Other Top-level Politicians Do Not Express Their

I Was 25 Years Old And Pursuing My Doctorate In Economics When I Was Allowed To Spend Six Months Of Postgraduate Studies In Naples, Italy. I Read The Western Economic Textbooks And Also The More General Work Of People Like Hayek. By The Time I Returned To Czechoslovakia, I Had An Understanding Of The Principles Of The Market. In 1968, I Was Glad At The Political Liberalism Of The Dubcek Prague Spring, But I Was Very Critical Of The Third Way They Pursued In Economics.

The Climate Change Debate Is Basically Not About Science; It Is About Ideology. It Is Not About Global Temperature; It Is About The Concept Of Human Society. It Is Not About Nature Or Scientific Ecology; It Is About Environmentalism, About One - Recently Born - Dirigistic And Collectivistic Ideology, Which Goes Against Freedom And Free Markets.

To Reduce The Interpretation Of The Causality Of All Kinds Of Climate Changes And Of Global Warming To One Variable, Co2, Or To A Small Proportion Of One Variable - Human-induced Co2 - Is Impossible To Accept. Elementary Rationality And My Decades-long Experience With Econometric Modelling And Statistical Testing Of Scientific Hypotheses Tell Me That It Is Impossible To Make Strong Conclusions Based On Mere Correlation Of Two (or More) Time Series.

I Never Intended To Be A Politician Or Office-seeker.

I Don't Think There Is Any Global Warming. I Don't See The Statistical Data For That.