herculean effort, to low level Experts that their ideas are false. And you can have some success with ordinary folk, as long as they have not imbibed a fatal dose of propaganda. (I have labored along these lines, mostly in vain.) But you’re not going to get many (or any) mid or high level Experts. The True Believers in the public are like the patients of Mark Twain’s quacks: they believe strongest of all.

Anyway, here’s the headline which motivated this post: “Biden rule tells power plants to cut climate pollution by 90 percent — or shut down“.

You can read the article at your leisure. There is a certain amount of fun in identifying what is propaganda and what true belief. And you can be amazed that our rulers, our very guardians, the government which swears it loves us, is willing to shut down energy production. Breathtaking.

Because why? Because, in part, true belief. But mostly because they think they’ll get something out of it. Which can only mean the obvious: our rulers are not only deceitful despicable creatures, but they are none too bright, either.

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card click here. Cash App: $WilliamMBriggs. For Zelle, use my email: matt@wmbriggs.com, and please include yours so I know who to thank.


  1. john b()

    We’ve had frost three times in the last week or so.

    We’ still FROST AND FREEZE advisories Thursday and Friday AFTER May 15th.

  2. Kenan Meyer

    Calling carbon dioxide pollution is in fact an insidious lie. Since basically all life on planet earth (except some types of bacteria ) is directly or indirectly dependent on carbon dioxide, calling CO2 an evil is an attack on life itself.

  3. Hagfish Bagpipe

    ”…our rulers are not only deceitful despicable creatures, but they are none too bright.”

    True, but they don’t need to be too bright — they just need to be one lumen brighter than us. And be thoroughly “viscous”.

  4. awildgoose



    The great mass of citizens are so dumbed down they now struggle to navigate traffic lights.

  5. Ann Cherry

    The working-class revolt against Net Zero – spiked


    I asked someone, “What’s the difference between “decommissioning” a power plant (because it failed to meet impossible standards), and taking out that same power plant with a bomb?

    I think that bombing would be better. Both mean the end of the power plant, but if it had been bombed, there might be a will to re-build. Instead, our energy infrastructure goes down “not with a bang, but a whimper.” And by our own government, no less.

    Here’s a story where U.S. truckers are protesting CA’s laws banning diesel trucks; they are very upset. But according to this article, many are upset because there aren’t enough charging stations. “We’re not ready yet to DIE, we need more juice.” (I paraphrase.)

    Trucking industry faces showdown with Democrats over push to eliminate diesel rigs, go electric | Just The News

    It takes me 4-6 hours to fully charge my depleted electric bicycle battery. We wonder how long it takes to charge a diesel truck, even if there ARE “enough charging stations”, and how far a truck hauling loads could even go on a charge.

    We might be tempted to say, “they really haven’t thought this through.” But as Briggs points out, while that may apply to some of the true-believing midwits and lemmings…. OF COURSE many of them have “thought this through.”

    If WE understand that “green energy” is a con designed to take out our energy infrastructure and make China and its allies (such as the W.H.O.) supreme, so do THEY understand it.; and if WE are thinking, “cutting back on agriculture will lead to mass starvation” so have THEY thought it out, and yet they are doing it anyway.

    This should tell us all we need to know about WHO our government represents. It ain’t us, babe.

  6. brad tittle

    I start sounding like a broken clock. How do you identify an expert worth listening to?

    He will tell you why you don’t need to hire him.

    As soon as this line start working though, it will be useless. The expert has to be able to call a spade a spade. He also has to be able discern shovels, cards, and neutering operations…

    Just because he calls a spade a spade, doesn’t mean other people won’t walk the definition in another direction. If he holds to tightly to the definition the people are gone. If he doesn’t hold tightly enough, he is now just another “expert”.

  7. Brad Tittle: ” How do you identify an expert worth listening to?” . One of my favorite site is smalldeadnimals.com – they have a frequent advertiser who sells consulting services under the slogan “hire an asshole” and I rather think that makes sense. A real expert generally tells you what you don’t want to hear.

    Now, in that context ( 😉 ) .. virtually all conquerors have imposed their own codes on their subjects. In the French case, it was Louis XIV, not Napoleon, who implemented a powerful bureaucracy to impose his rules across the country. Napoleon merely inherited most of it.

    Further Wilson/FDR etc bought into the belief that experts could solve the world’s problems because they saw the problems as largely the result of there being too many people who weren’t like them. Ever been to India or Africa? if so, you’ll understand what drove that conclusion. Both were, in that sense, closet NAZIs (just as today’s Soros dominated democrats are) – remember the conflict is not between left and right, or conservatives vs communists, it’s between those who believe in individual responsibility (e.g. Christians, the American Founders – one reason democrats hate Russia so much is that the country is largely white/Christian) and those who feel they should be on top with everyone else following orders.

  8. William Wallace

    I loved the blatant outrageous LIE that was produced on the instrument cluster of certain hybrid cars. The less Carbon Dioxide the car produced, green vines would start growing across the screen. The exact opposite of reality. ?

  9. Cary D Cotterman

    Senator John Kennedy has that certain kind of Southern accent that conveys “sir, we all know you are completely full of shit”. I could listen to him gleefully dismantle “experts” all day.

  10. Johnno

    Let me answer – The honchos at the top, following the will of Satan, are trying to kill as many as they can.

    It is no secret. They’ve been open about it for years.

    Impoverishment is the ideal long term way. Energy has been good for human progress. But then we start getting these crazy ideas about independence, families, travel, entrepreneurship, and basically doing things on our own WITHOUT THEIR KNOWLEDGE OR OVERSIGHT! How will they get their cut? What if we compete with them? Learning things on our own? Independently verifying things they claim? Becoming the nouveau-expertise class?

    This cannot be allowed to happen! It must be neutered! But they can’t manage billions of us, the herd but be of a suitable size, just enough to tend the new garden of Eden that our betters will rule over, for they have now become the fruit of knowledge that we are encouraged to seek. “Though wilt not die if thou listens to us *hissssssss*,” say the Expurts. We know where that story goes…

  11. cookie

    It has just been announced that it has been predicted that the hottest year on record will most likely happen in the next 5 years.

    What they don’t tell you is we are coming into a solar peak and that heat islands are only increasing as more concrete is poured in cities.

    Nothing to do with carbon, its where measurements are taken and how these measurements skew the overall picture.

    Ocean temperatures are the only figure to watch.

  12. Vermont Crank

    I think that Hilary should be put in charge of the problem.

    With absolutely no training, and with a little bit of just reading the NY Times, she made s small fortune in trading cattle futures.


  13. Uncle Mike

    CO2 is the fundamental building block of life. It’s in short supply geo-historically. Warmer is better, anyway, whether due to CO2 or not. These facts are evident to rational, informed people.

    Child mutilation is about as evil as evil can get. Even non-religious people understand that.

    The lies are purposeful scaremongering to exert control. Paranoia is a weapon of mass destruction. That’s the real pandemic.

    Humanity has turned against itself. The Darkness appears to be winning. The super-rich are apparently planning to move to Mars in advance of nuclear annihilation of this planet.

    I have faith that God has a better plan. Not sure what it is, but He made the Earth, including human beings, on purpose. Why let Satan destroy it? I don’t claim divine understanding — but why allow Creation to be thrown away?

  14. DAA

    To the deep questions above, I remember the perspective from Tolkien: abiding the long defeat – up until the final victory.

    We don’t know much of the world anyway. There is a strong impression that we have great science and that we know, but please try to do some yourself and feel like some idiot who does not know left from right. How can so much garbage be said and published? Of course, we know something, but that is very different from knowing outright. And that is the problem. In the 19th century if something like climate change was broadcast people would receive it coldly. Or might say ‘same old, same old’. Today, after years of media indoctrination and so many degrees awarded to dimwits, no chance in hell are we going to get rid of this.

  15. James J. Roper

    While I agree that politicians are none-too-bright, and probably only have their own best interests in mind, and only try to appear to satisfy their constituents, I have issues with other details. For example, there are many areas of science that have other data that demonstrate unusually rapid climate change, and it is not JUST due to CO2, but to which CO2 contributes an important part. Nature – that is, plant phenologies, bird migration, coral die-offs, and more, all have patterns that suggest and are consistent with climate change, the greenhouse effect, and the human link. Sure, correlation is not causation, nonetheless, the evidence is strong. Also, the risk is large. As a biologist, I’ve long seen how deforestation and desertification can also cause local climate change due to the change in the albedo of the ground, along with all the water cycling that goes on in healthy forests. Species loss and extinction have also been more rapid recently. The planet is a limited place, with limited resources, and the human effect is huge. More importantly, regardless of opinions about the environment, global warming, or species loss, there is only one reasonable solution. To get big money out of politics, institute voting reform (ranked-choice would be best, to make it easier to vote people out of office), so that politicians are forced to become more honest. To do that requires that people quit their polemics about the nonsense the politicians use to divide us, and we join together to force political honesty and accountability. Without that, political corruption will always keep us from solving the real issues.

  16. Mark

    James, what data almost that you quoted as examples have been debunked. You need to quit reading propaganda.

  17. Uncle Mike

    Desertification? Where? Warmer means more evaporation from the oceans and hence more rain. That FACT is acknowledged by the IPCC.

    During the Holocene Climatic Optimum ~6,000-8,000 years ago (2-4°C warmer than today) the deserts bloomed! There were hippos in the Sahara. That’s a solid gold FACT supported by ample evidence.

    Deforestation? Where? There are more acres of forest today than at any time in the Holocene. Trees are a renewable resource; they grow back.

    Lies, lies, and more lies do extreme damage. Tell you what, you huddle in the cold and dark in a mud hut while you starve to death. The rest of us will pity your foolishness.

  18. John W. Garrett

    Prices make resources.

  19. Gunther Heinz

    Twitter’s new CEO went to Beaver College? She mentioned “beavers”. Or did she go to Camp Oswego hunting lodge, and there eat her first beaver? GO BEAVER (eaters)!

  20. James J. Roper

    Mark and Uncle Mike are not just incorrect and ambiguous, they aren’t very nice about it either.

    There are NOT more forests today than any time during the Holocene if you do the math right. Remember, the HCO followed on the heels of the last Ice Age (~11,000 years ago). Desertification took time. The entire planet had a different format after the Ice Age before the tradewinds and so on (that influenced desertification in the Sahara) took a while to settle in to their current conditions. Also, hotter air does not mean more rain. Desertification is a fact – just use it as a key word and pay attention to the good scientific literature associated with it (and not the popular press, which, we all know, is a bit convoluted, to say the least). I’ve seen it in Panamá, Ecuador, Brazil and more.

    Mark asked “what data almost that you quoted as examples have been debunked.” but I couldn’t figure out what the question was really asking.

    I noticed that nobody recognized or acknowledged that I was saying that the REAL problem is not whether global warming is occuring and it is due to human activity (even though that is true), but rather it is all due to politics. That is, the politics involved in research funding, the politics involved in electing candidates, running campaigns, lobbying, and so on. Corruption at the top means the rest is also often either corrupted or at least infested by the corruption. After all, if researchers have to appeal to politics to get funding, if politicians base their claims on what the people say they believe, and if the press amplifies whatever gets the most attention, then neither science nor the people can be certain that they’re getting the real story, the real issues, and the unbiased data that demonstrates what is happening.

    For the people to argue among themselves about the details of things like global warming, CRT, or whatever, is simply playing into the politician’s hands. After all, they want us distracted by complex, ambiguous, and disagreeable issues, rather than have us fix the political situation by instituting campaign reform, transparency, accountability, and honesty among politicians. Until we get the politics right, politicians will be persuaded by money, power, lobbyists, boondoggles, idiots like the former president, and so on. And, as long as that continues, arguing about anything else going on in the world is moot.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *