jump to navigation

Prince Charles labeled Eco-Hypocrite as he arrives in the US to lecture on sustainability May 8, 2011

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,

Prince Charles labeled Eco-Hypocrite as he arrives in the US to lecture on sustainability

Written by Ann McElhinney & Phelim McAleer
Not Evil Just Wrong, 02 May 2011

Prince Charles is the latest to be exposed as an eco-Hypocrite in our short filmseries.

The Prince is coming to the US this week to speak at Georgetown University about “sustainability” so we decided to see just how he lives up to his own standards.

We’ve made a short film that exposes just how hypocritical the Prince is as he lives a fabulous, luxury life whilst lecturing the rest of us that we have to live with less.

PRINCE CHARLES HYPOCRITE exposes the double standard that is at the center of so much environmentalism.

It is a shocking viewing. It follows on from our exposure of James Cameron and Robert Redford and their hypocrisy.

Read the rest here


1. Bush Bunny - May 8, 2011

How would you expect him to arrive by air balloon?
He has a successful organic farm in UK and encourages and also lobbied parliament to support farmers to convert to more organic principles for five years during the transition period.

2. Oliver K. Manuel - May 8, 2011

Eco-Hypocrite Prince Charles is another piece in the emerging pattern of a tyrannical world government that places little or no value on the most basic values of our free society:

Belatedly I have concluded that we face, not just corruption of climate science, Climategate, but abuse of the entire scientific enterprise (from astronomy, . . . to zoology), included the once “hard” sciences like nuclear and particle physics.

1. WHY?

I do not know, but outcome seems to match Eisenhower dire predicted for the demise of science and the loss of our basic rights as members of a free society in his 1961 farewell address to the nation on 17 January 1961.

After warning about the danger of a.) “An Industrial Military Complex”, he warned about the danger of b.) “A SCIENTIFIC-TECHNOLOGICAL ELITE”:

“Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of “A SCIENTIFIC-TECHNOLOGICAL ELITE”.




These three papers reveal serious compromise of climatology, cosmology, nuclear and particle physics by the “SCIENTIFIC-TECHNOLOGICAL ELITE”:

a. “Earth’s Heat Source – The Sun”, Energy and Environment 20, 131-144 (2009)


b. “Is the Universe Expanding?” The Journal of Cosmology 13, 4187-4190 (2011)


c. “Neutron Repulsion”, The APEIRON Journal, in press, 19 pages (2011)



George Orwell’s book, “1984”, seems to best describe the overall pattern:


With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo

3. eurobrat - May 8, 2011

Of course some of the celebrity figures speaking for the green movement are hypocrites, but that in itself does not change the validity of the problem at hand. Just like the hypocrisy of some religious figures doesn’t cause me to stop being a Christian and believing in God…..

4. gofer - May 9, 2011

Apparently people haven’t read any of the data in the past couple years….global warming is NOT happening. None of the predictions are even close…

5. Bush bunny - May 9, 2011

Humans have caused considerable environmental damage. But by repairing it, might not be so easy
as pollution is caused mainly from burning fossil fuels. What do we do remove all cars, planes, ships from the planet, that would considerably clean it up from pollution. But it won’t change the climate.
If the planet is moving into a cooler period, they
will say that cutting emissions is causing this, not by natural cyclic planetary trends. But they only want to tax emissions, that has to include fuel. But to then compensate emitters with carbon credits etc., won’t stop them emitting. And should they do this, then it won’t change the weather or climate.

Prince Charles is promoting his organic theories,
and this will improve our environment. And soils capacity for carbon sequestration. It will improve production and food values eventually.
It will help conserve water retention in soils particularly in partly arid areas. But it won’t
change the weather, climate, but will improve the health of our water systems protected from leaching of harmful fertilizers into them.

6. Bush bunny - May 9, 2011

By harmful fertilizers, I also include toxic insect
and herbicides, and particularly Super phosphates.
They kill microbiology in the soil, that is the secret to keep plants healthy and productive. It’s only a band aid to soil fertility and poisons water
sources, and increases salinity.

7. Bush Bunny - May 10, 2011

Well at the last federal election in Oz,(August 2010) when we got a hung parliament, the then
Minister for climate change, senator Wong, was asked at the televised tally room, “Was dropping the ETS the reason for labor losing community support?’ “No” she replied, “The planet is cooling.” So why now blame carbon dioxide then and introduce carbon taxes you may ask. The question is causing a lot of anger in the community? But mentioning CO2, pollution and climate change in the same breath is not only wrong but totally ignorant.

If Prince Charles is still quoting climate change
as the reason to change to sustainability, he is
in one way, supporting the environment, I agree there. Forget the climate change bit. Because whether the climate gets colder or warmer, sustainability is still a good cause to change our ways with farming techniques and methodology.
Because when it gets colder, agriculture will be more difficult to sustain. As the Northern Hemisphere found in the last glacial periods and
during the mini ice age (1300s – 1850).

8. SPURWING PLOVER - July 23, 2011

Its a good thing we fought a revolution over 200 years ago so we would no longer be run by these british royals and especialy with prince chuckles and his green hypocracy

9. Oliver K. Manuel - July 24, 2011

Thanks for the messages.

The history (1945-2011) of consensus science, global climate concerns, and the current economic and social unrest from the perspective of a space scientist leads to very unpleasant but inescapable conclusions:

Click to access 20110722_Climategate_Roots.pdf


Please let me know if you can find a more palatable conclusion.

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: