http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/23/11144098-gaia-scientist-james-lovelock-i-was-alarmist-about-climate-change?lite
Huh!
Just the term "Climate Change" itself is a disingenuous hedge on the part of "their side" of the debate. "Global Warming" got dropped in favor of it as more and more data made them realize the whole warming part was looking increasingly iffy... at best.
And IMO it's a much more dangerous term, because well.. duh, the "climate" is always going to change. All sorts of historical, geological, and biological data suggests it does nothing but. Greenland was
called "Greenland" because of the lush forests that grew on it's coastlines when the Vikings "discovered" it 1000+ years ago. There's evidence that the Sahara desert got it's start from early agriculture, and herded livestock. Unlike (Man Made) Global Warming, where pretty concrete predictions about temperature were made, and risked being disproved within just a few years, "Climate Change" is the perfect vehicle for pushing "Watermelon Environmentalism" forever.
I do think a lot (some?) of the individual people involved in the Man-Made Global Warming fiasco were genuinely concerned, and may not have had larger goals of using it as a scare tactic and bully-pulpit to push socialism on a global scale. However, I've long held that goals, drives, and "evil" can be an emergent property of any larger system, government, or belief.