Mike Adams
Natural News
Monday, May 7, 2012

This is, without question, the most important article I’ve ever penned, because it discusses the idea that the human race is being destroyed in the name of science.

Stopping these “scientists” from destroying our world and our civilization must become our top priority if we hope to survive.

The entire Northern hemisphere is now imminently threatened by a massive, “global killer” radiation release from failing Fukushima reactor No. 4. (http://www.naturalnews.com/035789_Fukushima_Cesium-137_Plume-Gate.htm…). Our world is right now just one earthquake away from a radiological apocalypse, and we were put into this position by scientists who promised us that nuclear power would be safe and inexpensive.

Even as we live under the immediate threat of Cesium-137-induced radiological extinction, another group of genetic scientists threatens the future of our world with self-replicating genetic pollution. These scientists work for Monsanto, Dupont and other biotech firms that have compromised the future of life on Earth in order to seek their own selfish profits. Bill Gates and all the others who have promoted GMOs and allowed them to be unleashed into our world are guilty of nothing less than crimes against both the human race and nature itself.They are a threat to the continuation of life on Earth and must be stopped.

In the realm of human biology, our very existence is now being widely threatened bytoxic vaccines. Always promoted in the name of “science,” these vaccines actually cause severe neurological damage and widespread infertility, compromising the ability of members of the human race to reproduce.

And in terms of our global food supply, the accelerating collapse of the honey bees is now solidly linked to the widespread use of chemical pesticides manufactured by pharmaceutical companies (http://www.naturalnews.com/034678_honey_bees_colony_collapse_pesticid…). These pesticides, of course, are always promoted in the name of “science!” It’s better living through chemistry, remember?

In fact, if you take an honest look at what threatens our civilization and our planet today, it’s always something done in the name of science!

Death by science

• Toxic pesticides that kill the soils and rivers? “Science!”

• Toxic chemical medications that kill humans and pollute downstream waters? “Scientific!”

• The mass poisoning of the population with a toxic combination of industrial waste products called “fluoride?” It’s all done for “science!”

• Nuclear bombs that have already decimated civilian populations? “Science!”

• Mammograms and other medical imaging devices that actuallycausecancer? “Scientific!”

• Chemotherapy poisons, “preventive” mastectomies, cancer radiation treatments? It’s all “scientific” of course.

• The mass mercury poisoning of children through dental amalgams? They call it “science-based dentistry!”

What’s clear from all this is that the human race is being murdered in the name of science.

But underneath that realization is an even more profound one: Much of the so-called “science” is really just fraudulent science that’s twisted, distorted and quacked up by greed-driven corporations.

Real science is the quest for understanding, not the quest for profit

Real science is a good thing, as it is based on the quest for knowledge. But today, there’s not much real science being conducted anymore. Most of what takes place iscorporate-driven sciencefor the purpose of gaining power and profits.

In medicine, for example, the search for new drugs is not about helping humanity; it’s about helping quarterly profits. But you already knew that. Only the most naive individuals today still believe Big Pharma cares about human beings.

In the world of GMOs, it’s not about actually “feeding the world” as is ridiculously claimed by its corrupt, criminal pushers; it’s actually about “owning the world” and using food as a weapon against the People of the world. He who controls the food supply eventually controls everything. Monsanto is hell bent on world domination, not world nourishment.

Vaccines, for their part, aren’t about actually preventing disease and enhancing the health of the public. Infectious disease prevention could be easily accomplished through sanitation improvements and low-cost vitamin D supplementation. Vaccines are really about two things: 1) Population control, 2) Repeat business for the drug industry due to all the vaccine damage caused by inoculations. (Vaccines damage the liver, kidneys, brain and intestines, among other organs.)

The “science” practiced today is a science of domination and control. It is almost never carried out for humanitarian purposes to benefit humankind. Even the entire intellectual property “ownership” system of patents and trademarks is set up to grant corporate monopolies over innovation, thereby denying the People access to such innovations. Intellectual property laws have been twisted and exploited by corporate giants to hijack the innovation process and use it to crush competition. All corporations ultimately want a global monopoly over their particular industry sectors.

Universities, which once conducted research to benefit humankind, now use taxpayer money to develop patentable chemicals that are then licensed to drug companies (or pesticide companies) in exchange for royalties that enrich the university.

As a result of such trends, “science” has come to mean corruption, dishonesty, greed and death. “Scientists” — the people who practice such science — are death engineers whose innovations may deliver hyped-up short-term benefits, but they often ultimately lead to long-term death and destruction. Roundup herbicide, for example, kills crop soils and encourages the development of pesticide-resistant “superweeds.” In the terrain of human biology, much the same ramification of death and destruction is happening with the widespread abuse of antibiotics and the alarming rise of MRSA and other “superbugs.”

Such “scientific” innovations were, of course, developed by well-meaning people who didn’t mean to cause widespread crop failures and antibiotic-resistant staph infections, but in doing so they only became experts in paving the road to Hell with good intentions.

Science is killing us. As a race, we are committing suicide by allowing science to dominate our medicine, agriculture and military industries. To the degree that we allow scientists to unleash their dangerous experiments onto the world without legitimate testing — and no, flu shot vaccines are never scientifically tested for long-term safety — we only accelerate the digging of our own graves. If we don’t learn to restrain the blind ambitions of arrogant scientists who are all too easily enticed by the chance to roll the dice in their “let’s play God” games, the blind pursuit of science without wisdom will only lead to our total destruction.

Because next we can count on the rise of the robot drones in the name of science — a new race of Terminator machines (unmanned AI drones) with the capability to mindlessly unleash bombs and bullets on civilian populations. Such drones will be developed in the name of “science,” of course, with all the predictable ego-driven fantasies of their geek-headed inventors who, with all their superior intellect, have still failed to study human history.

Even if the drones don’t get us, nanotechnology may yet spell our demise. Scientists are already running dangerous experiments with nanotechnology, and if just one such experiment results in a self-replicating nanotech “grey goo,” our entire world could be inescapably devoured by self-replicating microscopic machines that make GMOs seem tame by comparison. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_goo)

If we are to survive, we must force science to be bound by the Precautionary Principle

If we are to survive the endless greed, arrogance and ambition of today’s scientists — whose actions more closely resemble little children with flamethrowers than mature, adult individuals — we must force science to abide bythe Precautionary Principle.

The Precautionary Principle means that when we experiment with nature,we force ourselves to err on the side of caution, not profits. In practical terms, that means we should never unleash self-replicating genetic programs (GMOs) into the open world and let experimental seeds get blown across the continent by the wind.

We should never build highly radioactive nuclear power facilities that require power to run pumps in order to avoid a nuclear meltdown. Such facilities must be designed to run in agrid-down, self-shutdownformat that defaults to an unmanned state of non-criticality.

We should never unleash synthetic chemicals across the world’s crops and soils to kill insects, not knowing the long-term ramifications of such neurotoxins being introduced into the ecosystem.

The Precautionary Principle recognizes that human civilization is fragile, and science-sounding experiments can run amok in ways that simply cannot be anticipated by even the most brilliant and well-intentioned human minds.

Technology without wisdom is suicide

In the name of science, humanity has developed remarkable technologies. But as a species, humankind operates as infants in terms of wisdom and maturity. We are worse than children with flamethrowers –we are children with nukes!

A typical top-level scientist working for a corporation or a government body is ethically under-developed, lacking wisdom and perspective. They may be geniuses in their absurdly narrow realms of technical expertise, but they have no understanding of the importance ofrestraining the application of scientific pursuitsin the real world. Even now, scientists working at the Large Hadron Collider near Geneva are playing God with the universe, attempting to discover what they ridiculously call new “particles” even though such particles are not even particles in the first place. (http://www.naturalnews.com/025486_article_science_WHO.html)

In their quest for what they claim to be scientific knowledge, they are playing a dangerous game with our world, risking the very small but catastrophically fatal chance that their experiment might create a planet-consuming black hole that devours our world. Sound like science fiction? Most conventional scientists dismiss such ideas as pure nonsense. But their colleagues also told us that nuclear power was safe; that GMOs are safe; that pesticides are safe; that fluoride is safe; that vaccines are safe; and on and on. If there’s one thing we can scientifically establish as truth in our world today, it’s that scientists vastly and naively overestimate the safety of their own experiments,often in ways that cause widespread harm, death or destruction to innocent people around them.

Scientists are a danger to our world, in other words. And they need to be immediately restrained before they utterly destroy the very conditions on our planet that make human life possible.

History has taught us that scientists have very little ability to anticipate the long-term effects of their present-day actions. The nature of the universe is more complex than even the most brilliant scientist can imagine, it turns out, and when they start to play God with the natural world, unexpected things can and do occur. Murphy was an optimist, as the saying goes. Not only will things go wrong if they can go wrong; they will go wrong in catastrophic ways that simply cannot be anticipated.

The sixth mass extinction on our planet may be caused by science itself

There have been five mass extinction events on our planet, the most recent being theCretaceous-Paleogene extinction event(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous%E2%80%93Paleogene_extinction_…).

The sixth such event may be caused by science itself, either with a global radiological release, a runaway genetic pollution event, a nanotechnology disaster, an AI rise to power, or something far more sinister that we can’t even anticipate. We already stand on the verge of being inundated with radiation from Fukushima — a precarious situation upon which “the fate of the world” now rests. What other great threats to our survival have been committed in the name of science?

Until the Wild West, “anything goes” approach to science as practiced today is held in check by a sense of self preservation, the human race will remain at grave risk of becoming an inadvertent casualty of well-intentioned science gone terribly wrong.

Let us take steps now to halt the life-threatening science that has put us all at risk and pull ourselves back from the brink of scientific suicide.

The top ten “scientific” projects threatening the survival of the human race right now

#1) Nuclear power (Fukushima in particular)
#2) GMOs (self-replicating genetic pollution)
#3) Nanotechnology (self-replicating microscopic machines)
#4) Bioweapons (self-replicating microscopic weapons)
#5) Atmospheric experiments (HAARP and high-altitude spraying)
#6) Artificial Intelligence (AI, when coupled with killer drone hardware)
#7) Particle accelerator physics experiments (Large Hadron Collider)
#8) Pollinator disruption chemicals (synthetic pesticides that destroy honey bee colonies)
#9) Nuclear weapons
#10) Weaponized vaccines (live cross-species viral material being injected into human targets)

 

P Gosselin
NoTricksZone
Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Update: Now at Fox News!

Eventually the sham is going to give, and the latest letter signed by 50 NASA experts, with more than 1000 years of combined professional experience, is a sure sign the gig’s about over.

…..unproven remarks…..not substantiated…..hundreds of well-known climate scientists…..tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief…..science is NOT settled…..unbecoming of NASA’s history…..advocacy of an extreme position…..damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA…..even the reputation of science itself…”

Letters to the top don’t get any more blunt than that.

And how many tens of billions have these crackpots at GISS cost the taxpayers?

Here’s the letter:

March 28, 2012
The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
NASA Administrator
NASA Headquarters
Washington, D.C. 20546-0001
Dear Charlie,

We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.

The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.

As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.

For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.

Thank you for considering this request.

Sincerely,

(Attached signatures)

CC: Mr. John Grunsfeld, Associate Administrator for Science
CC: Ass Mr. Chris Scolese, Director, Goddard Space Flight Center

Ref: Letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, dated 3-26-12, regarding a request for NASA to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims that human produced CO2 is having a catastrophic impact on climate change.

1. /s/ Jack Barneburg, Jack – JSC, Space Shuttle Structures, Engineering Directorate, 34 years
2. /s/ Larry Bell – JSC, Mgr. Crew Systems Div., Engineering Directorate, 32 years
3. /s/ Dr. Donald Bogard – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 41 years
4. /s/ Jerry C. Bostick – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 23 years
5. /s/ Dr. Phillip K. Chapman – JSC, Scientist – astronaut, 5 years
6. /s/ Michael F. Collins, JSC, Chief, Flight Design and Dynamics Division, MOD, 41 years
7. /s/ Dr. Kenneth Cox – JSC, Chief Flight Dynamics Div., Engr. Directorate, 40 years
8. /s/ Walter Cunningham – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 7, 8 years
9. /s/ Dr. Donald M. Curry – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Leading Edge, Thermal Protection Sys., Engr. Dir., 44 years
10. /s/ Leroy Day – Hdq. Deputy Director, Space Shuttle Program, 19 years
11. /s/ Dr. Henry P. Decell, Jr. – JSC, Chief, Theory & Analysis Office, 5 years
12. /s/Charles F. Deiterich – JSC, Mgr., Flight Operations Integration, MOD, 30 years
13. /s/ Dr. Harold Doiron – JSC, Chairman, Shuttle Pogo Prevention Panel, 16 years
14. /s/ Charles Duke – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 16, 10 years
15. /s/ Anita Gale
16. /s/ Grace Germany – JSC, Program Analyst, 35 years
17. /s/ Ed Gibson – JSC, Astronaut Skylab 4, 14 years
18. /s/ Richard Gordon – JSC, Astronaut, Gemini Xi, Apollo 12, 9 years
19. /s/ Gerald C. Griffin – JSC, Apollo Flight Director, and Director of Johnson Space Center, 22 years
20. /s/ Thomas M. Grubbs – JSC, Chief, Aircraft Maintenance and Engineering Branch, 31 years
21. /s/ Thomas J. Harmon
22. /s/ David W. Heath – JSC, Reentry Specialist, MOD, 30 years
23. /s/ Miguel A. Hernandez, Jr. – JSC, Flight crew training and operations, 3 years
24. /s/ James R. Roundtree – JSC Branch Chief, 26 years
25. /s/ Enoch Jones – JSC, Mgr. SE&I, Shuttle Program Office, 26 years
26. /s/ Dr. Joseph Kerwin – JSC, Astronaut, Skylab 2, Director of Space and Life Sciences, 22 years
27. /s/ Jack Knight – JSC, Chief, Advanced Operations and Development Division, MOD, 40 years
28. /s/ Dr. Christopher C. Kraft – JSC, Apollo Flight Director and Director of Johnson Space Center, 24 years
29. /s/ Paul C. Kramer – JSC, Ass.t for Planning Aeroscience and Flight Mechanics Div., Egr. Dir., 34 years
30. /s/ Alex (Skip) Larsen
31. /s/ Dr. Lubert Leger – JSC, Ass’t. Chief Materials Division, Engr. Directorate, 30 years
32. /s/ Dr. Humbolt C. Mandell – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Program Control and Advance Programs, 40 years
33. /s/ Donald K. McCutchen – JSC, Project Engineer – Space Shuttle and ISS Program Offices, 33 years
34. /s/ Thomas L. (Tom) Moser – Hdq. Dep. Assoc. Admin. & Director, Space Station Program, 28 years
35. /s/ Dr. George Mueller – Hdq., Assoc. Adm., Office of Space Flight, 6 years
36. /s/ Tom Ohesorge
37. /s/ James Peacock – JSC, Apollo and Shuttle Program Office, 21 years
38. /s/ Richard McFarland – JSC, Mgr. Motion Simulators, 28 years
39. /s/ Joseph E. Rogers – JSC, Chief, Structures and Dynamics Branch, Engr. Directorate, 40 years
40. /s/ Bernard J. Rosenbaum – JSC, Chief Engineer, Propulsion and Power Division, Engr. Dir., 48 years
41. /s/ Dr. Harrison (Jack) Schmitt – JSC, Astronaut Apollo 17, 10 years
42. /s/ Gerard C. Shows – JSC, Asst. Manager, Quality Assurance, 30 years
43. /s/ Kenneth Suit – JSC, Ass’t Mgr., Systems Integration, Space Shuttle, 37 years
44. /s/ Robert F. Thompson – JSC, Program Manager, Space Shuttle, 44 years
45. /s/ Frank Van Renesselaer – Hdq., Mgr. Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, 15 years
46. /s/ Dr. James Visentine – JSC Materials Branch, Engineering Directorate, 30 years
47. /s/ Manfred (Dutch) von Ehrenfried – JSC, Flight Controller; Mercury, Gemini & Apollo, MOD, 10 years
48. /s/ George Weisskopf – JSC, Avionics Systems Division, Engineering Dir., 40 years
49. /s/ Al Worden – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 15, 9 years
50. /s/ Thomas (Tom) Wysmuller – JSC, Meteorologist, 5 years

1. Boeing announces plans to send its own astronauts into space
2. NASA Releases New Spacecraft Images of Apollo Landing Sites
3. Poor America: Cash-strapped NASA needs to hire out parts of Kennedy SC
4. Former NASA climate scientist pleads guilty to contract fraud
5. NASA’s Chief Climate Scientist Calls for Climate Change Civil Disobedience
6. NASA sells shuttle PCs without wiping secret data
7. Federally Funded NASA ‘Educates’ Children About Global Warming on ‘Climate Kids’ Web Site
8. Nasa scientists braced for ‘solar tsunami’ to hit earth
9. Scientists say hackers skewed climate-change emails
10. Inhofe Weighs Criminal Probe of Scientists’ Climate Change E-Mails
11. NASA chief blasts US space policy in leaked email
12. Huge Defunct Satellite Falling to Earth Faster Than Expected, NASA Says

 

Rowena Mason
London Telegraph
February 1, 2012

 

EDUCATE YOURSELF ON SMART METER AND BC GOVERNMENT & BC HYDRO PROPAGANDA AND FRAUD.




















Satire video where tax payers moneys is being used for a fraud program that doesn't save energy...Hitler Rants about BC Hydro Smart Meters




BC mayors consider moratorium on smart meters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV6T9L6I2RQ&feature=related



Victoria Concerned About Smart Meters



Former BC Premier Bill Vander Zalm Talks About Smart Meters

This is the OFFICIAL website for the Initiative Petition to Stop Smart Meters in British Columbia. By pre-registering yourself you will ensure that you will be contacted when the OFFICIAL Petition is launched under the BC Recall and Initiative Act. Former BC Premier Bill Vander Zalm Talks About Smart Meters - http://stopsmartmeters.ca/

Smart Meter Slavery

Smart Meters have no energy saving properties- their sole purpose is to change your behavior.

Cassandra Anderson
Infowars.com
August 6, 2011

Smart meters are radio frequency microwave meters that communicate with the Smart Grid. The Smart Grid is a transmission system that delivers electricity to from power plants to distribution substations and then from the substations it is delivered to homes and businesses.

The federal Department of Energy (DOE) stated purpose of the Smart Grid is to reduce carbon emissions. Note to DOE: man-made global warming is a lie- go ask NASA, CERN and 30,000 independent scientists.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is beneficial to plants- why do you think greenhouses pipe in carbon? Because it makes plants and crops more robust. According to Dr, Michael Coffman, a 500% increase in CO2 would only benefit plants and animals. It is absurd to consider CO2 a pollutant!

The Smart Grid is being used to promote green energy/clean energy/renewable energy. Because global warming (climate change) has been so thoroughly discredited, global warming policies and regulations are now being forced on us under the banner of green, clean and renewable energy. Global warming is a tool of Agenda 21 Sustainable Development, the overarching blueprint for depopulation and total control.

Water and natural gas Smart Meters are scheduled to launch next year. Again, the stated purpose is conservation of resources based on phony global warming myths. Smart Meters for water are particularly disturbing because there is a master kill switch on the grid and water is essential for life every day.

THE SMART GRID/ SMART METER SCAM

1. Smart meters monitor you, your appliances and energy usage minute-by-minute. Smart Meters have no energy saving properties- their sole purpose is to change your behavior.

2. Smart Meters communicate with the Smart Grid which portions out energy loads and discourages use during peak hours. Smart Grids have the capability of turning the power off to your home, street and city. The Smart Grid is promoted for the following reasons:

* Save energy- this can be accomplished by charging you more, particularly during peak hours.

* Ensure privacy- this is a lie, the purpose is to snoop on you: Smart Meters and people who hack into them can tell when you’re not home.

* Shrink bills- this is another lie as most people see an increase in charges for these dangerous devices.

* Improved security- a centralized system is more vulnerable to damage when hacked or attacked.

3. Super Grids: Most states are on a consolidated Super Grid managed by the Department of Energy(DOE).

The DOE received $30 billion in funding from Obama’s stimulus package to implement tyrannical global warming policies like Smart Grids that are ultimately controlled by the federal government. The Super Grid has a backdoor kill switch that could cut electricity to entire states with the flick of a switch.

California lost its energy independence after the Enron debacle; when Enron was banished, California joined the DOE Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) Super Grid that “services” 15 states. This occurred after Enron soaked California for $9 billion by interrupting power one transmission line (Path 15)! Path 15 was upgraded for $300 million.

4. Smart Grids are a federal program, so the States can reject Smart Grids. But many states took the stimulus money bribes and made secret contracts with the federal government.

Obama’s stimulus earmarked $4.5 billion for Smart Grid implementation. The top 10 states that sold out are California, Colorado, Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas. Obama’s stimulus, financed by your tax dollars, is being used to kill you as Smart Meters emit RF microwave radiation and dirty electricity.

5. Smart Grids are expected to generate $170 billion in worldwide sales by 2014.

The biggest supporters of the Smart Grid are corporations who stand to benefit from building the infrastructure: IBM, GE, Hewlett Packard, Siemens, Google, Toshiba, Microsoft, ABB and Cisco.

Environmental organizations such as the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) also support Smart grids. Most (if not all) of the large environmental organizations are controlled opposition that pretend to act on the behalf of the environment but are really funded by the controlling elite who fund them- NRDC was created through the Ford Foundation.

6. Technocracy is government by scientists, engineers and experts. The endgame for Smart Grids is control through measuring and monitoring your every move. Patrick Wood explains in detail the history and intent of Technocratic control and an economy based on resources. Technocracy through Smart Grids can only exist as long through measuring and monitoring individuals and a persistent belief in the global warming fairy tale. Wood’s articles can be read here:

http://www.augustforecast.com/2010/03/03/smart-grid-the-implementation-of-technocracy-2/

http://www.augustforecast.com/2011/06/15/technocracys-endgame-global-smart-grid/

A Technocratic economy can use excessive charges as a punishment for people who use too many resources. Incrementally, this system could conceivably turn into a resource based negative economy where people are given daily, weekly or monthly rations of water and energy.

Patrick Wood also explains that Capitalism will be blamed for the destruction of our economy. The Federal Reserve fiat money system and its legal tender laws are the opposite of a Capitalist free market. Corporate monopolies can only exist through government regulations and Public-Private Partnerships are on the rise- these entities are the opposite of free market Capitalism. A true free market has zero regulations EXCEPT to protect people’s lives, liberty and property (the proper role of government). So, what we have now is the opposite of free market Capitalism.

Because people are waking up to the illusion of the fiat money system based on money created out of thin air, the bankers are plotting to move toward a resource based economy. Technocracy is a highly controlled form of negative exchange based on resources.

SMART METER HEALTH EFFECTS

Rob States’ excellent presentation ‘The Dark Side of Smart Meters’ covers the potentially lethal effects of Smart Meters as they emit both RF microwave radiation and dirty electricity that have been shown to cause cancer and heart disease

He references the ‘Childhood Cancer in the Vicinity of of the Sutro Tower, San Francisco’ study that can be read here:

http://www.neilcherry.com/documents/90_r3_EMR_Sutro_Paper_09-02.pdf

Dirty electricity or electric pollution is another danger that can lead to cancer, heart disease, diabetes and suicide. Dr. Sam Milham, author of ‘Dirty Electricity’, is a physician and epidemiologist who has studied this issue extensively. You can read his recent papers about the health effects of dirty electricity at his website Sam Milham.com.

Smart Meters, Dirty Electricity and Disease

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ci5GGqEPecE&feature=player_embedded

Smart Meters likely emit 100 times the amount of cumulative whole body exposure to microwave radiation than that of a cell phone. You can read an article and watch a video with Daniel Hirsch, a nuclear policy expert at UC Santa Cruz who explains how tests were manipulated here.

Most utility industry studies only account for one Smart Meter on a home, but with the addition of natural gas and water Smart Meters, the risks are tripled. And imagine the effects from clusters of Smart Meters on apartment houses!

CONCLUSION

The federal government has enormous control over the States with the DOE’s Super Grid. The federal government spent billion in bribe money to States to accept Smart Grids and Smart Meters in opposition of public health and interest. Huge technology corporations stand to benefit by $170 billion a year. Utilities will make a killing.

These facts make our future look very bleak.

However, without Smart Meters, the Smart Grid system falls apart.

* Man-made global warming is a lie, and thanks to NASA, we have further proof that the UN’s climate computer model “science” is false. Global warming is the primary excuse for Smart Meters.

* Public awareness and is growing. 45 Local governments in California oppose Smart Meters and 10 of these cities and counties have ordinances banning them.

* California’s Public Utility Commission (CPUC) claims authority over over Smart Grids and Smart Meters. The individuals on the CPUC board can be sued for making unseen contracts with the federal government, utilities and corporations.

* How Governments just think they are above people's rights and freedoms and will ram anything into place without the people's concent.

BC Hydro will proceed with its smart meter program regardless of growing municipal government opposition, Energy Minister Rich Coleman said Tuesday.

As local government officials at the Union of B.C. Municipalities Convention grilled BC Hydro officials over why the utility is proceeding with the controversial $930-million infrastructure upgrade program despite concerns from residents, Coleman said the program is here to stay.

“We continue what we are supposed to do, and that is to install smart meters in British Columbia,” he said. “We have already made the investment, we’ve already passed the legislation in the Clean Energy Act. We have invested [as much as] $400 million so far and a resolution [by the UBCM] is not going to stop us.”

The province has insisted BC Hydro convert and upgrade its meter system to devices that can be read remotely. It estimates the program will result in a net savings of $520 million over 20 years and lead to improved conservation of electricity. It will also put a significant damper on electricity theft from marijuana-growing operations.

Local politicians at a breakfast seminar expressed a repeated theme that their ratepayers have concerns about potential health impacts from the radio frequency (RF) emitting devices. Others worried the meters will collect more private information than simple usage statistics.

Others believe BC Hydro will eventually use the meters to bring in “time of use” rates that, while offering cheaper rates in non-peak hours, will dramatically raise rates in peak evening hours. Several pointed to the experience of residents in California and Ontario, whose monthly bills rose by as much as 80 per cent because of the time-scaled rates.

“In respect to issues in our community, this one has been pretty tremendous,” said Chris Burger, Parksville’s acting mayor. The municipality has its own utility but buys power from BC Hydro and is part of the smart meter program.

“We are getting letters being sent to our utility from customers saying they will refuse to accept smart meters,” he told the session. “They have also said they will refuse to allow personnel from entering their property to install these meters.”

A number of people believe the devices can cause cancer because they emit radio signals. But BC Hydro project manager Gary Murphy said the meters produce a tiny fraction of energy compared to cellphones and other ubiquitous wireless devices.

He said B.C. residents won’t be allowed to opt out of the program or use non-smart meter equipment, although BC Hydro is willing to consider moving the meters elsewhere on a property. “We continue to have a dialogue with those folks and we are trying to answer all their questions,” he said. “We are not in a place where we are ready to throw the gauntlet down and play hardball.”

Wendy Bales, a director for the Fraser Valley Regional District, said some of her constituents are so angry and worried they are considering “going off the grid” by installing their own power generation equipment.

Under questioning from Saanich Coun. Leif Wergeland, Murphy acknowledged BC Hydro never consulted with the public before buying the meters. He said the province’s Clean Energy Act mandated that the utility begin the modernization program.

Murphy said the province is not bringing in “time of use” rates, something Coleman reinforced with reporters later.

Asked why there is a backlash against the program, Murphy blamed part of it on “the anti-RF specialty groups that grew out of Northern California.”

jefflee@vancouversun.com

twitter.com/sunciviclee

B.C. Greens want smart-meter program stopped

Privacy Commissioner to investigate smart meters

New 'smart' meters will cost jobs, create waste: CUPE

www.citizensforsafetechnology.org

read more ...

---

News Stories on Smart Meters that cause damage

Educate yourself on Smart Meters and what happens when home-owers get damage done to their private property within their home and who pays.

Was smart meter to blame for fried fridge? -

http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/134461708.html

 

BCLocalNews - Mario Bartel
Irene Haraga believes a power surge that occurred when a new BC Hydro smart meter was installed at her house destroyed some of her appliances like a ...

Smart-meter battle may involve recall bid‎ Victoria Times Colonist
Activists want referendum on BC Hydro smart meters‎ Straight.com
Public action on BC Hydro smart meters‎ CKNW News Talk 980

PG&E SmartMeters: Regulators offer way to opt out -

San Francisco Chronicle - David R. Baker - 1 day ago

PG&E, California's largest utility, has faced a persistent rebellion against SmartMeters, driven in large part by people who believe the signals from cell ...

Marin SmartMeter opponents blast proposal to charge for opt-outs‎ Marin Independent-Journal
SmartMeter opponents unfazed by opt-out option; local group says ...‎ San Jose Mercury News

Some Naperville residents refuse Smart Meter alternative
Chicago Daily Herald - Justin Kmitch - 8 hours ago

AP By Justin Kmitch “Not In My Back Yard” has taken on a literal meaning for several Smart Meter opponents in Naperville. ...

Could smart meters be blamed for poor WIFI signal?‎ FuelFix (blog)

Seeking the truth about smart meters effects on health: Accurate ...
BCLocalNews
8) So how did each responsible person in British Columbia form an opinion about the smart meter so far? Did you consult science and health experts on the ...

Regulators review plan to disable 'smart' meters - San Jose Mercury News

PG&E suggested a similar payment plan in March after resistance to smart meters led several communities to place moratoriums on the devices

State hears lots of complaints about NV Energy's new smart meters - Las Vegas Sun - Cy Ryan

 

Smart meters blamed for Wi-Fi router traffic jam - CNET (blogMartin LaMonica - A smart meter being installed. This is not one of the same meters installed by Central ...

More Hurdles for Smart Meters - Connected World Magazine

Smart meters blamed for Wi-Fi interference - FierceCIO

Smart meters blamed for Wi-Fi, garage opener interference -‎ Register

Smart Meters Blamed for Electronics Interference in Maine - SmartMeters - Maine's Office of the Public Advocate has released a statement saying the smart meters deployed by Central Maine Power (CMP) is causing interference with a ...

Even With Wi-Fi Interference, Meter Opt Out Not Popular - Greentech Media (blog)

Smart meters a stupid profit grab - BCLocalNews
Time of use rates will be implemented almost immediately after smart meters are all installed. Like every jurisdiction where they've been installed, ...

Conservatives call on province to end 'ill-advised' smart meter ...‎ Merritt News

Further News on Smart meters

http://www.google.ca

---

 

Ethan Huff
Infowars.com
November 29, 2011

At its recent board meeting in Bangladesh, the GAVI Alliance, formerly known as the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations, announced plans to bring the deadly human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines Gardasil (Merck & Co.) and Cervarix (GlaxoSmithKline) into the third world. A pro-vaccination group backed by the World Bank, UNICEF, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the vaccine industry, GAVI’s stated goal is to vaccinate 240 million children by 2015.

As many as two million women and girls in nine unidentified developing countries could soon receive one of the two HPV vaccines, even though HPV is potentially linked to only one percent, of all cervical cancers, according to some reports (http://washingtonexaminer.com/node/…). The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), however, has stated that “HPV is not associated with cervical cancer” at all (http://www.naturalnews.com/022404.html).

And yet the vaccine industry through its various “nonprofit” and government partnership continues to push the deadly vaccine on young girls, women, and now even young boys around the world, despite the fact that it does not work and can cause horrific side effects. According to the latest figures released by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Gardasil alone has caused more than 20,000 adverse events and 71 known deaths since it was first unveiled (http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/va…).

These figures are actually higher when taking into account the 26 additional deaths concealed in US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) documents that were recently exposed by Judicial Watch, a public watchdog group (http://www.infowars.com/uncovered-f…). SaneVax, a vaccine group that tracks HPV vaccine cases, says there have actually been more than 23,300 adverse events and 103 deaths caused by HPV vaccines, to date (http://sanevax.org/).

With all this in mind, it is concerning, to say the least, that GAVI is advocating that the poorest women and children in the world be subjected to this chemical poison. Nevertheless, the group is reportedly working on a deal with both Merck and GSK to get the vaccines at a reduced rate, and the UN World Bank will be issuing bonds to countries in order to fund the whole HPV vaccine campaign.

A GAVI press release also states that the group will push rubella vaccines along with the HPV vaccines. The goal is to vaccinate 588 million children against rubella by 2015 (http://www.gavialliance.org/library…).

Sources for this article include:

http://old.news.yahoo.com/s/ap/2011…

This article originally appeared on Natural News.

HEAD LINE NEWS LINKS

Vaccines and foreign aid: a shot in the arm that will be felt all over the world

Mexico to give HPV vaccine to all girls from 2012

Gardasil Exposed: Deadly vaccine pushed on millions of young boys and girls worldwide

Bill Gates promises $10 billion for vaccines

3 Girls Dead, Others Hospitalized After Gardasil HPV Vaccine

Are MMR vaccines dangerous for children?

Washington Post: Government May Have to Waste Millions of H1N1 Vaccines

Swine flu: Ministers ‘preparing to offload millions of unwanted vaccines’

Drug firms cut vaccine prices to the developing world

Pig virus contaminates rotavirus vaccines, but FDA says no problem

Vaccines Found to Cause Diabetes in Children

HPV Vaccine: It’s Not Just for Girls Anymore

 

Daily Mail
November 27, 2011

A group of scientists is pushing to publish research about how they created a man-made flu virus that could potentially wipe out civilisation.

The deadly virus is a genetically tweaked version of the H5N1 bird flu strain, but is far more infectious and could pass easily between millions of people at a time.

The research has caused a storm of controversy and divided scientists, with some saying it should never have been carried out.

Read more

Head Line News

H1N1 Virus: Manufactured or Result of “Human Error”?

Scientists Weaponize Bird Flu, Consider Releasing Results to Create Bioweapon

Millions of Computers Hit by Virus Across China

Western surge in obesity may have been caused by a virus

Container of swine virus explodes on Swiss train

Swine Flu Virus Not So New, Study Finds

CDC Mixes H1N1, H5N1 Viruses in Tests

‘Accidental’ Contamination Of Vaccine With Live Avian Flu Virus Virtually Impossible

Potential Risk to Blood Supply Probed

Deadly Hybrid Flu Possible

In Lyon we try to cross the H1N1 virus and influenza H5N1de

Baxter: Product contained live bird flu virus

 

Mike Adams,
Natural News
November 23, 2011

What corporate-driven “science” has in mind for the future of humanity is far different from the dreamy utopian landscape that’s been portrayed by the mainstream media. To hear the corporate-run media tell it, science is always “good” for humanity. Scientific achievements are always called “advances” and not “setbacks,” even though many of them have proven to be disastrous for humanity (atomic bombs, for example, or GMOs).

While pure science is, indeed, a necessary component of any civilization which seeks to expand its understanding of the universe, what we see dominating the landscape today isn’t pure science butcorporate-driven “science”that only seeks to accelerate corporate profits, not human understanding. And with that corporate-slanted science comes a whole new era of truly terrifying technologies that we may soon see become reality in our world.

Here, I’ve compiled a list of ten future technologies that might be used to strip away your freedoms and enslave you to the corporate globalist masters, all under the label of “science.”

#1) Organ harvesting from genetically modified, patented pigs

Need a replacement heart or lung? No worries, mate! Monsanto will grow you a new one using a genetically modified, trans-species pig (patent pending) that was raised on GMO animal feed and subjected to organ harvesting while it was still alive in order to keep the organs “fresh.”

Your government-approved, Medicare-funded transplant will be handled by one of the top U.S. hospitals, which are, even today, deeply engaged in black market organ trafficking and illegal transplantations.

#2) “Behavioral vaccines” that rewire your brain to eliminate dissent

Disobedience is a disease! And the “cure” for disobedience (or Oppositional Defiance Disorder, as they call it) will be a new “vaccine” that biologically rewires your brain to make you more socially acceptable to the controllers.

It will be called a “behavioral vaccine” even though, in reality, it’s just a chemical lobotomy. This technology will be a cornerstone of the global police state, which will have no tolerance for independent thinking or critical thought of any kind, especially against the state.

#3) Centralized, remote monitoring of all your health statistics and vital signs by the police state

Think your medical records are really private? Think again: Even now, the U.S. government maintains a secret centralized bank of blood taken from children at birth. In the near future, citizens will be implanted with biometric monitoring chips that relay information back to the government about your pulse, respiration, and the presence of either illegal drugs or legalized pharmaceuticals (which are often the very same chemicals as illegal drugs, just re-branded as a medication).

These chips will be used by the government to enforce people taking their medications. They will also be used to locate and arrest those who smoke a little pot or take addictive substances without a prescription.

But most importantly, these chips will be used to monitor nutritional levels and make sure no one attains a high level of vitamin D, for example, which promotes clear thinking and strong cognitive function (http://www.naturalnews.com/029190_v…). Under scientific dictatorship, the sheeple must be kept in a state ofchronic nutritional deficiencyin order to be easily controlled. This will all be sold to the public as a way for the government to monitor their “safety” because, the government will claim, “Too much vitamin D can be dangerous!” So they will set the upper safety limits to the lower threshold of cognitive awakening, making sure that everyone remains in a mental stupor as they live out their state-run lives.

#4) The total secrecy of all food ingredients, sources and places of origin

As the food industry is increasingly invaded by junk science (GMOs, anyone?), efforts will increase tohide all the chemical ingredientsin food products and rename dangerous-sounding chemicals into nice-sounding chemicals.

The Corn Refiners Association is already trying to rename “High Fructose Corn Syrup” to “corn sugar.” (http://www.naturalnews.com/029748_h…)Aspartame is now going to be called “AminoSweet,” and MSG has been renamed things like “yeast extract” or “Torula yeast powder.”

But it’s going to get far worse as fraudulent science accelerates food industry deceptions. Expect to see preservatives like “sodium benzoate” renamed as things like, “Freshiness crystals.” Or “artificial colors” might be described as “Fortified with pretty colors.”

Above all, the food industry wants to hidewhereits foods come from,howthey are made, andwhat’sin them, because all three of those categories are bad news for your health.

#5) The complete criminalization of home-produced foods and medicines, forcing total reliance on factory food production

Speaking of food, corrupt “scientists” will soon insist that growing your own food is extremely dangerous because you might grow e.coli in your garden! With such absurd justifications, home gardening will be completely outlawed in many towns, and those who try to secretly grow tomatoes will be arrested and imprisoned as if they were heroin smugglers.

The idea of all this is to make the population completely dependent on centralized factory food production, in the same way the population is currently dependent on centralized electricity and centralized fossil fuels. This will all be justified with the help of “scientists” who claim that factory-produced food is safer for you because it’s all pasteurized, irradiated and fumigated.

#6) The unleashing of a global bioweapon pandemic through seasonal flu shots

Whereas vaccines were once intended to prevent disease, they are now being increasinglyweaponizedand engineered to spread disease, which is why most of the people who get the flu each winter are the very same people who routinely take flu shots.

In the near future, as the globalists decide the world population has reached its upper tolerable limit, a live “population control” virus will be engineered right into the vaccines, followed by an aggressive vaccine push that even offers to pay people to receive flu shots. (Get a flu shot, earn $25!)

The whole scheme, of course, is nothing more than a population control measure designed to eliminate all the lower-IQ people on the planet who are stupid enough to allow themselves to be injected with biological weapons packaged and sold as vaccines. Effectively, it’s really a eugenics program that the globalists believe will save the human race from the rise of stupidity (no matter what the cost in human suffering).

#7) Total government control over your reproduction and the genetic code of your “offspring”

Copulating with the person of your choice and producing your own “random” offspring will no longer be allowed under the scientific police state. Reproduction must be carefully controlled through licensing and regulation to make sure that no unexpected results occur.

Before having children, parents will need to apply to the government forpermissionto reproduce, at which point they will be genetically and cognitively profiled, then granted a reproduction classification status that must be strictly followed to avoid imprisonment.

People who show rebellious tendencies and speak out against the state will be denied reproduction “privileges.” Only the most obedient, white-skinned, do-gooder mind slaves will be granted reproduction privileges, and they will gladly copulate and raise yet more babies to be sacrificed to the state as the next generation of mind slaves.

#8) Wireless brain implants that can be remotely activated by law enforcement to make entire crowds of people passive

The future of “science” involves all sorts of electronics implanted into the human body. One of the most convenient ones will be the “pacification chip” that will be forced upon citizens along with “money chips” that they use to pay for everything (cash will be outlawed, and using cash will be seen as a terrorist activity).

The pacification chip can be remotely activated by the government through cell tower bursts — or through hand-held units issued to police and law enforcement commanders — to instantly pacify large crowds of protesters or rioters. Are the students protesting about free speech again? Activate the pacification chip, and they’ll all lay down on the lawn and daydream for a while.

Are revolutionaries marching on the capitol and trying to overthrow the government? Activate the pacification chip, and your tyrannical dictatorship is safe!

Such chips may also be used to “excite” the brain at times when it is also politically useful. For example, when another terrorist attack is staged on U.S. soil, the “excitation chips” can be activated across the population to get people riled up and calling for war! (And that’s the whole point of false flag attacks, of course.)

#9) The genetic engineering and breeding of obedient super soldiers

In the far future, battlefield soldiers will actually be humanoid-shaped robots equipped with firearms and body armor. Think “Terminator” model T-1000. That’s still a ways off, of course, given the incredible complexity of mobile power, robotic actuation technologies, vision recognition systems and artificial intelligence.

In the mean time, the most powerful nations of the world will pour R&D money intogrowing genetically modified super soldiers who are secretly birthed, raised and trained to be as robotic as possible. These super soldiers will be genetically engineered with peak performance attributes (high blood oxygenation, large body frames, etc.) combined with small brains that can only process enough information to follow ordersbut neverquestionthem.

They will also be outfitted with numerous electronic implants, making them more cyborg than human. They will have vision implants attached to their retinas, for example, GPS chips wired to their brains, comm equipment wired into their ears, and built-in pain medication dispensers that flood their bodies with stimulant chemicals so they can keep fighting even after an arm gets blown off, for example.

#10) The electromagnetic activation of metals and nano-crystals injected into you through vaccines

Here’s a new one most people haven’t thought about: In addition to vaccines being used to spread infectious disease, they can also be used to inject humans with nano-crystals that are sized and tuned to resonate at certain frequencies, much like a radio crystal tunes in to a specific radio band.

Such nano-crystals may lie dormant in the bodies of the general public for years or even decades, but at some point the government can take over the radio towers with an “emergency” national transmission that broadcasts an activation signal at precisely the right wavelength to excite the nano-crystals already in peoples’ bodies. The results could be anything frommass insanityto massive outbreaks of violence (rioting, etc.) or just tens of millions of people instantly dropping dead. Any of those outcomes could then be exploited by the government to sell a cover story of a “terrorist attack” that requires even more government control over the population.

It could all be done in the name of “science”

Remember, this collection of 10 points is about possible future technologies that exemplify theabuse of scienceto empower tyrannical governments and corrupt industries. Thankfully, these ten examples have not come true yet, but several are well on their way to become reality in just the next few years.

Real science has an important role to play in any society, but I believe that science should serve the interests of the People, not the self-serving controllers who run globalist corporations and national governments. When science is used to dominate and enslave people rather than setting them free, it is a violation of one of the most fundamental truths throughout the universe: only through freedom (the freedom of ideas, freedom of questioning, freedom of discussion) can true understanding of our universe be achieved.

NaturalNews salutes the real scientists out there who pursue the betterment of human civilizationwithoutpunching a clock for all the evil corporations which abuse science for their own nefarious purposes.

 

Collecting and storing every newborn’s blood violates Genetic Privacy Act

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
November 18, 2011

In a long running case, a Supreme Court has ruled to limit the use of blood samples collected from newborns by the government.

The case has exposed the fact that there is an ongoing semi-covert movement by state and federal governments to claim ownership of every newborn baby’s DNA for the purpose of genetic research without the consent of individual citizens.

The Minnesota Court ruled Wednesday that the Minnesota Department of Health is violating the law in storing, using and disseminating newborn screening test results and newborn DNA.

Overruling a lower court’s decision, the state Supreme Court found that the samples are “Genetic Information” under the State Genetic Privacy Act, and held that “unless otherwise provided, the Department must have written informed consent to collect, use, store, or disseminate [the blood samples].”

In 2003, The Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom (CCHF), formerly known as The Citizens’ Council on Health Care (CCHC), discovered that The Minnesota Department of Health had been indefinitely storing the blood of newborns since the mid 1980s, and using the samples for purposes beyond the State’s newborn screening program since 1997.

The state treated the activity as an “opt out” program, whereby if the parents of the newborn infant do not specifically opt out of the process, the state presumes its has “informed consent” and that the parents have opted in.

Consequently, the DNA of nearly a million children is considered government property under Minnesota law.

Without the knowledge or consent of the person or their parents, the government has been selling the DNA for genetic research purposes.

In 2008, state Health Department officials began seeking exemption for the so called “DNA Warehouse” from Minnesota privacy law.

Essentially this would mean that eventually every person’s DNA would be collected at birth, warehoused by the state in what is known as a “genomic biobank”, and sold or given away to private or governmental genetic researchers, who may manipulate, alter or splice the DNA in any way they see fit. Hundreds of samples have already been used in government comissioned studies.

Such information would represent a goldmine to employers, insurance companies, medical institutions, and big pharma.

Under such conditions we are faced with the prospect of a society that is literally the mirror image of the nightmarish vision outlined by Aldous Huxley in his 1932 novel Brave New World, where individuals are categorized in a social hierarchy according to their genetic traits.

In a statement, Justice Helen M. Meyer, voicing the majority opinion in this week’s ruling, writes:

“The Genetic Privacy Act … restricts the collection, use, storage, and dissemination of blood samples collected pursuant to the newborn screening statutes…

“The newborn screening statutes provide an express exception to the Genetic Privacy Act only to the extent that the Department is authorized to administer newborn screening by testing the samples for heritable and congenital disorders, recording and reporting those test results, maintaining a registry of positive cases for the purpose of follow-up services, and storing those test results as required by federal law.”

The case was brought by 9-families who sued the Minnesota Department of Health for violation of the state genetic privacy law.

The following video shows the oral argument brought before the court back in March and breaks down the issue in much more detail:

In a press release concerning the court ruling, Twila Brase, president of CCHF writes:

“We are cheered by this good news, says. “When our organization discovered the state health department’s Baby DNA warehouse in 2003 and the use of newborn DNA for genetic research without parent consent, we determined to do all that we could to stop this practice. No state law expressly permits these activities.”

“We are pleased that these nine families were willing to sue the State of Minnesota,” adds Brase. “Their action and this decision now secures the genetic privacy rights and informed written consent rights of all Minnesota parents and newborn citizens.”

Ms. Brase has been warning of the ongoing move for a a number of years. In January 2007 she issued a written testimony to the Minnesota legislature on the unethical and hidden uses of harvested DNA by the state.

Watch Twila Brase explain the possible consequences of the pending DNA profiling legislation:

Though the Minnesota case has received recent public attention, such DNA harvesting is not restricted to that state and is being undertaken nationwide.

The National Conference of State Legislatures lists for all 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia, the various statutes or regulatory provisions under which newborns’ DNA is being collected.

DNA of newborns has been harvested, tested, stored and experimented with by all 50 states. In addition, all 50 states are now routinely providing these results to the Department of Homeland Security.

In April 2008, President Bush signed into law a bill which formerly announced the process that the federal government has been engaged in for years, screening the DNA of all newborn babies in the U.S. within six months of birth.

Described as a “national contingency plan” the justification for the law S. 1858, known as The Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act of 2007, is that it represents preparation for any sort of “public health emergency.”

The bill states that the federal government should “continue to carry out, coordinate, and expand research in newborn screening” and “maintain a central clearinghouse of current information on newborn screening… ensuring that the clearinghouse is available on the internet and is updated at least quarterly”.

Sections of the bill also make it clear that DNA may be used in genetic experiments and tests, both by the government and by researchers chosen to handle the DNA samples and the information that goes with them.

Read the full bill here.

Many have described the law as the first step towards the establishment of a national DNA database, like the one in the UK.

In 2006 and 2007, then Senator Obama filed legislation that would create a national DNA database. The same bill was filed by Sen. Patrick Kennedy in 2008. The bills required parental consent, but all three died in the Senate.

In certain states, authorities are required to destroy a child’s DNA sample if a parent demands they do so. Ludicrously, parents wishing to do this must fill in a form like this one from Texas.

In other states, parents have to put their request in writing, however, there is no legal requirement for states to destroy the samples.

The subject made national headlines last year as CNN’s Senior Medical Correspondent probed the issue:

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/health/2010/02/05/nr.phillips.gov.dna.cnn

The practice of taking DNA from all newborns is not limited to the U.S.

In the UK, a similar DNA harvesting program was rejected in 2005 by The Human Genetics Commission, who cited cost and ethical problems in a report to government ministers.

However, DNA profiling of all newborn babies has since been called for by lawmakers and senior police officers.

In December 2009, a Dublin hospital was revealed to have built a secret database containing the DNA of almost every person born in the country since 1984 without their knowledge.

The retention of newborn screening cards has also caused controversy in Australia and New Zealand where the DNA has been used by police to help to solve crimes. A sample in New Zealand was used to identify the father of a dead child against the wishes of the mother.

There is no doubt that the practice is in operation all over the developed world.

The Minnesota Supreme Court ruling is a small victory on this issue. However, unless this practice is further exposed, publicized, and taken to courts across the country, and indeed the world, we could find ourselves sleepwalking towards the basis for a new eugenics movement, the practice of “perfecting” the human race through genetic manipulation, previously endorsed by Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, and toyed with by the likes of Adolf Hitler.

 

The greatest public health threat can no longer be denied

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Infowars.com
Monday, November 14, 2011

The fact that the planet is being bombarded with chemicals from high-altitude spraying as part of numerous geoengineering programs being conducted by U.S. government agencies and universities that have been approved with no oversight whatsoever can no longer be denied.

The re-classification of global warming, a highly contentious and often scientifically fraudulent pseudo-science, as a “national security threat” has been exploited by governments as an excuse to play God, green lighting secret experiments on a massive scale that carry innumerable dangers to humans and their environment.

However, now that increasing awareness of geoengineering as a result of the chemtrails phenomenon has propagated widely, authorities are slowly being forced to disclose certain aspects of the program. We are now not far away from full disclosure of the true extent of geoengineering experimentation.

Scientists now admit that vapor trails from aeroplanes are creating “artificial clouds” that block out the sun. This is no longer a matter of debate. The chemtrail “conspiracy theorists” were proven correct.

Reading University’s Professor Keith Shine told the Daily Mail last year that the clouds “formed by aircraft fumes could linger ‘for hours’, depriving those areas under busy flight paths, such as London and the Home Counties, of summer sunshine.”

“Experts have warned that, as a result, the amount of sunlight hitting the ground could be reduced by as much as ten per cent. Professor Shine added: “Over the busiest areas in London and the South of England, this high-level cloud could cover the sky, turning bright sunshine into hazy conditions for the entire area. I expect the effects will get worse as the volume of air traffic increases.”

The report also makes reference to a 2009 Met Office study which found that high-level winds did not disperse contrails that later formed into clouds which covered an astonishing 20,000 miles.

Of course, only the completely naive would suggest that there is no connection between chemtrails that block out the sun, a phenomenon that has been ongoing for over a decade, and open calls on behalf of scientists to ‘reduce global warming’ by injecting the atmosphere with aerosols.

Mainstream science and academia has gone from dismissing chemtrails as a fantasy of paranoid conspiracy theorists to now accepting that they exist but claiming that they are natural and not artificially induced, despite numerous patents and scientific proposals that focus around using man-made dispersal of aerosols to alter the atmosphere.

The proposal to disperse sulphur dioxide in an attempt to reflect sunlight was discussed in a September 2008 London Guardian article entitled, Geoengineering: The radical ideas to combat global warming, in which Ken Caldeira, a leading climate scientist based at the Carnegie Institution in Stanford, California, promoted the idea of injecting the atmosphere with aerosols.

“One approach is to insert “scatterers” into the stratosphere,” states the article. “Caldeira cites an idea to deploy jumbo jets into the upper atmosphere and deposit clouds of tiny particles there, such as sulphur dioxide. Dispersing around 1m tonnes of sulphur dioxide per year across 10m square kilometres of the atmosphere would be enough to reflect away sufficient amounts of sunlight.”

Experiments similar to Caldeira’s proposal are already being carried out by U.S. government -backed scientists, such as those at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Savannah River National Laboratory in Aiken, S.C, who in 2009 began conducting studies which involved shooting huge amounts of particulate matter, in this case “porous-walled glass microspheres,” into the stratosphere.

The project is closely tied to an idea by Nobel Prize winner Paul Crutzen, who “proposed sending aircraft 747s to dump huge quantities of sulfur particles into the far-reaches of the stratosphere to cool down the atmosphere.”

In 2008, scientist Tim Flannery also warned that “mankind might need to pump sulphur into the atmosphere to survive,” adding that, “gas sulphur could be inserted into the earth’s stratosphere to keep out the sun’s rays and slow global warming, a process called global dimming.”

Such programs merely scratch the surface of what is likely to be a gargantuan and overarching black-budget funded project to geoengineer the planet, with little or no care for the unknown environmental consequences this could engender.

Given that sulphur emissions cause ‘global dimming’, is it any wonder that the emergence of the chemtrails phenomenon coincided with an average 22% drop in sunlight reaching the earth’s surface?

What is known about what happens when the environment is loaded with sulphur dioxide is bad enough, since the compound is the main component of acid rain, which according to the EPA “Causes acidification of lakes and streams and contributes to the damage of trees at high elevations (for example, red spruce trees above 2,000 feet) and many sensitive forest soils. In addition, acid rain accelerates the decay of building materials and paints, including irreplaceable buildings, statues, and sculptures that are part of our nation’s cultural heritage.”

The health effects of bombarding the skies with sulphur dioxide alone are enough to raise serious questions about whether such programs should even be allowed to proceed.

The following health effects are linked with exposure to sulphur.

- Neurological effects and behavioral changes
- Disturbance of blood circulation
- Heart damage
- Effects on eyes and eyesight
- Reproductive failure
- Damage to immune systems
- Stomach and gastrointestinal disorder
- Damage to liver and kidney functions
- Hearing defects
- Disturbance of the hormonal metabolism
- Dermatological effects
- Suffocation and lung embolism

According to the LennTech website, “Laboratory tests with test animals have indicated that sulfur can cause serious vascular damage in veins of the brains, the heart and the kidneys. These tests have also indicated that certain forms of sulfur can cause foetal damage and congenital effects. Mothers can even carry sulfur poisoning over to their children through mother milk. Finally, sulfur can damage the internal enzyme systems of animals.”

Even pro-geoengineering scientist Mark Watson, admits that injecting sulphur into the atmosphere could lead to “acid rain, ozone depletion or weather pattern disruption.”

Rutgers University meteorologist Alan Robock also, “created computer simulations indicating that sulfate clouds could potentially weaken the Asian and African summer monsoons, reducing rain that irrigates the food crops of billions of people.”

“Imagine if we triggered a drought and famine while trying to cool the planet,” Robock told a geoengineering conference last year.

The Canada-based Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration (ETC) has called for such experiments to be shut down. “This experiment is only phase one of a much bigger plan that could have devastating consequences, including large changes in weather patterns such as deadly droughts,” the group said in a written statement.

Fred Singer, president of the Science Environmental Policy Project and a skeptic of man-made global warming theories, warns that the consequences of tinkering with the planet’s delicate eco-system could have far-reaching dangers.

“If you do this on a continuous basis, you would depress the ozone layer and cause all kinds of other problems that people would rather avoid,” said Singer.

Even Greenpeace’s chief UK scientist – a staunch advocate of the man-made global warming explanation – Doug Parr – has slammed attempts to geoengineer the planet as “outlandish” and “dangerous”.

Stephen Schneider of Stanford University, who proposed a bizarre plan to send spaceships into the upper atmosphere that would be used to block out the Sun, admits that geoengineering could cause “conflicts between nations if geoengineering projects go wrong.”

As we have repeatedly highlighted, numerous universities and government agencies have been conducting studies in the field of geoengineering for years.

Discussion of geoengineering technology is often framed as a future consideration, yet governments are already conducting such programs at an advanced stage.

The Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Program was created in 1989 with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and is sponsored by the DOE’s Office of Science and managed by the Office of Biological and Environmental Research.

One of ARM’s programs, entitled Indirect and Semi-Direct Aerosol Campaign (ISDAC), is aimed at measuring “cloud simulations” and “aerosol retrievals”.

Another program under the Department of Energy’s Atmospheric Science Program is directed towards, “developing comprehensive understanding of the atmospheric processes that control the transport, transformation, and fate of energy related trace chemicals and particulate matter.”

The DOE website states that, “The current focus of the program is aerosol radiative forcing of climate: aerosol formation and evolution and aerosol properties that affect direct and indirect influences on climate and climate change.”

U.S. government scientists are already bombarding the skies with the acid-rain causing pollutant sulphur dioxide in an attempt to fight global warming by “geoengineering” the planet, despite the fact that injecting aerosols into the upper atmosphere carries with it a host of both known and unknown dangers.

In addition, the Obama administration’s interest in exploring “geoengineering” mirrors recent publications penned by the elite Council On Foreign Relations.

In a document entitled Geoengineering: Workshop on Unilateral Planetary Scale Geoengineering, the CFR proposes different methods of “reflecting sunlight back into space,” which include adding “small reflecting particles in the upper part of the atmosphere,” adding “more clouds in the lower part of the atmosphere,” and placing “various kinds of reflecting objects in space either near the earth or at a stable location between the earth and the sun.”

The proposals in the CFR document match exactly the atmospheric effects observed in the aftermath of chemtrail spraying.

A report issued last year by the UK government also calls for the UN to exclusively regulate world wide geoengineering of the planet in order to stave off man made global warming.

Of course, killing millions of people in the third world through unintended consequences of geoengineering is probably seen as a price worth paying for the likes of John P. Holdren, White House science czar and strong geoengineering proponent, given that he and other luminaries in the global warming movement want to see global population drastically reduced by means of a “planetary regime” carrying out forced sterilization and other draconian population control measures.

It is now overwhelmingly obvious that geoengineering projects involving spraying chemicals at high altitudes are already underway through chemtrails.

In 2008, a KSLA news investigation found that a substance that fell to earth from a high altitude chemtrail contained high levels of Barium (6.8 ppm) and Lead (8.2 ppm) as well as trace amounts of other chemicals including arsenic, chromium, cadmium, selenium and silver. Of these, all but one are metals, some are toxic while several are rarely or never found in nature.

The newscast focuses on Barium, which its research shows is a “hallmark of chemtrails.” KSLA found Barium levels in its samples at 6.8 ppm or “more than six times the toxic level set by the EPA.” The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality confirmed that the high levels of Barium were “very unusual,” but commented that “proving the source was a whole other matter” in its discussion with KSLA.

KSLA also asked Mark Ryan, Director of the Poison Control Center, about the effects of Barium on the human body. Ryan commented that “short term exposure can lead to anything from stomach to chest pains and that long term exposure causes blood pressure problems.” The Poison Control Center further reported that long-term exposure, as with any harmful substance, would contribute to weakening the immune system, which many speculate is the purpose of such man-made chemical trails.

Indeed, barium oxide has cropped up repeatedly as a contaminant from suspected geoengineering experimentation.

Geoengineering programs conducted by politically-driven scientists who have proven adept at covering up and ignoring contradictory evidence in the global warming debate should not be empowered with the authority and funding to conduct such dangerous tests without a major public debate about the potential consequences.

The fact that individuals who embrace the dogma of global warming, alarmism which has already killed more people than man-made climate change in the third world through starvation linked to food price hikes caused by biofuel production, are now preparing to launch programs with government approval that could drastically alter weather patterns and cause droughts, is frightening.

More sober minds in the scientific community need to become far more public in their opposition to geoengineering to prevent a very real form of man-made climate change that could irrevocably damage our planet for decades to come.

HEADLINE NEWS LINKS

CFR on Planetary Geoengineering: “Add more small reflecting particles in the upper part of the atmosphere”

The Government Is Already “Geo-Engineering” The Environment

Geoengineering Conference To Discuss Blocking Sun

Colossal GeoEngineering in Plain Sight

Rosalind Peterson: The Chemtrail Cover-Up

Scientists to Create “Artificial Volcano” In Bid to Geoengineer Climate

Scientists Admit Climate Cooled in the Last Decade, Cite Sulfur Pollution from China

Rosalind Peterson: The Chemtrail Cover-Up

U.S. Government Mad Scientists Geo-Engineer Atmosphere

Scientists Admit Chemtrails Are Creating Artificial Clouds

Geoengineering Unmonitored

Concerns About Chemtrails Given Fresh Impetus

 

 

Alex Jones
Infowars.com
November 13, 2011

NASA reported 5 years ago that the earth is now receiving at least 20% less sunlight than 10 years before.

After 16 years of denial, the White House Science Czar John P Holdren now admits that they have been “testing” the manipulation of Earth’s atmosphere with Barium salts, Aluminum Dioxide and other toxic compounds.

Bottom line: there is a world-wide secret program to manipulate the atmosphere. They admit it’s happening, but they won’t tell us why.



HEADLINE NEWS LINKS

 

Geoengineering Conference To Discuss Blocking Sun

CFR on Planetary Geoengineering: “Add more small reflecting particles in the upper part of the atmosphere”

Oil falls below $35, and a bottom is nowhere in sight

No Rise of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Fraction in Past 160 Years, New Research Finds

Is The End Of The Euro In Sight?

Colossal Financial Collapse: The Truth behind the Citigroup Bank “Nationalization”

Infowars Nightly News: Race Card To Shield Obama, Geoengineering Madness, Vote Fraud & More

No End in Sight

The Colossal Deceit Known As The Underwear Bomber Case

Geoengineering Unmonitored

Now even troops are warned they may not be paid with no solution to debt crisis in sight

Government Scientists Propose “Geo-Engineering” Earth’s Upper Atmosphere

 

 

 

Mad scientists gone insane with all their Frankenstein experiment's gone wrong. The globalists’ genetic takeover might as well be coming from a hostile alien species – as in the movie ‘The Thing.’

Genetic Manipulation: The Global Elite’s “Thing”

Infowars Nightly News
October 28, 2011

 

In Alien Takeover: The End of Humanity, Alex Jones runs down the threat facing humanity as an out of control power elite attempt to manipulate and dominate the very genetic building blocks of life on planet earth. In the video, Alex compares the effort to an alien invasion like the one portrayed in John Carpenter’s classic 1982 horror film ‘The Thing.‘

As Aaron Dykes notes in his review of the 15 minute video, in the real world, aggressive genetically-modified species are destroying naturally-occurring species while inflicting harm on those who consume GMO foods – specifically: widespread infertility, organ failure, cancer and mutations, as demonstrated repeatedly in lab animal studies.

In addition to a control freak effort to patent and thus legally own and monopolize the genetic structure of all life on the planet, the GMO monster is also being used to enhance and extend the lives of a small elite at the expense of the rest of humanity and indeed of all life on a global scale.

As Dykes notes, if we do not stop the elite’s “Thing” now, it may soon be too late to turn back. “It is vital we recognize this amorphous danger for what it is– the annihilation of our species and those with which we co-inhabit. We don’t have any more time to waste,” he writes.

Alien Genetic Takeover: The End of Humanity

THE issue of our time: Genetic Armageddon

GCN’s Katherine Albrecht: The Globalists and Their Genetic Human Manipulation Agenda

Genetic Genocide: Humanity’s Greatest Threat

Global Elites Struggle to Keep EU, Euro Intact

Global warming is the new religion of First World urban elites

Elites Launch “Global Impact Investing Network”

Liver transplants could be thing of the past as scientists grow working cells that correct genetic mutation

Pentagon to Use Genetic Code to Identify Perfect Soldier?

Embryo test ‘screens all genetic disease’

DNA “Genetic Patdown” Introduced to Airports by DHS

Microsoft pushes for single global patent system

---

The New Wrold Order - The Thing by Madmen scienists

Aaron Dykes
Infowars.com
October 26, 2011

COMMENT FROM ALEX JONES: Yes the headline says alien takeover, because it is alien to cross plant, animal, insect and microscopic species… and this witch’s brew is already having disastrous effects and is the single greatest thing not only to our species but to the planet as a whole.

In this powerful video, Alex breaks down how the global takeover might as well be coming from a hostile alien species– as depicted in John Carpenter’s classic 1982 horror film ‘The Thing‘. In fact, such an invader would be hard pressed to wreak more destruction upon the earth’s biosphere.

In the film, and its other versions from 1951 and 2011, an uncovered species takes over its host’s DNA while outwardly imitating it, threatening to infect the entire planet in a short span. In the real world, aggressive genetically-modified species are destroying naturally-occurring species while provably causing harm to those who consume GMO foods– including widespread infertility, organ failure, cancer and mutations, as demonstrated repeatedly in lab animal studies.

In fact, the real dangers of GMOs, human-animal hybrids, vaccines (loaded with super-viruses, dangerous chemical compounds and other special ingredients), fluoride and much more have only begun to unleash their long-term multi-generational harm. The frank reality is that what humanity faces is far worse than Alex could possibly convey in this short presentation.

Complex and controversial emerging legal rulings over gene patents and intellectual property are clearly paving the way for the globalists’ ‘Thing‘ mechanism to dominate agriculture, monopolize medicine and profit on mass-death and the unraveling of our planet’s genetic inheritance. Those in power hope to retain a privately-controlled continuity through their arctic seed vaults (a la Noah’s ark), but life is bigger than even they can grasp.

Technological solutions will create a two-tier system aiming to enshrine the lives of the elite- with the available enhancements for health and longevity- while allowing further domination and dumbing-down of the masses (the nouveau riche, the middle class and poor alike). A wide-spectrum of ambient soft-kill enviro-additives poison us all, with the future hanging in the balance, at the very time an inner-coterie of science, tech and wealth has declared that the future doesn’t need us.

If we don’t stop this ‘Thing‘ now, we may never have a second chance. It is vital we recognize this amorphous danger for what it is– the annihilation of our species and those with which we co-inhabit. We don’t have any more time to waste.

Genetic Genocide: Humanity’s Greatest Threat





LINKS AND RESEARCH:

http://www.psfk.com/2010/06/research-links-genetically-modified-food
http://www.infowars.com/scientific-studies-conclude-gmo-feed-causes-organ
http://www.infowars.com/genetic-genocide-humanitys-greatest-threat/
http://www.infowars.com/food-the-ultimate-secret-exposed/
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23503
http://www.infowars.com/gm-human-animal-hybrids-emerging-market
http://www.infowars.com/7-secret-ways-we-are-being-poisoned/
http://www.infowars.com/john-gormley-fluoride-gmo-and-the-rockefeller
http://www.infowars.com/bill-gates-use-vaccines-to-lower-population/
http://www.infowars.com/proof-vaccines-killing-people/
http://www.infowars.com/pig-virus-contaminates-rotavirus-vaccines
http://www.infowars.com/mercury-in-vaccines-no-more-dangerous
http://www.infowars.com/vaccinations-deadly-immunity/
http://www.infowars.com/rockefeller-foundation-developed-vaccines-for-fertility-reduction/
http://www.infowars.com/establishment-media-pushes-brain-eating-vaccines/
http://www.infowars.com/voluminous-research-proves-vaccines-are-deadly/
http://www.infowars.com/proof-vaccines-killing-people/

HEADLINE NEWS LINKS

Genetic Genocide: Humanity’s Greatest Threat

The Technocracy and the Genetic Engineering of Humanity

THE issue of our time: Genetic Armageddon

Alex Jones Talks About Humanity’s Struggle & Future Potential

Immigrants Not Amused by ”Illegal Alien” Halloween Costume

Animal’s genetic code redesigned

Pentagon to Use Genetic Code to Identify Perfect Soldier?

Murdoch’s media malpractice and the genetic altering of humans

DNA “Genetic Patdown” Introduced to Airports by DHS

ALIPAC: Illegal Alien Costumes Are Cool for Halloween!

NASA Scientist Claims Evidence of Alien Life on Meteorite

Liver transplants could be thing of the past as scientists grow working cells that correct genetic mutation

 

 

Infowars Nightly News
October 25, 2011

Aaron talks with Mark Morano of the Climate Depot about the massive fraud of climate change, the ethical breaches of its proponents, and the arrival of early winter in Britain.

 read more ...

Death Cult Scientists have reconstructed the genetic code of the germ responsible for the Black Death. Why would anyone want to do this, unless they are planning to use this worldwide.

Anthony Gucciardi
Infowars.com
October 21, 2011

Scientists have reconstructed the genetic code of the germ responsible for the Black Death, an infection carried by fleas that led to the deaths of around 50 million Europeans.

Considered by some experts to be the first pandemic in history, DNA from the 14th Century outbreak was recovered from the teeth of victims buried in a graveyard in London’s East Smithfield.

Researchers drilled the teeth, finding the DNA fragments of the ancient bacterium that ultimately led Professor Johannes Krause from the University of Tubingen, Germany, and his team of scientists to reconstruct the very virus that wiped out 50 million people.

Professor Krause explained the process:

“If you actually crack open an ancient tooth you see this dark black powdery material and that’s very likely to be dried up blood and other biological tissues. So what I did was I opened the tooth and opened the pulp chamber and with a drill bit made one pass through and I took out only about 30 milligrams of material, a very very small amount and that’s the material I used to do the DNA work.”

Reconstructing the Black Death opens its genetic code to be weaponized, unleashed

The bacterium responsible for the Black Death, known as Yersinia pestis, is very close to the common ancestor of all modern strains that can affect humans — the grandmother of all plagues, according to Professor Krause. It is responsible for sparking the Black Death between 1347 and 1351, and virtually all plagues and bacterial strains that affect humans to follow. The reconstruction of the Black Death bacterium Yersinia pestis opens the door to potential weaponization, resulting in perhaps the most potent bioweapon ever created by human kind. Weaponizing the Black Death bacterium could potentially kill hundreds of millions, and be hundreds of times more potent than the original strand. In the event that this bacterium falls into the wrong hands, such as in the event of global strife, nefarious individuals could create an artificial global pandemic.

Headline News

Ukrainian Black Lung Death Toll Over 1000, Over A Quarter-Million Hospitalized

China paper warns of impact from euro crisis “Black Death”

First evidence of gene transfer from human host to bacterial pathogen

Abortion Kills More Black Americans Than the Seven Leading Causes of Death Combined

Carnegie Touts Green Credentials Of Genghis Khan For Slaughtering 40 Million People

Jacko’s Death More Important Than a Million Dead Iraqis

63 percent of people killed in Iraq war were civilians: report

Neda Death Footage: Poster Child For A Million More Tragedies?

Researcher: Famine Killed 7 Million in U.S. During “Great Depression”

Workers Cut Fed Black Fiber, Black SUVs Arrive Moments Later

Scientists get death threats over Large Hadron Collider

Scientists Experiment with Vaccinations in GMO Corn

 

 

Jonathan Benson | Study shows how governments, industry, Wall Street are behind global warming scam, and how they continue to use taxpayer dollars to fund it

Natural News
October 19, 2011

For over 20 years, the dogma of man-made global warming has been trumping sound science and even basic logic. The result has been a global movement of pseudo-scientific alarmism about climate change that seeks to solve it with scams like global carbon taxes.

But a simple visual chart put together by Jo Nova shows how governments, industry, and Wall Street have been behind the global warming scam all along, and how they continue to use taxpayer dollars to fund it.

Nova calls it “The Climate Change Scare Machine,” a continuous cycle that bilks taxpayers out of their money in order to fund the man-made global warming agenda. Behind this agenda are Wall Street financial firms, “green” foundations, and even organizations created specifically to smear those that speak out against global warming. And after receiving “rubber stamp” approval from the mainstream media, the misinformation created by these groups is peddled to the masses as scientific truth, even though little-to-none of it is actually based in sound science.

You can view the chart for yourself here:
http://joannenova.com.au/2011/10/map-the-climate-change-scare-machine-the-perpetual-self-feeding-cycle-of-alarm/

Climate change apologists have a monopoly on science

Many of the formulas, calculations, studies, and other data cited as evidence of man-made climate change have been exposed as seriously flawed over the past several years. But because the problem is “systemic” rather than “conspiratorial,” according to Nova, this monopoly on science and scientific thought is strangling any real progress towards discovering the real truth about climate change. As a result, the man-made global warming theory is still considered to be truth, despite a lack of credible evidence.

To make matters worse, the few scientists and climate experts that are brave enough to speak out against global warming, using real science to back up their claims, continue to be ignored or ridiculed by the establishment. There simply is no room for alternate theories, or any type of evidence that contradicts the official story, after all.

As a result, many others in the scientific industry who feel the same way are intimidated from speaking out themselves, for fear that they will lose funding or even their careers. Many of the major scientific groups that study climate science are funded by the same interests pushing the man-made climate change theory, after all.

So unless the system undergoes a massive overhaul, those that have much to gain from pushing the man-made climate change theory will continue to push their agenda, and corner the market on climate science. And with a virtually unlimited supply of taxpayer dollars to maintain this monopoly, any legitimate, independent scientific inquiry into climate change will remain in the shadows.

Links

Taxpayers foot $850M bill for Wall St.’s pension fees

Scientists Call AP Report on Global Warming ‘Hysteria’

Fears Over Global Warming In Rapid Decline Following Climate Scandals

Global warming and the twisting of our children’s minds

Government Report Says Global Warming May Cause Cancer, Mental Illness

Flashback: There is No Global Warming

Climate Change Conference: Genocidal Global Warming Policies will Kill Hundreds of Millions

War of words over global warming as Nobel laureate resigns in protest

Wall Street sit-in goes global Saturday

Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’?

Global Warming ‘Hysteria’ Is Claimed

EPA Suppresses Internal Global Warming Study

 

---

 

Natural News | For over 20 years, the dogma of man-made global warming has been trumping science.

Jonathan Benson,
Natural News
October 19, 2011

For over 20 years, the dogma of man-made global warming has been trumping sound science and even basic logic. The result has been a global movement of pseudo-scientific alarmism about climate change that seeks to solve it with scams like global carbon taxes.

But a simple visual chart put together by Jo Nova shows how governments, industry, and Wall Street have been behind the global warming scam all along, and how they continue to use taxpayer dollars to fund it.

Nova calls it “The Climate Change Scare Machine,” a continuous cycle that bilks taxpayers out of their money in order to fund the man-made global warming agenda. Behind this agenda are Wall Street financial firms, “green” foundations, and even organizations created specifically to smear those that speak out against global warming. And after receiving “rubber stamp” approval from the mainstream media, the misinformation created by these groups is peddled to the masses as scientific truth, even though little-to-none of it is actually based in sound science.

You can view the chart for yourself here: http://joannenova.com.au/2011/10/ma…

Climate change apologists have a monopoly on science

Many of the formulas, calculations, studies, and other data cited as evidence of man-made climate change have been exposed as seriously flawed over the past several years. But because the problem is “systemic” rather than “conspiratorial,” according to Nova, this monopoly on science and scientific thought is strangling any real progress towards discovering the real truth about climate change. As a result, the man-made global warming theory is still considered to be truth, despite a lack of credible evidence.

To make matters worse, the few scientists and climate experts that are brave enough to speak out against global warming, using real science to back up their claims, continue to be ignored or ridiculed by the establishment. There simply is no room for alternate theories, or any type of evidence that contradicts the official story, after all.

As a result, many others in the scientific industry who feel the same way are intimidated from speaking out themselves, for fear that they will lose funding or even their careers. Many of the major scientific groups that study climate science are funded by the same interests pushing the man-made climate change theory, after all.

So unless the system undergoes a massive overhaul, those that have much to gain from pushing the man-made climate change theory will continue to push their agenda, and corner the market on climate science. And with a virtually unlimited supply of taxpayer dollars to maintain this monopoly, any legitimate, independent scientific inquiry into climate change will remain in the shadows.

Sources for this article include:

http://blog.heartland.org/2011/10/j…

http://joannenova.com.au/2011/10/ma…

 

Patrick Henningsen
Infowars.com
October 6, 2011

A wacky Victorian idea concocted by global warmists and climate changlings- of a 1 kilometer-long giant hose pipe attached to a blimp, has been delayed because more time and money is needed for ‘consultation’. Time to catch your breath.

This week, self-styled climate scientists from Bristol University were hoping to launch their big new toy in Norfolk, England. Their mad plan, which entails launching a helium-filled blimp, tethered by a 1 km long hosepipe which will spray reflective particles into the air, is part of a growing movement of bored scientists, known as geoengineering. By simulating this new man-made “volcanic eruption”, this team of career-academic climate hacks are hoping to save humanity from certain doom.

The new crack-team of climate engineers is led by the likes of David Whelan, “a man who spent years in the US defence department working on the stealth bomber”. Apparently, he’s Boeing’s chief scientist, a man who spends his days working on “ways to find new solutions to world’s most challenging problems”.

Whelan is supposed to be top dog in a Specially Convened Taskforce, touted by climatists as “the cream of the emerging science and military”.

Joining him is Stanford University atmosphere scientist Ken Caldeira from the National laboratory at Livermore, CA , home to Reagan’s pricey “star wars” failure. Low and behold, he also manages billionaire Bill Gates’s Geoengineering Research Budget.

The team of Victorian-style climate inventors is rounded out by David Keith, a Canadian who has a company developing a machine… that sucks CO₂ out of the air. No joke (well, it’s not meant to be anyway).

This is definitely the ‘A Team’ of climate crazies.

They are part of a new bizarre hydra head, a science fiction movement which has managed to claw in some millions in state funding. This is the new “Geoengineering lobby” that has somehow sprouted out of the IPCC’s now discredited elite climate club, and it includes various academics, former ambassadors, an assistant secretary of state, military engineers and a “chief US climate negotiator”. As if climatism couldn’t get any more divorced from reality.

Put simply, this new A Team of “US expertise”, is merely group of men who hope to do what every other charlatan has managed to do behind the battle cry of Al Gore’s sermon of climate doom and holy jihad against the planet- that is, position themselves for vast potential future profits for their institutions and geo-engineering companies.

The spell cast over the guilt-ridden middle classes of North America and Europe, of apocalyptic prophecies and sea levels rising- is fast wearing off, and climatists do know this. Thus, the dash for climate cash has never been more desperate than it is today.

During a cash-strapped global economic crisis, you’d think we couldn’t afford to play around with expensive toys used to fight imaginary enemies… you’d think.

Thanks to one reader, known here as Battle Hymn, who asked simply, “What is the “environmental” movement doing for the planet?

His answer:

Spraying sulfur in the atmoshphere
Blanketing the skies with chemtrails of barium and aluminum
Deforesting millions of acres to grow corn for ethanol
Demanding that we fill our landfills with mercury-laden compact flourescent lightbulbs
Openly advocating dispersing sterilants into the drinking water
Ramping up production of batteries with extremely toxic byproducts for hybrid vehicles
Demanding regulations that cause our jobs to shipped to foreign nations
Driving up our energy costs

Apparently, some governments still have got money to burn.

 read more ...

Hole in the sky: Europe, Canada and Russia at risk as continent-sized ‘second hole’ in ozone layer opens over the Arctic

ROB WAUGH
UK Daily Mail
Oct 3, 2011

The ozone loss over the Arctic was so severe this year that for the first time a ‘hole’ in the ozone layer, similar to the one over the Antarctic, appeared.

At a level of around 13 miles above the ground, 80 per cent of the ozone was lost, potentially exposing people on Earth’s surface to harmful ultraviolet-B rays from the sun, which can cause sunburn and skin cancer.

The loss happened not because of increased use of ozone-destroying chemicals – now banned, and rarely used – but because cold high-altitude weather made the existing chemicals ‘more active’.

The paper, published in science journal, Nature, said: ‘Chemical ozone destruction over the Arctic in early 2011 was — for the first time on record — comparable to that in the Antarctic ozone hole.’

Data showing ozone destruction was released in April, but this is the first full analysis of the effect in the Arctic. Scientists cannot predict whether the effect will persist – but under certain conditions, predict ‘severe ozone loss’.

Full article here

 

Clinton a total nutcase: Climate deniers make US ‘look like a joke’ - Seattle PI | “If you’re an American, the best thing you can do is to make it politically unacceptable for people to engage in denial”.

 

Christopher Booker
Mail Online
September 21, 2011

With active encouragement from the Government, whole generations of school-children have now had the apocalyptic threat of climate change pushed down their throats — not just in science classes, but in almost any subject you can think of (questions on the need to fight global warming have even cropped up in English GCSE papers).

In geography, the present curriculum no longer concentrates on countries, continents, rivers, mountains or cities. Instead, it insists that pupils should learn about global warming and climate change and the likely effects of rising sea levels.

The propaganda is all-encompassing. The Climate Change Schools Project, an outfit that exists in partnership with the Environment Agency and other government-funded bodies, promises on its website ‘to put global warming at the heart of the national curriculum . . . We want schools to become the “hub” of excellence in climate change teaching, learning and positive action in their local communities.’

When David Miliband was Labour’s education minister, he ordered that copies of Al Gore’s propaganda film An Inconvenient Truth should be sent to every school in the country. A High Court judge decided that the ‘apocalyptic vision’ of global warming presented in the film was politically partisan and not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change.

Read full article here

 

Patrick Henningsen
Infowars.com
September 20, 2011

You can always gauge the level of desperation in a political movement by its inability to maintain a coherent message. This usually happens when the reality visible in the world runs contrary to the reality being professed from their pulpit.

In the final days of Nazi Germany, elite officers were all huddled in their Berlin bunker, eating foie gras and drinking champagne, as the Red Army closed in on their capital. Even in the 11th hour, Hitler was convinced that the righteous armies of the Fatherland would regroup and stem the Soviet tide. After all, Germany had achieved so much in such a short time, and they had no reason to think that their epic revolution of “National Socialism” would not succeed.

It seems now that, in the face of more and more record-breaking winters, increased polar ice cover and an endless string of academic scandals, that Al Gore and the global warming/climate change movement are having their own Berlin bunker moment.

Having watched Gore’s recent 24 Hours of Reality internet media show this past week, I could see that very same level of desperation present in all of the day’s presentations. I saw a level of incoherence not seen before in the climate change crusade. I saw a faith-based movement clearly facing a rapidly unraveling ideology. Even traditional global warming activists have been wary of having anything to do with Gore’s telethon, where presenter upon presenter attempted in vain to cherry pick any extreme region weather event on the globe and connect it to man-made global warming.

One of the more disturbing thrusts of the presentations streamed that day was a rallying call for academics and education professionals to do a better job in delivering their message of man-made global warming and climate Armageddon… to young children. In other words, there appeared to be a need to indoctrinate kids at a young age if the movement is to survive. Presenters were quite vocal about their disdain for “deniers”, upset about the scourge of intelligent adult skepticism. One presenter even called on children to ‘put pressure on their parents to be more responsible’. One last propaganda blitz before the fall.

I could not help but feel here that global warmists must be feeling as Joseph Goebbels did, faced with the horror of his dream of a Utopian Reich disintegrating before his eyes, a man whose final move was a campaign to mobilize children, getting the kids to man gun posts in hopes of repelling the inevitable Soviet advance towards ground zero. When educated adults are finally coming to their senses, gathering enough courage to go and look outside, and determine for themselves that the sky is not falling, then it is perhaps the most cynical and ruthless area of exploitation for a fundamentalist movement to target the innocent minds of young children to do their bidding.

A real dose of reality is on the way however, one not apparent in Al Gore’s media montage. If you live in the Northern hemisphere, you can expect record-breaking cold spells this winter, including early blizzards… and a string of sub zero temperature events.

In past years the UK’s official weather forecaster, the Met Office, has come under heavy fire from critics having failed to predict with any level of accuracy a succession of record-breaking freezes in their country. As a result, municipalities failed to stock up on grit for the roads, allocate money for snow ploughs and other key provisions. This had dire consequences- a number of deaths last winter in the UK were related to unforeseen weather conditions. This year appears to be different as weather experts, in a bid to salvage their credibility and distance themselves from the likes of the IPCC’s failing projections and scandals like Climategate, for the first time in years are sounding the cold alarm.

As a recent Daily Mail report explains, forecasters are warning that Britain is about to experience an early winter, with snow expected to arrive as soon as next month. The Met Office now admits that we can expect cold temperatures as early as October, and Weather Services International agrees, saying that in October, November and December we will be hit with temperatures approximately two degrees lower than the average.

James Madden of Exacta Weather also agrees, “I expect to see the first signs of some moderate to heavy snowfalls as early as October or November in certain parts of the UK. Huge swirly low-pressure systems also offer the potential for widespread disruption from heavy snowfall across many parts of the UK including the South, as they clash with the predominant cold air.” Madden also added that Scotland and the North would face the worst weather, including possible ‘blizzard-like conditions’ brought on by snow from the Arctic for prolonged periods.

Another vocal opponent of Al Gore and the climatist fundamentalist movement is Weather Action, a UK-based long range weather forecaster led by scientist Piers Corbyn. Weather Action has also issued a stark warning that four major storms are coming in the next 6 weeks and that it is very important that emergency services are aware of what is over the horizon. The organization has worked out, with about 80% accuracy, what are the real factors that drive climate on this planet, namely, a combination of solar activity, lunar cycles and changes in the earth’s magnetic fields.

Weather Action has also identified that cold weather can have disastrous consequences for agricultural production if farmers are not prepared. For instance, in the production of Maize, frosts forecasts means the crop should be planted late, and those who planted early lost out. In Dairy production, a cold spring forecast means that grass would be late so it would be worth spending on fertilizer.

Weather Action’s calculations and forecasts are based on the use of mathematics and physics, unlike the IPCC’s elite group of ‘climate scientists’ who have been basing their apocalyptic predictions of the future on a collection of rigged computer-modeled projections. Herrs Gore, Strong, Hansen, Mann and Jones relied on these sacred computer-modeled climate mock-ups to get their initial gravy train going, and it worked. Now the wheels are beginning to come off that gravy train.

As global temperatures have declined since 1998, one can only deduce that the alarmist tone of Al Gore’s self-styled “scientific consensus” has already been discredited, and people and their governments around this planet should move back on track with reality as soon as possible.

The most bizarre turn of green ideology is that many top climate zealots have been claiming “that global cooling is caused by global warming”. It’s a rather bizarre idea that has been successfully implanted into the minds of a faithful flock, but it is quite obviously the death pangs of a flock who have lost their way.

In this twisted zone of eco-spin, millions could perish from famine or a spike in food prices brought on by early frosts, and elderly residents might die trapped in their homes without sufficient heat, and yet, climate fantasists will tell you that this is all down to man-made global warming, in much the same way that Pat Robertson told us that Hurricane Katrina and and the Haiti earthquake were brought on by God’s vengeance for those peoples’ sins. Climate fundamentalists, whether they are cognisant of this or not, are operating on the same level of misdirection as Pat Robertson.

Still there are millions of dollars a day around the globe being spent researching quack Victorian science fiction ideas as ridiculous as a man-made simulated volcano in England, or a giant cold blanket to cover Greenland’s glaciers.

The longer mainstream society entertains the sort of intellectual indulgence that the Man-Made Global Warming movement is offering out, the more valuable time and money we continue to waste on an ideology that was actually never based on real science- or hard facts. The whole ideology fusing man-made global warming and an illusion of climate crisis was always based on one main element- fear, followed by a powerful politically correct idea of collective guilt. These were deployed against populations in order to achieve the end goal, which was the collectivization and control of society through various legal and economic instruments like carbon emissions trading, an expensive process which will ultimately end in a redistribution of society’s wealth upwards.

Meanwhile, after 10 years and hundreds of billions in precious public and private money spent on an ideological crusade to save the planet from a nemesis that never existed, real environmental threats have gained ground on mankind. The consolidation of genetically modified food production, the introduction of cross-breed chimera species into our ecosystem, the continual dumping of toxic waste and chemicals into our oceans and water supplies, known carcinogens being spread via popular consumer products and the mass release of radioactive pollution through a series industrial incidents- all of which actually threaten mankind’s place and progeny on the planet, and still we see little progress made in pushing them back to truly safe levels.

In the end, Gore’s “24 hours of Reality” only reinforced my belief that there is no “climate crisis”- therefore we should do nothing to solve it, let alone fight it. Still, his CEO and President for the media event, Maggie Fox, implores her troops to soldier on. “It is up to you to continue to stand up for reality and share the truth about the climate crisis. We will succeed because we must.”

That sounds a lot like Goebbels and Co down in that Berlin bunker.

 read more ...

WakeUp.tv| “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we suggested that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.”

The Common Enemy of Humanity is Man

“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we suggested that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.”

– The First Global Revolution, A Report by the Council of The Club of Rome, page 85 (King, A. and Schneider, B., 1991)

---

Scientists to Create “Artificial Volcano” In Bid to Geoengineer Climate - Paul Joseph Watson | Scheme designed to lead to program to inject sulphur into upper atmosphere to ‘prevent global warming’

Scheme designed to lead to program to inject sulphur into upper atmosphere to ‘prevent global warming’

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, September 16, 2011

Despite the pseudo-science of global warming being discredited with each passing day, scientists are preparing to field test an “artificial volcano” which is eventually intended to lead to mammoth geoengineering programs which will inject sulfur particles in to the atmosphere at high altitudes, a process that other scientists have warned will cause widespread droughts and other drastic consequences.

“Next month, researchers in the U.K. will start to pump water nearly a kilometer up into the atmosphere, by way of a suspended hose,” reports Scientific American.

“The experiment is the first major test of a piping system that could one day spew sulfate particles into the stratosphere at an altitude of 20 kilometers, supported by a stadium-size hydrogen balloon. The goal is geoengineering, or the “deliberate, large-scale manipulation of the planetary environment” in the words of the Royal Society of London, which provides scientific advice to policymakers. In this case, researchers are attempting to re-create the effects of volcanic eruptions to artificially cool Earth.”

Never mind the fact that the science behind global warming is only becoming more contentious, with Norwegian physicist and Nobel laureate Ivar Giaever this week quitting the American Physical Society because of its advocacy of the man-made climate change thesis, allowing scientists driven by the political agenda that global warming alarmism has become to conduct such dangerous experiments with the eco-system on such a massive scale is nothing short of insane.

As we have previously documented at length, this latest experiment is just one of a series of similar tests designed to investigate the feasibility of injecting aerosols into the atmosphere that have been carried out by scientific bodies under the control of both the British and American governments.

The proposal to disperse sulphur dioxide in an attempt to reflect sunlight was discussed in a September 2008 London Guardian article entitled, Geoengineering: The radical ideas to combat global warming, in which Ken Caldeira, a leading climate scientist based at the Carnegie Institution in Stanford, California, promoted the idea of injecting the atmosphere with aerosols.

“One approach is to insert “scatterers” into the stratosphere,” states the article. “Caldeira cites an idea to deploy jumbo jets into the upper atmosphere and deposit clouds of tiny particles there, such as sulphur dioxide. Dispersing around 1m tonnes of sulphur dioxide per year across 10m square kilometres of the atmosphere would be enough to reflect away sufficient amounts of sunlight.”

Experiments similar to Caldeira’s proposal are already being carried out by U.S. government -backed scientists, such as those at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Savannah River National Laboratory in Aiken, S.C, who in 2009 began conducting studies which involved shooting huge amounts of particulate matter, in this case “porous-walled glass microspheres,” into the stratosphere.

The project is closely tied to an idea by Nobel Prize winner Paul Crutzen, who “proposed sending aircraft 747s to dump huge quantities of sulfur particles into the far-reaches of the stratosphere to cool down the atmosphere.”

Such programs merely scratch the surface of what is likely to be a gargantuan and overarching black-budget funded project to geo-engineer the planet, with little or no care for the unknown environmental consequences this could engender.

What is known about what happens when the environment is loaded with sulphur dioxide is bad enough, since the compound is the main component of acid rain, which according to the EPA “Causes acidification of lakes and streams and contributes to the damage of trees at high elevations (for example, red spruce trees above 2,000 feet) and many sensitive forest soils. In addition, acid rain accelerates the decay of building materials and paints, including irreplaceable buildings, statues, and sculptures that are part of our nation’s cultural heritage.”

The health effects of bombarding the skies with sulphur dioxide alone are enough to raise serious questions about whether such programs should even be allowed to proceed.

The following health effects are linked with exposure to sulphur.

- Neurological effects and behavioral changes
- Disturbance of blood circulation
- Heart damage
- Effects on eyes and eyesight
- Reproductive failure
- Damage to immune systems
- Stomach and gastrointestinal disorder
- Damage to liver and kidney functions
- Hearing defects
- Disturbance of the hormonal metabolism
- Dermatological effects
- Suffocation and lung embolism

According to the LennTech website, “Laboratory tests with test animals have indicated that sulfur can cause serious vascular damage in veins of the brains, the heart and the kidneys. These tests have also indicated that certain forms of sulfur can cause foetal damage and congenital effects. Mothers can even carry sulfur poisoning over to their children through mother milk. Finally, sulfur can damage the internal enzyme systems of animals.”

Even the lead scientist heading up the latest experiment in the UK, Mark Watson, admits that injecting sulphur into the atmosphere could lead to “acid rain, ozone depletion or weather pattern disruption.”

The Canada-based Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration (ETC) responded to the announcement of the test by calling on the British government to shut down the research. “This experiment is only phase one of a much bigger plan that could have devastating consequences, including large changes in weather patterns such as deadly droughts,” the group said in a written statement.

Rutgers University meteorologist Alan Robock also, “created computer simulations indicating that sulfate clouds could potentially weaken the Asian and African summer monsoons, reducing rain that irrigates the food crops of billions of people.”

Of course, killing millions of people in the third world through unintended consequences of geoengineering is probably seen as a price worth paying for the likes of John P. Holdren, White House science czar and strong geoengineering proponent, given that he and other luminaries in the global warming movement want to see global population drastically reduced by means of a “planetary regime” carrying out forced sterilization and other draconian population control measures.

Of course, many would argue that geoengineering projects involving spraying chemicals at high altitudes are already underway through chemtrails. Indeed, last year scientists admitted that emissions from aircraft are forming artificial clouds that block out the sun, but ludicrously claimed that the effect was a natural phenomenon.

In 2008, a KSLA news investigation found that a substance that fell to earth from a high altitude chemtrail contained high levels of Barium (6.8 ppm) and Lead (8.2 ppm) as well as trace amounts of other chemicals including arsenic, chromium, cadmium, selenium and silver. Of these, all but one are metals, some are toxic while several are rarely or never found in nature.

The newscast focuses on Barium, which its research shows is a “hallmark of chemtrails.” KSLA found Barium levels in its samples at 6.8 ppm or “more than six times the toxic level set by the EPA.” The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality confirmed that the high levels of Barium were “very unusual,” but commented that “proving the source was a whole other matter” in its discussion with KSLA.

KSLA also asked Mark Ryan, Director of the Poison Control Center, about the effects of Barium on the human body. Ryan commented that “short term exposure can lead to anything from stomach to chest pains and that long term exposure causes blood pressure problems.” The Poison Control Center further reported that long-term exposure, as with any harmful substance, would contribute to weakening the immune system, which many speculate is the purpose of such man-made chemical trails.

Indeed, barium oxide has cropped up repeatedly as a contaminant from suspected geoengineering experimentation.

Geoengineering programs conducted by politically-driven scientists who have proven adept at covering up and ignoring contradictory evidence in the global warming debate should not be empowered with the authority and funding to conduct such dangerous tests without a major public debate about the potential consequences.

The fact that individuals who embrace the dogma of global warming, alarmism which has already killed more people than man-made climate change in the third world through starvation linked to food price hikes caused by biofuel production, are now preparing to launch programs with government approval that could drastically alter weather patterns and cause droughts, is frightening.

More sober minds in the scientific community need to become far more public in their opposition to geoengineering to prevent a very real form of man-made climate change that could irrevocably damage our planet for decades to come.

---

SOLAR-GATE: Obama’s Big Green Scandal That Won’t Go Away - Patrick Henningsen | ENRON 2.0 has arrived and Obama is caught right in the middle of it.

Patrick Henningsen
Infowars.com
September 16, 2011

In the first year of his presidency, George W. Bush was under siege. At that time, he had appeared to win his war in Afghanistan, only to find himself tangled in another story, a tale of corporate greed and political corruption made by the hands of a company known as Enron.

Back then, it was the new energy brokerage houses and the new energy futures market that drove the hubris, and the greed of men like Ken Lay. Today in 2011, Barrack Obama now finds himself in the midst of his own ‘Enron moment’, but this time it’s political favouritism and a seemingly bottomless pit of green government stimulus handouts that has driven his green juggernaut into a ravine.

The Enron scandal saw, among other crimes, the savings and retirement funds of tens of thousands of employees disappear when the politically connected energy giant went bankrupt overnight, but it was the cronyism- the company’s direct connections to Bush, Cheney and other insiders which left the worst taste in America’s mouth. Last week, deja vu hit the Obama White House, as his favourite green pet- solar energy firm Solyndra, managed to do an overnight disappearing act with over $500 million in taxpayer funds. What’s worse is that just like Enron, the solar energy firm’s connections go right up through Washington, and right up to the President himself.

From a policy level, it’s a complete wash out due to the fact that despite over half a billion dollars in Federal Financing Bank handouts, Solyndra did not manage to create any new ‘green jobs’. On an insider corruption level, things are looking even bleaker.

Indeed, in the Obama White House, just as it was in the Bush White House, money buys influence, and more importantly, money also buys business opportunities. Apparently, when Solyndra first applied for its green subsidies, auditors at the Department of Energy (DOE) had serious doubts about the company’s financial strength, yet, they were still fast-tracked for one the biggest green subsidies in US history. Jonathan Silver is executive director of the Loan Programs Office, and is the man who signed off on Solyndra’s loan. Will he thrown under the bus later, if the investigation reaches Congressional hearings? The plot thickens.

The $500 million question is why this firm was allowed to win such a large handout if its fundamentals did not pass grade? The answer to that question is a man by the name of George Kaiser, an Oklahoma billionaire and a major investor in Solyndra, who also happened to be… a key fundraiser for Obama’s 2008 election campaign. But it gets worse.

When Solyndra when down under Chapter 11 bankruptcy last week, you would think that the US taxpayer would be first in line as a creditor who hoped to recoup its $500 million loss. Not so. First in line was… George Kaiser, who managed to pocket his initial $75 million investment before anyone else got to the butchers table.

In an ABC report, Kaiser, like with every inner circle Obama Democrat, moved quickly to place the blame on our far eastern neighbours.“Solyndra’s collapse saying the solar firm faced “serious challenges in the marketplace, especially the drastic decline in solar panel prices during the past two years caused in part by subsidies provided by the government of China to Chinese solar panel manufacturers”, said Kaiser.

Now there is an ethical and perhaps criminal element to Obama’s green scandal. Like with Enron, where thousands of employee retirement accounts were pilfered away by its cowboy executives, Solyndra’s employees were informed literally overnight, that their company was closed and was so broke, that there would not even be a severance cheque waiting for them. But it turns out that insiders in Washington did know the company was in trouble long before it closed its doors last week. The question now is who knew. Which Washington insiders had off-loaded their stocks and shares in the months before the solar manufacturer went down the drain?

Criminal proceeding will certainly follow should investigative authorities come up with any information pointing to gross insider trading and financial malfeasance. At the orders of the DOE’s Inspector General, the FBI have now already raided the offices of Solyndra, seizing all its files, as well as raided the homes of Solyndra executives, seizing their computers and related company documents.

The reality of Obama’s green revolution in 2011 is that, despite his pledge to handout $38.6 billion in Federal loan guarantees to companies like Solyndra, a promise to create 65,000 “green” jobs has only produced a rather pathetic 3,545 permanent jobs- this after giving out almost half the allocated amount so far, according to the DOE.

One only needs to do the math, and you will discover what every other developed country around the globe already knew in 2008- that the cost per green job is hardly worth the financial pain and suffering.

Unquestionably, this scandal will throw into question every other ‘green jobs’ award that Obama’s White House has given out since 2008, as well as severely damage confidence in any other DOE projects on the table, or in the future.

Now, it is perhaps only a question of time before the investigation reaches the Congress hearing level, where Democrats will be hoping to push a major investigation past the election next November 2012. In the meantime, GOP opponents on Capitol Hill have already caught the scent of political blood left by Obama’s big green debacle. In a recent Washington Post article, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn) exclaimed, “My goodness. We should be reviewing every one of these loan guarantee”. Audit baby audit.

Early indications imply that the sheer size and scope of Obama’s “Solargate” scandal leave us with the impression that this may only be the tip of a much, much larger iceberg. It will be Obama’s first classic Pennsylvania Avenue scandal he has had to face in his first term, one in which we will discover the true quality of this President’s tephlon coating.

Above all, this scandal underlines the very same issues which were present during, and which grew out of the Enron days, because Obama’s “green economy” rides squarely on the back of some very questionable “science” which endorses a belief in Al Gore’s universal theory of man-made global warming and climate change. From this idea also sprung a vision whereby the people of the world would one day be buying and selling their carbon emissions in a carbon marketplace, a market designed by Ken Lay himself. It seems that with Solargate, the house of cards is well and truly coming down.

With Enron it, was pure hubris and greed, combined with opportunity. With Solyndra, it is green hubris and green greed, combined with opportunity. When you get right down to it, they are no different.

 

Gore himself is a living example of how global warming alarmism is built on hypocrisy and pseudo-science

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Al Gore is set to launch his 24 Hours of Reality propaganda blitz this evening in a desperate effort to reverse increasing skepticism towards global warming alarmism – but the jig is up – Gore himself is a living example of how climate change hysteria is built on a platform of greed, hypocrisy and faulty pseudo-science.

Polls show that increasing numbers of Americans are not falling for the hocus pocus of man-made global warming, which is unsurprising given that Gore – one of its leading proponents – lives a lifestyle completely at odds with his own dogma.

Gore’s insistence that he is walking the walk, not just talking the talk, doesn’t seem to extend to his own private life in the context of energy conservation and CO2 emissions. While lecturing the world about reducing CO2 emissions and saving energy, Gore’s own mansion uses 20 times the energy of the average American home.

In February 2007, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research revealed that the gas and electric bills for the former vice president’s 20-room home and pool house devoured nearly 221,000 kilowatt-hours in 2006, more than 20 times the national average of 10,656 kilowatt-hours. These figures were not disputed by Gore.

“If this were any other person with $30,000-a-year in utility bills, I wouldn’t care,” said the Center’s president, Drew Johnson. “But he tells other people how to live and he’s not following his own rules.”

As the leading luminary of the global warming movement, you would expect Al Gore to live up to the standards he lectures everyone else about, particularly in relation to population control. Gore recently called on women to access “fertility management” (abortion) in order to stabilize global population.

However, Gore has four children of his own, who presumably enjoy the luxury of his $8.8 million seaside mansion in Montecito, California (absent any worries about rising sea levels).

Gore is set to become the first “carbon billionaire,” but he offsets his multiple-times the average power consumption by purchasing carbon credits ….bought largely from his own company, Generation Investment Management.

Aside from Gore’s own hypocritical lifestyle, the science behind man-made global warming is also being increasingly discredited, which is precisely why the former vice-president feels the need to reinforce the myth of anthropogenic climate change, particularly as a mere 24% of Americans think he is an expert on the subject.

“Gore is completely wrong when he tells us that the science of climate change is settled. If his “Climate Reality Project” actually did promote climate realism, he would tell us that the science is in a period of negative discovery — the more we learn, the more we realize we do not understand about this, arguably the most complex science ever tackled. Rather than “remove the doubt,” as Gore says, we need to recognize the doubt,” writes Tom Harris.

But that dogma is being contested by more and more reputable scientists who are finally speaking out in an organized fashion. For example, on August 29, a blockbuster science document was published that totally refutes Gore and Ban — the Interim Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). Coauthored by a team of scientists recruited and led by climate experts Dr. Craig Idso, Professor Robert Carter, and Professor Fred Singer, the NIPCC shows that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has ignored or misinterpreted much of the research that challenges the need for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas controls. In other words, the science being relied upon by governments worldwide to create multi-billion dollar climate policies is almost certainly wrong.

Consider extreme weather, the main topic of 24 Hours of Reality. Gore promotes the concept that greenhouse gas-induced global warming is leading to increasingly severe weather. But this defies logic. If the world warms due to increasing greenhouse gas emissions, temperatures at high latitudes are forecast to rise most, reducing the difference between arctic and tropical temperatures. Since this differential drives weather, we should see weaker midlatitude cyclones in a warmer world, and so less extremes in weather, not more.

Two of the primary pieces of evidence presented in Gore’s Inconvenient Truth polemic have also recently been completely undermined by the facts.

Gore’s emotional appeal in his film that predicates on the ludicrous notion that polar bears are not strong swimmers and will drown because of melting polar ice caps has been vehemently discredited by new figures from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service which show, “That the polar bear population is currently at 20,000 to 25,000 bears, up from as low as 5,000-10,000 bears in the 1950s and 1960s. A 2002 U.S. Geological Survey of wildlife in the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain noted that the polar bear populations ‘may now be near historic highs,’” it read.

In addition, catastrophic sea level rises attributed to man-made CO2 emissions, a claim repeatedly invoked by Gore, have also failed to live up to their hype in recent times. Data recorded over the last several years clearly indicates that sea level rises have slowed down and are now flat.

All the king’s horses and all the king’s men, never mind a 24-hour TV bore-athon, cannot put the global warming myth back together again. Gore’s 24 hours of bullshit will only serve to exemplify the flailing desperation of climate change doomsayers as their dire proclamations are increasingly proven laughable by mother nature herself.

 read more ...

R-Calf USA
Sept 6, 2011

Billings, Mont. – During his presentation on the status of the nation’s new country-of-origin labeling (COOL) law, and on behalf of the R-CALF USA COOL Committee, R-CALF USA member and Kansas cattle feeder Mike Callicrate was asked a non-COOL question that set convention goers on their heels during the 12th Annual R-CALF USA Convention held August 26-27 in Rapid City, S.D.

“Has the Environmental Protection Agency declared hay a pollutant?” an audience member asked. Callicrate responded affirmatively and explained that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently initiated a formal enforcement action against his Kansas feedlot for, among other things, failure to store his hay in a pollution containment zone. “Now that EPA has declared hay a pollutant, every farmer and rancher that stores hay, or that leaves a broken hay bale in the field is potentially violating EPA rules and subject to an EPA enforcement action,” Callicrate said. “How far are we going to let this agency go before we stand up and do something about it?”

Callicrate is permitted to handle 12,000 cattle at a time in his feedlot, which is considered a small to mid-sized feedlot in an industry now dominated by mega-feedlots such as those owned by the world’s largest beef packer – JBS-Brazil – with a one-time capacity of over 900,000 cattle; or the other mega-feedlot that also feeds hundreds of thousands of cattle at a time and is owned by the nation’s second-largest beef packer – Cargill; or the other handful of mega feedlots with capacities of hundreds of thousands of cattle such as those owned by Cactus Feeders, Inc. and Friona Industries.

In comments submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice, R-CALF USA estimated the above named mega-feedlots feed 18 percent of the nation’s fed cattle each year while one-fourth of the nation’s cattle are fed in feedlots with a one time capacity of 50,000 head or more. The largest of feedlots are getting larger and Callicrate’s feedlot is among the group of small to mid-sized feedlots that are being pressured to exit the industry so beef packers and corporate feedlot owners can increase their respective capacities. Data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) show that 45 feedlots with one-time capacities of between 1,000 or more cattle but less than 16,000 cattle have exited the industry from 2008 to 2010.

R-CALF USA contents beef packers are deliberately forcing small to mid-sized feedlots out of business through unfair and abusive cattle-buying practices that effectively restrict market access for all but the largest of feedlots. “The proposed GIPSA rule (USDA Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration rule) will put a stop to such unfair and abusive practices, but only if USDA issues a final rule,” said Callicrate.

Callicrate’s feedlot is the perfect example. In late 1998, the nation’s largest beef packers blackballed Callicrate because he called attention to the unfair buying practices of the corporate meatpackers. Callicrate was forced to cease his feedlot operations until 2000 when he opened Ranch Foods Direct, a meat processing and distribution company in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and began marketing his own beef more directly to consumers.

“I believe the EPA’s enforcement action is a premeditated effort by EPA to partner with the beef packers to finish the job the beef packer’s couldn’t do alone,” said Callicrate adding, “along with my feedlot, the EPA has filed enforcement actions against five other smaller feedlots, including one with only 400 cattle.

Callicrate said the EPA does not appear to be going after the corporate feedlots. “EPA is turning a blind eye toward the mega-feedlots that are a real risk for pollution and, instead, is antagonizing small to mid-sized family operations in an effort to help their packer-partners capture the entire live cattle supply chain away from family farm and ranch operations.”

We thought the Obama Administration was going to bring about a change to the ongoing corporate control and corporate dominance that has been decimating the U.S. cattle industry. I guess we’re seeing that change right now. Rather than reduce corporate control and dominance the EPA is overtly partnering with the corporate beef packers to accelerate the exodus of sustainable, independent family operations. This really smells,” Callicrate concluded.

Note: For satellite photographs of Callicrate’s feedlot compared to larger, industrialized feedlots, go to http://nobull.mikecallicrate.com/

R-CALF USA (Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America) is a national, nonprofit organization dedicated to ensuring the continued profitability and viability of the U.S. cattle industry. R-CALF USA represents thousands of U.S. cattle producers on trade and marketing issues. Members are located across 46 states and are primarily cow/calf operators, cattle backgrounders, and/or feedlot owners. For more information, visit www.r-calfusa.com or, call 406-252-2516.

 read more ...

Soaring food prices caused by ethanol production – funded by Gore – are killing poor black people

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Monday, August 29, 2011

Of course, the delicious irony is the fact that the promotion of man-made global warming and the development of biofuels is killing predominantly black people in third world countries as a result of soaring food prices.

“I remember, again going back to my early years in the South, when the Civil Rights revolution was unfolding, there were two things that really made an impression on me,” Gore told Climate Reality Project collaborator Alex Bogusky. “My generation watched Bull Connor turning the hose on civil rights demonstrators and we went, ‘Whoa! How gross and evil is that?’ My generation asked old people, ‘Explain to me again why it is okay to discriminate against people because their skin color is different?’ And when they couldn’t really answer that question with integrity, the change really started.”

Gore then went on to talk about how to “win the conversation” on global warming, by comparing skeptics with racists, adding “It is important to get that out there, absolutely.”

Gore wants to make man-made climate change skepticism a thought crime on a par with uttering racist obscenities, once again revealing the hardcore authoritarian tendencies that cloud the entire global warming movement.

Since the skeptics are clearly ‘winning the conversation’, with polls showing a decreasing belief in climate change alarmism, merely insinuating skeptics are akin to holocaust deniers by labeling them “climate deniers” is no longer sufficient for the likes of Gore.

In reality, if you want to point the finger at anyone for encouraging racism, it’s overwhelmingly the global warming alarmists themselves.

Climate change alarmism and implementation of global warming policies is a crime of the highest nature, because it is already having a genocidal impact in countries like Haiti, where the doubling of food prices is resulting in a substantial increase in starvation, poverty and death.

As a National Geographic Report confirmed, “With food prices rising, Haiti’s poorest can’t afford even a daily plate of rice, and some must take desperate measures to fill their bellies,” by “eating mud,” partly as a consequence of “increasing global demand for biofuels.”

In April 2008, World Bank President Robert Zoellick admitted that biofuels were a “significant contributor” to soaring food prices that have led to poor people dying from starvation as a result of biofuels dominating land that would normally be used to harvest food.

Even man-made global warming advocate George Monbiot admits that promotion of biofuels “is causing starvation in the poor world,” particularly in Swaziland, where the decision to allocate several thousand hectares of farmland to ethanol production despite the country being in the grip of a famine was labeled “a crime against humanity” by Jean Ziegler, the UN’s special rapporteur.

Not only are biofuels starving millions of people, they are also leading to environmental destruction, by accelerating the growth of dangerous chemicals and pesticides.

Gore was an enthusiastic supporter of biofuel projects even as it became clear they were exacerbating the starvation of millions of predominantly black people in the third world, and yet he has the temerity to label critics of such practices as “racist”. Part of Gore’s $638 million Generation Investment Management funding was ploughed into the production of biofuels, before Gore himself was forced to admit he was wrong to push biofuels years later, after they had helped kill millions of poor black people.

But it’s not just biofuels, a product of global warming alarmism, that are unleashing a genocide against black people in poorer countries, it’s the whole anti-development mantra embraced by climate change activists that is being enforced by supranational organizations like the World Bank and the IMF in the name of reducing carbon dioxide, the evil life-giving gas that plants breathe and humans exhale.

Indeed, poorer countries rejected the 2009 Copenhagen climate agreement precisely because it discriminated against third world nations.

In the leaked Copenhagen text that emerged during the conference, leaders of third world countries were horrified to discover that developed nations would take on less of a burden than anticipated and that more would be demanded of poorer countries despite the fact that any further cuts in CO2 emissions would further cripple their flimsy economies and poverty-stricken people.

In addition, the leaked paper revealed that funds from climate financing, originally allocated to go to the UN and then be doled out piecemeal to third world nations, would instead be paid directly into the coffers of the World Bank and IMF, organizations that have made a habit out of looting poorer countries with crippling loans that cannot be paid back, forcing such countries to hand over their entire infrastructure to globalist loan sharks.

In addition, the Obama administration, firmly supported by Al Gore, last year ordered the World Bank to keep “developing” countries underdeveloped by blocking them from building coal-fired power plants, ensuring that poorer countries remain in poverty as a result of energy demands not being met.

By preventing poor nations from becoming self-sufficient in blocking them from producing their own energy, the Obama administration is ensuring that millions more will die from starvation and lack of access to hospitals and medical treatment.

Not only does strangling the energy supply to poorer countries prevent adequate food distribution and lead to more starvation, but hospitals and health clinics in the third world are barely even able to operate as a result of the World Bank and other global bodies ordering them to be dependent on renewable energy supplies that are totally insufficient.

A prime example appeared in the documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, which highlighted how a Kenyan health clinic could not operate a medical refrigerator as well as the lights at the same time because the facility was restricted to just two solar panels.

“There’s somebody keen to kill the African dream. And the African dream is to develop,” said author and economist James Shikwati. “I don’t see how a solar panel is going to power a steel industry … We are being told, ‘Don’t touch your resources. Don’t touch your oil. Don’t touch your coal.’ That is suicide.”

The program labels the idea of restricting the world’s poorest people to alternative energy sources as “the most morally repugnant aspect of the global warming campaign.”

Holding back poor countries and preventing them from developing their infrastructure in the name of reducing CO2 emissions is worsening poverty exponentially. This is the ultimate form of racism – economic terrorism against poor black people – and it’s fully embraced by Al Gore as part of his global warming creed.

Listen to Al Gore’s comments below.
EPIC FAIL - Al Gore Compares Global Warming Skepticism To Racism

 read more ...

Global warming alarmists invent new hoax after failing with everything else

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Friday, August 19, 2011

Having failed with drowning polar bears, global superstorms, rising sea levels and a myriad of other manufactured hoaxes, global warming alarmists have invented a new threat to try and persuade us to pay carbon taxes directly to Al Gore and the global elite – vengeful environmentalist extraterrestrials from outer space.

“It may not rank as the most compelling reason to curb greenhouse gases, but reducing our emissions might just save humanity from a pre-emptive alien attack, scientists claim,” according to a Guardian report.

A new study conducted by researchers at Nasa’s Planetary Science Division posits that “green” ETs might get angry at Bubba driving his gas-guzzling SUV and respond by wiping humankind off the face of the earth to “protect other civilizations”.

“Green” aliens might object to the environmental damage humans have caused on Earth and wipe us out to save the planet. “These scenarios give us reason to limit our growth and reduce our impact on global ecosystems. It would be particularly important for us to limit our emissions of greenhouse gases, since atmospheric composition can be observed from other planets,” the authors write.

Is it really any wonder why polls show belief in global warming is collapsing? A recent Rasmussen survey found that 69 per cent of Americans believed scientists had likely falsified climate change data to push their agenda.

They’ve fed us with drowning polar bears, overpopulation paranoia, global superstorms and all manner of manufactured lies in an effort to terrify people into accepting the hoax and blithely handing over their carbon taxes to Al Gore and the Rothschilds, but none of it has worked. Gore’s Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) has all but collapsed. The fact that they have now resorted to playing the “alien invasion” card illustrates how desperate and discredited the climate change cult has become.

There are many people who lament the decline and fall of NASA since its Apollo heydays, but if this is what taxpayer funds are being spent on, the organization’s demise cannot come soon enough.

Let’s not forget this is the same government agency that uses taxpayer dollars to fund the work of global warming activist Dr. James Hansen, the man who endorsed an eco-fascist book that called for cities to be razed to the ground, industrial civilization to be destroyed and genocidal population reduction measures to be implemented in the name of preventing climate change.

Perhaps the aliens should hire Hansen as their PR spokesman.

Hansen has received well over $1 million taxpayer dollars from NASA in the last four years to pursue his activist agenda. He is a key figure in the global warming movement, for it was his 1988 with testimony to a US Senate committee chaired by Al Gore that really got the ball rolling for the elite in their mission to hijack the environmental movement and promote apocalyptic fears of climate change as a means of pushing carbon taxes and a highly regulated society.

Aside from all this, why do we need aliens to destroy humanity and “save the planet”? White House science czar John P. Holdren seems to have it all in hand. Holdren’s 1977 book Ecoscience called for a “planetary regime” to carry out forced abortions and mandatory sterilization procedures, as well as drugging the water supply, in an effort to cull the human surplus.

Holdren is now in charge of “geoengineering” the planet to protect against supposed man-made climate change. For me, this represents a far greater and more imminent threat to humanity than any fantasy about alien invasions from outer space.

 read more ...

The American Dream
July 28, 2011

Crazed scientists all over the globe are “playing god” with the very building blocks of life. Today, thanks to extraordinary advances in the field of genetic modification, scientists are now able to do things that were once unthinkable. Part human/part animal hybrid monsters are being created by scientists all over the planet and it is all perfectly legal. Scientists justify mixing the DNA of humans and animals by claiming that it will help them “cure diseases” and “feed the world”, but the reality is that all of this genetic modification is a tremendous threat to the human race. It is only a matter of time before humans start allowing themselves to be genetically-modified in order to “fight illness” or to “enhance” their abilities. The temptation to insert the genes of animals or plants into people in order to create “super soldiers” or a “superior race” will certainly prove to be much too tempting. Unless something is done to hold all of this back, it seems almost certain that genetic hell will be unleashed on the human race. Once genetically-modified humans start breeding with normal humans there will be no putting the genie back into the bottle. Eventually, we could get to the point where there are very few “100% humans” left.

Most Americans have heard about genetic modification, but most of them don’t know a whole lot about it.

Today, the vast majority of the corn and the vast majority of the soy that you eat have been genetically-modified.

In fact, there are thousands upon thousands of food products on store shelves today that contain genetically-modified material.

But modifying plants is one thing. What is even more frightening is when scientists use genetic modification to mix humans with animals.

Recently, a Daily Mail article discussed a new report in the UK that noted that over 150 “human-animal hybrid embryos” have been created in British labs. The following is a brief excerpt from that article….

Scientists have created more than 150 human-animal hybrid embryos in British laboratories.

The hybrids have been produced secretively over the past three years by researchers looking into possible cures for a wide range of diseases.

The revelation comes just a day after a committee of scientists warned of a nightmare ‘Planet of the Apes’ scenario in which work on human-animal creations goes too far.

So who is going to tell scientists when they have gone too far?

Most countries around the globe allow scientists to do pretty much whatever they want when it comes to genetic modification.

The mixing of humans and animals is even going on inside the United States.

The following is from an article posted on MSNBC a few years ago entitled “Scientists Create Animals That Are Part-Human“….

On a farm about six miles outside this gambling town, Jason Chamberlain looks over a flock of about 50 smelly sheep, many of them possessing partially human livers, hearts, brains and other organs.

What do you think most Americans would say if you told them that creatures that are part human/part sheep are being grown inside the United States?

Do you think that they would believe you?

Well, it turns out that our scientists are creating all kinds of monsters that are part human. Just check out what that same MSNBC article said is currently going on….

In the past two years, scientists have created pigs with human blood, fused rabbit eggs with human DNA and injected human stem cells to make paralyzed mice walk.

So shouldn’t we be getting upset about all of this?

Of course we should be.

But the mainstream media barely mentions the bizarre human/animal hybrids that are being created all over the country and so most Americans don’t even realize that it is happening.

There is a lot of other sick stuff going on out there as well.

Did you know that in many areas it is perfectly legal to create human clones for scientific research purposes?

It’s true.

For example, LifeNews.com recently reported that in the state of Minnesota it is now perfectly legal “to use taxpayer dollars to create cloned human embryos“.

Scientists claim that this is perfectly acceptable because they only allow the clones to live for a few days.

Are you disturbed yet?

If not, you should be.

There is some really twisted stuff going on in the scientific community.

Scientists are now coming up with some very “unique” ways to expand the food supply.

In fact, many of us may soon be eating “human gelatin”.

According to an article in Science Daily, scientists are excited about the potential of putting “human-derived gelatin” into marshmallows, candy and other desserts….

Scientists are reporting development of a new approach for producing large quantities of human-derived gelatin that could become a substitute for some of the 300,000 tons of animal-based gelatin produced annually for gelatin-type desserts, marshmallows, candy and innumerable other products.

Doesn’t that just sound so yummy?

So exactly how would this “human gelatin” be made?

The following is how that same Science Daily article describes the process….

To get around these difficulties, the scientists developed and demonstrated a method where human gelatin genes are inserted into a strain of yeast, which can produce gelatin with controllable features.

Yuck.

Pretty soon we all may actually be eating “soylent green“.

Look, if you don’t know much about genetic modification you really need to get educated because it is one of the greatest threats our planet is facing today.

My recent article entitled “Genetic Modification Gone Wild: 10 Signs That Our World May Be Destined To Resemble A Really Bad Science Fiction Movie” is a great place to get started.

The following are a few examples of genetic modification involving human DNA that are noted in that article….

*In China, scientists have inserted human genes into the DNA of dairy cow embryos. At this point, approximately 200 hybrid cows have been successfully produced. These cows can produce milk that is virtually identical to human breast milk. The scientists hope to have huge herds of these cows producing an alternative to human breast milk soon, and they hope to have this “milk” sold in global supermarkets within 3 years.

*Scientists at Rockefeller University have injected human genes into mice. These “humanized mice” are being used to study the spread of the hepatitis C virus.

*In Missouri, entities that are part pig and part human are being grown with the goal of providing organs for human transplants.

Countries all over the world are doing this kind of research.

Unless people start objecting, this “research” is going to keep spreading and it is going to keep becoming even more bizarre.

Science is messing with the very building blocks of life. If we are not very careful, our children and our grandchildren will be living in a world where “man-made life” and “human/animal hybrid monsters” are running around all over the place.

Sometimes it is difficult to convey the true threat posed by genetic modification with only words. Please take a few moments to watch the video posted below. It is put out by Infowars.com and it is entitled “Genetic Armageddon: Humanity’s Greatest Threat“….

 read more ...

The genetic mutilation of present and future generations continues.



 read more ...

The absurdity of many US government recommendations would be humorous if not for the millions of Americans that take them seriously.

 

Ethan A. Huff
Natural News
June 27, 2011

The absurdity of many US government recommendations would be humorous if not for the millions of Americans that take them seriously. The latest pseudo-scientific nonsense being peddled by Big Brother is the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) ignorant claim that sunlight is dangerous, and that only “broad spectrum” sunscreens that block basically every type of sun ray from penetrating the skin are capable of preventing skin cancer and other alleged sun-induced diseases.

The FDA’s recent announcement deals primarily with a significant change in sunscreen labeling, but the devil is in the details as the agency purports in its press release that the sun is dangerous and must be avoided. The agency would rather have every American lather on a coating of toxic, chemical-laden sunscreen than risk the chance that even a single ray of “damaging’ sunshine penetrate their skin.

Such nonsense, of course, has been debunked by a host of scientific studies in recent years. Not only is sunlight exposure absolutely vital for maintaining healthy levels of vitamin D in the body, but a lack of it can lead to serious illnesses like multiple sclerosis, cognitive decline, bone loss, and even cancer. But the FDA has never let the facts get in the way of its agendas, which in this case is to promote the myth that sunlight exposure causes cancer and has no legitimate health benefit, and that the only way to effectively avoid it is to wear lots of sunscreen.

“The population of the world has been brainwashed by the American Academy of Dermatology and the sunscreen industry for thirty years, with the unrelenting message that you should never be exposed to direct sunlight because it is going to cause serious skin cancer and death,” says Dr. Michael Holick, professor of Medicine, Physiology, and Biophysics at Boston University School of Medicine. “People are really quite surprised by the new message that sensible sun exposure, in moderation, is very important for good health. We should appreciate the sun for its benefits, and not abuse it.”

And yet nowhere in the recent FDA announcement does the agency even hint that moderate sunlight exposure could be beneficial to health. Instead, Janet Woodcock, director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, states that people should “regularly apply and reapply (approved) sunscreens,” as well as “limit sun exposure.”

Besides blocking beneficial sunlight rays that produce vitamin D in the skin, the sunscreens the FDA promotes are loaded with untested nanoparticles, as well as known toxins like retinyl palmitate and oxybenzone. The agency denies, of course, that nanoparticles and other sunscreen chemicals penetrate the skin, even though numerous scientific studies say otherwise.

“Sunscreens facilitate the skin’s absorption of pesticides,” says Dr. Tatiana Cannell from the Vitamin D Council. “So if you want pesticides to be readily absorbed through your skin, circulate in your blood, go to your internal organs, and be excreted in your urine, wear sunscreens. Or you could take a swig of your Coppertone and chase it with a shot of Deepwoods Off.”

Sources for this story include:

http://www.anh-usa.org/fda-finally-…

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsr…

 

Daily Mail | The first ‘test-tube’ hamburger is only a year away, scientists claim.

 

Sophie Borland
Daily Mail
June 27, 2011

(click to enlarge)

The first ‘test-tube’ hamburger is only a year away, scientists claim.

They believe the product, beef mince grown from stem cells, could pave the way for eating meat without animals being slaughtered.

The Dutch scientists predict that over the next few decades the world’s population will increase so quickly that there will not be enough livestock to feed everyone.

As a result, they say, laboratory-grown beef, chicken and lamb could become normal.

Read entire article

 

Gore promoting fewer children to curb pollution
Daily Caller | Former VP Al Gore took on population size and the role of society in controlling it to reduce pollution.

Jeff Poor
The Daily Caller
June 22, 2011

The global warming debate has always been a touchy one for both sides, and when the world’s top global warming activist is talking about the size of population and how that contributes to the choices societies make, it might be worth taking note.

In an appearance Monday in New York City, former Vice President Al Gore, prominently known for his climate change activism, took on the subject of population size and the role of society in controlling it to reduce pollution.

He offered some ideas about what might be done for females in the name of stabilizing population growth. (h/t Chris Horner via wattsupwiththat.com)

“One of the things we could do about it is to change the technologies, to put out less of this pollution, to stabilize the population, and one of the principle ways of doing that is to empower and educate girls and women,” Gore said. “You have to have ubiquitous availability of fertility management so women can choose how many children have, the spacing of the children.

Read full article

---

Al Gore branches out into population control theory
Not content to make a fool of himself confusing weather and climate, Al has now decided to lecture women on how to reduce the population for the benefit of the planet.

Watts Up With That?
June 22, 2011

Not content to make a fool of himself confusing weather and climate, Al has now decided to lecture empower women on how to reduce the population for the benefit of the planet. Watch the video below, now we know why he doesn’t allow recordings of his lectures. Darn those Flip Video Cameras.

Al Gore How Empowering Women Fights Climate Change

Al Gore Talks Extreme Weather, Climate

Recorded June 20th by Brian Merchant, hat tip to Chris Horner.

UPDATE: Tom Nelson on his blog points out the bottled water next to Gore.

Flashback: Pour the bottled-water trend down the drain

it’s time for those of us who care about the environment and are concerned about global warming to stop buying and drinking bottled water.

2007: Bottled Water Ban Not Enough
Following the radically liberal traditions of San Francisco, Mayor Gavin Newsom banned municipal departments from purchasing bottled water, even for water coolers.

 read more ...

What may be the science story of the century is breaking this evening, as heavyweight US solar physicists announce that the Sun appears to be headed into a lengthy spell of low activity, which could mean that the Earth – far from facing a global warming problem – is actually headed into a mini Ice Age.

By Lewis Page
The Register
June 15, 2011

Physicists say sunspot cycle is ‘going into hibernation’

 read more ...

CNS News | Bryson told a University of California Berkeley audience in 2010 that a cap and trade system was a good way to hide a carbon tax from the public.

 

 

A $3.3 million research project into colony collapse disorder (CCD), the phenomenon of honeybees mysteriously dying in droves, lost thousands of its test bees to thieves. Researchers at the Center for Neurosciences at Dundee University in Scotland, reported that the British black bees, contained in four hives, were taken on the morning of Sunday, May 8, 2011.

Tara Green
Natural News
May 26, 2011

A $3.3 million research project into colony collapse disorder (CCD), the phenomenon of honeybees mysteriously dying in droves, lost thousands of its test bees to thieves. Researchers at the Center for Neurosciences at Dundee University in Scotland, reported that the British black bees, contained in four hives, were taken on the morning of Sunday, May 8, 2011.

The monetary value of the bees, in the vicinity of $5,000-$6,000, is only part of the reason for the researchers’ dismay at the bee burglary. “This theft will undoubtedly hamper our research,” said lead researcher of the project Dr. Chris Connolly who called the theft “disheartening” for the research team.

The thieves apparently worked quickly and had some knowledge of bee handling. Connolly stated that “The bees were there when I arrived at work on Sunday morning but were absent when I went to work on them 20 minutes later.” Police in the area are pursuing leads about a sighting of two men in a white van seen near the research center around the time of the theft. One of the men may have been wearing a beekeeper’s helmet. Dr. Connolly described the stolen bees as “very unique” and suggested they would be easily identifiable if recovered.

Hmmm, let’s play armchair detective and think about this. Who would want to steal bees? It could be, as Dr. Connolly speculated, someone wanting the bees as breeding stock for the lucrative bee farming business? Large-scale bee businesses can earn hundreds of thousands of dollars by renting their hives to farmers for use in pollinating crops. With the decline in bee populations due to CCD, bees have become scarcer, resulting in a growing apian black market.

But unlike most bee thefts, this one took place at a university, not a bee farm. Is there another suspect? Remember, these bees were part of a research project investigating colony collapse disorder. Many scientists and environmentalists have speculated that CCD in bees, like white-nose syndrome in bats, afflicts pollinators because they come into close contact with plants sprayed with pesticides.

Who might want to prevent research that could potentially verify the link between the toxic chemicals used on our crops and a mysterious decline in bee populations? Is it outside the realm of possibility that the list of suspects might look something like this: http://npic.orst.edu/ingred/manuf.htm

Sources for this article include:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/scientists…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla…
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/epis…
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/epis…
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/ne…

 

You breathe, you pay solution for the New World Order Kooks

Carbon Wow from New World Order Solutions

Vince from ScamWow makes a return for New World Solutions to promote the solution to ‘Climate Change’ or ‘Global Warming’ by introducing You breathe, you pay solution, the CarbonWow Sucking Machine.

No Verichip
Friday, May 13, 2011



Vince from ScamWow makes a return for New World Solutions to promote the solution to ‘Climate Change’ or ‘Global Warming’ by introducing You breathe, you pay solution, the CarbonWow Sucking Machine. Also features Scott Silverman from Verichip and Mr Tinkles the Pants Monkey

 read more ...

In times of tragedy, there always seems to be hucksters about trying to use that tragedy to sell a position, a product, or a belief. In ancient times, tragedy was the impetus used to appease the gods and to embrace religion to save yourselves.

Watts Up With That?
April 30, 2011

In times of tragedy, there always seems to be hucksters about trying to use that tragedy to sell a position, a product, or a belief. In ancient times, tragedy was the impetus used to appease the gods and to embrace religion to save yourselves. In light of this article on the Daily Caller Center for American Progress blames Republicans for devastating tornadoes it seems some opportunists just can’t break the pattern of huckster behavior in the face of disaster.

I can’t think of a more disgusting example of political opportunism that has occurred such as we witnessed today from The Center for American Progress via their Think Progress blog, as well as the New York Times op-ed piece that suggests predicting severe weather is little more than a guessing game. Certified Consulting Meteorologist Mike Smith of Wichita, KS based WeatherData Inc. said of the NYT piece:

The cruelty of this particular April, in the number of tornadoes recorded, is without equal in the United States.

This may or may not be true. The statement is at least premature. The NWS Storm Prediction Center March 8th changed its methodology which allows more reports of tornadoes and other severe storms to be logged (see first note here). We don’t know yet whether this is a record April.

Tornadoes in particular, researchers say, straddle the line between the known and the profoundly unknowable.

“There’s a large crapshoot aspect,” said Kevin Trenberth, a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo.

To add to the mix, Peter Gleick says at the Huffington Post “More extreme and violent climate is a direct consequence of human-caused climate change (whether or not we can determine if these particular tornado outbreaks were caused or worsened by climate change).”

In the Think Progress piece, again, Dr. Trenberth is quoted:

“Given that global warming is unequivocal,” climate scientist Kevin Trenberth cautioned the American Meteorological Society in January of this year, “the null hypothesis should be that all weather events are affected by global warming rather than the inane statements along the lines of ‘of course we cannot attribute any particular weather event to global warming.’”

It should also be noted that during that AMS conference in January, Dr. Trenberth called people who disagreed with that view “deniers” in front of hundreds of scientists, even after being called out on the issue he left the hateful term intact in his speech. Clearly, he is a man with a bias. From my perspective, these articles citing Trenberth are opportunistic political hucksterism at its finest. Unfortunately, many from these bastions of left leaning opininators don’t bother to cite some inconvenient facts, leaving their claims to be on par with superstitions that were the part of our dark past.

First, let’s look at the claim of tornadoes being on the increase, in parallel with the climate change that is claimed. In my previous essay Severe weather more common? Data shows otherwise I cited this graph from the National Climatic Data Center:

 read more ...

A shadowy lobby group which pushes the case that global warming is a real threat is being funded by the taxpayer and assisted by the BBC.

Jason Lewis
London Telegraph
April 24, 2011

A shadowy lobby group which pushes the case that global warming is a real threat is being funded by the taxpayer and assisted by the BBC.

The little-known not-for-profit company works behind the scenes at international conferences to further its aims.

One of its key supporters headed the official investigation into the so-called “Climategate emails”, producing a report which cleared experts of deliberately attempting to skew scientific results to confirm that global warming was a real threat.

Another scientific expert linked to the group came forward to praise a second independent investigation into the Climategate affair which also exonerated researchers.

Set up with the backing of Tony Blair, then the Prime Minister, and run by a group of British MPs and peers the organisation, Globe International, started life as an All Party Group based in the House of Commons.

 read more ...

 

Bees ‘entomb’ pesticide-tainted pollen in effort to protect themselves from extinction

Scientists say that because of this massive onslaught of toxins, bees are actually entombing, or sealing off, their hive cells in an attempt to quarantine polluted pollen and prevent it from destroying the entire colony.

 

Jonathan Benson
Natural News
April 13, 2011

A crucial lifeblood to agriculture, bees continue to face threats of extinction by things like pollution and pesticides, both of which are implicated in causing mass bee die-offs, also known as “colony collapse disorder” or CCD (http://www.naturalnews.com/honey_be…). And scientists say that because of this massive onslaught of toxins, bees are actually entombing, or sealing off, their hive cells in an attempt to quarantine polluted pollen and prevent it from destroying the entire colony.

The Guardian writes that scientists began noticing differences among hive cells containing normal pollen, and others containing tainted pollen. The tainted cells were sunken and covered with a waxy layer of propolis, a sticky resin substance with antibacterial and anti-fungal properties. Upon analysis, the propolis-covered cells were found to contain high levels of pesticides and other toxic pollutants, indicating that the bees were purposely covering them in propolis to protect the hive.

“This is a novel finding, and very striking,” said Jeff Pettis, an entomologist at the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). “The implication is that the bees are sensing [pesticides] and actually sealing it off. They are recognizing that something is wrong with the pollen and encapsulating it. Bees would not normally seal off pollen.”

Researchers also noted that while the sealing efforts are a type of emergency reaction by bees to being bombarded with toxins, they are not really all that effective in the end. According to Pettis, most of the colonies with entombed cells ended up dying off anyway.

Though there are likely other factors contributing to CCD, pesticides play a considerably substantial role in the devastating phenomenon. In fact, a document leaked back in late 2010 revealed that a popular pesticide known as clothianidin, which was approved by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1993, is directly responsible for killing off bees — and the EPA has known this for a while but has done nothing about it (http://www.naturalnews.com/030921_E…).

Sources for this story include:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environme…

---

Climate Change Craziness of the Week: a fish story from llama land

This is just….just…ah heck I can’t even begin to describe it. The stupid, it burns.

 

Here’s the odiferous essence of this publicity stunt story:

“In addition to the anticipated warming of lakes and rivers, we may also see an increase in the occurrence of extreme weather events such as floods, droughts and heatwaves.

“All of these could have an impact on much of the native wildlife in England, especially aquatic species such as the rare and specialised vendace, so we are taking action now to conserve the existing populations.”

So let’s move the animals into the ClimateArk for the “anticipated warming of lakes and rivers”. Eeegads, let’s not wait for the actual data to see if there’s a real temperature problem or not, act now!

 

AP | The unknown risks of “geoengineering” — in this case, tweaking Earth’s climate by dimming the skies — left many uneasy.

CHARLES J. HANLEY
Associated Press
April 5, 2011

Scientists of earth, sea and sky, scholars of law, politics and philosophy: In three intense days cloistered behind Chicheley Hall’s old brick walls, four dozen thinkers pondered the planet’s fate as it grows warmer, weighed the idea of reflecting the sun to cool the atmosphere and debated the question of who would make the decision to interfere with nature to try to save the planet.

The unknown risks of “geoengineering” — in this case, tweaking Earth’s climate by dimming the skies — left many uneasy.

 

 read more ...

Doctors must take a leading role in highlighting the dangers of climate change, which will lead to conflict, disease and ill-health, and threatens global security, according to a stark warning from an unusual alliance of physicians and military leaders.

 

Doctors urged to take climate leadership role

Fiona Harvey,
London Guardian
April 6, 2011

Doctors must take a leading role in highlighting the dangers of climate change, which will lead to conflict, disease and ill-health, and threatens global security, according to a stark warning from an unusual alliance of physicians and military leaders.

Writing in the British Medical Journal on Tuesday, a group of military and medical experts, including two rear admirals and two professors of health, sent out an urgent message to governments around the world. “Climate change poses an immediate and grave threat, driving ill-health and increasing the risk of conflict, such that each feeds upon the other,” said the authors, Lionel Jarvis, surgeon rear admiral at the UK’s Ministry of Defence; Hugh Montgomery, professor of human health at UCL, London; Neil Morisetti, rear admiral and climate and security envoy for the UK; and Ian Gilmore, professor at the Royal Liverpool hospital. “Like all good medicine, prevention is the key.”

The threat to national security and health from global warming have been addressed separately in the past, but the BMJ editorial urges governments to treat them together. “It might be considered unusual for the medical and military professions to concur,” wrote the authors. “But on this subject we do.”

The authors urge doctors to use their position of trust in society to build support for action on climate change. “Although discussion is good, we can no longer delay implementing tough action that will make a difference, while quibbling over minor uncertainties in climate modelling. Unlike most recent natural disasters, this one is entirely predictable,” they warned. “Doctors, often seen as authoritative, trusted, and independent by their communities, must make their voices heard in calling for such action.”

 read more ...

Natural News | The FDA has articulated its belief that there is no such thing as a right to health or to purchase or consume any given food.

David Gutierrez
Natural News
April 3, 2011

In a response to a lawsuit filed by the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF), the FDA has articulated its belief that there is no such thing as a right to health or to purchase or consume any given food.

The FTCLDF has sued the FDA for banning the interstate shipment or sale of raw milk products, alleging that the policy deprives consumers and a food buying group owner “of their fundamental and inalienable rights of (a) traveling across State lines with raw dairy products legally obtained and possessed; (b) providing for the care and well being of themselves and their families, including their children; and (c) producing, obtaining and consuming the foods of choice for themselves and their families, including their children.”

In a legal response, the FDA countered that “there is no ‘deeply rooted’ historical tradition of unfettered access to food of all kinds.” As evidence for this position, the agency cites “the dietary laws of biblical times.”

The FDA goes further, stating that “there is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular kind of food [because] comprehensive federal regulation of the food supply has been in effect at least since Congress enacted the Pure Food and Drugs Act of 1906. … Thus, plaintiffs’ claim to a fundamental privacy interest in obtaining ‘foods of their own choice’ for themselves and their families is without merit.”

In other words, the agency has stated that because Congress has given FDA the authority to regulate food, there is no such thing as a right to acquire any given food.

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect

Furthermore, the FDA says, “there is no generalized right to bodily and physical health.”

“Finally, even if such a right did exist, it would not render FDA’s regulations unconstitutional because prohibiting the interstate sale and distribution of unpasteurized milk promotes ‘bodily and physical health.’”

 read more ...

Watts Up With That?
April 5, 2011

Personally, I’ve always thought that the key to an advanced and open society was freedom of information. Apparently too much freedom for certain labeled groups of people is going to destroy the planet. Gosh. Australian media really has gone off the edge of the Earth since Gillard took over. Oh in case you haven’t seen it, here’s the leaked Gillard game plan to teach those Australian “deniers” to accept a new carbon tax. Damn that Internet and those meddling kids!

From Jammie Wearing Fool (via Chris Horner) who sums this farce up quite nicely.

Great News: The Internet Will Destroy the Planet

Now how exactly will Al Gore’s masterful invention go about destroying the planet? Why, by giving climate change “deniers” a voice to oppose the environmental wackos.

Broadcaster and Sydney Morning Herald columnist

excerpts: …

The planet may not be so lucky. It’s increasingly apparent that the internet may bring about the death of human civilisation, beating out previous contenders such as nuclear holocaust and the election of George W. Bush.

The agents of this planetary death will be the climate-change deniers who, it’s now clear, owe much of their existence to the internet. Would the climate-change deniers be this sure of themselves without the internet?

Somehow I doubt it. They are so damn confident.

They don’t just bury their heads in the sand, they fiercely drive their own heads energetically into the nearest beachfront, their bums defiantly aquiver as they fart their toxic message to the world. How can they be so confident, in the face of so much evidence to the contrary?

It’s the internet, of course, and the way it has given climate-change deniers the perfect forum — one in which groups of quite dim people can swap spurious information, reassuring each other there’s no evidence on the other side, right up to the point they’ve derailed all efforts to save the planet. Call it ”mutually reassured destruction”.

In decades past, the climate-change deniers would have swapped theories in the pub or at a barbecue. But at the barbecue there was always one person willing to put a contrary view, to say: ”There’s another side.” And unless the barbecue was particularly nutty, there was no one handing out gestetnered sheets of dodgy science for people to take home.

The net allows the climate-change deniers to bleat about the scientists and whine about a price on carbon without fear of ever hearing a different voice, right up to the point of planetary collapse. To reformulate T.S. Eliot: ”This is the way the world will end — not with a bang but a whinger.”

On the upside, when it all does end it’ll spare us from reading nonsense like that.

Gosh, those intellectual media types are so smart. Oh wait, I’m a “broadcaster and columnist” too. Hmmm. I thought about leaving a comment on his blog as a courtesy just to let him know that some deniers took notice of what he wrote, but he doesn’t accept comments. Good thing too, the wrong people could get ideas that way.

Maybe we could all send Mr. Glover the The big self parodying “climate change blame” list.

Problem is lately, the “deniers” as we are called, outnumber the “believers” when opinion polls are taken.

/sarc

UPDATE: Some commenters have questioned whether Mr Glover isn’t simply writing a sarcastic piece. There’s two reasons why I don’t think so:

#1 While it is often difficult to detect sarcasm in writing, there appears to be no hint of it here in this piece that I can detect.

#2 He’s written about his dislike of the Internet and people who use it before, specifically Twitter. In March 2009 he claimed it would be gone in 3 months. Here it still going strong is two years later, more successful than ever.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/entertainment/tv–radio/you-could-bring-back-the-hula-hoop-if-you-found-a-way-ofconnecting-it-to-the-net/2009/03/20/1237055064186.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

This quote from that article rather sums up his world view when it comes to technology use by people:

The 1970s were full of innovations that were meant to change the world forever but then retreated to the fringe, providing little more than a safe habitat for nutters.

Reality about Twitter is far different than Mr. Glover’s opinion, see this:

Source: http://venturebeat.com/2010/06/10/twitter-growth-125-million-users/

 read more ...

Global Warming Files
WIDESPREAD cloud and persistent rainfall has kept temperatures down right across Queensland. Longreach, in the Central West, received persistent rain from Tuesday evening, dropping the temperatures by about four degrees. The temperature then barely moved yesterday, reaching a maximum of 11 degrees; 12 degrees below the long-term average and the coldest July day in 44 years of records.Isisford, further south, was even colder, getting to just 10 degrees. This was the town's chilliest day since before records began in 1913, almost a century ago. read more ...

Revolutionary Politics.com | Oh, the contempt.

March 31, 2011

The English edition of Der Spiegel has a recent interview with Prof Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. In this interview Schellnhuber announced that he would unveil his “Master Plan” for transforming society – one no doubt that suits his world view. In Schellhuber’s view, human society needs to be scaled back and managed by an elite group of “wise men” who know what is best for the rest.

Schellnhuber’s contempt for today’s organisation of western soctety is illustrated by his statements. For example Der Spiegel stumps Schellnhuber with a simple question: “Why is it that your messages haven’t been all that well received until now?” Schellnhuber responds:

I’m neither a psychologist nor a sociologist. But my life experiences have shown that the love of convenience and ignorance are man’s biggest character flaws. It’s a potentially deadly mixture.”

Oh the contempt. So we are all too comfortable and ignorant. It’s time for “wiser men” to think for the rest of us. Your message, Mr Schellnhuber, has not been well received because it is anti-democratic and authoritarian. Your kind of thinking is a threat to the principles of Germany’s Constitution and so belongs under government observation.

Read the More: http://notrickszone.com/2011/03/29/another-german-will-soon-unveil-a-master-plan-for-a-transformation-of-society/

 read more ...

Forget democracy, human freedom and free markets. These concepts, which have made today’s human prosperity and long lifespans a reality for humans, wherever and whenever they are given the chance to work, are upsetting a small but very elitist group of individuals who view these concepts as a disruption and a threat to their world view.

P Gosselin
No Tricks Zone
March 31, 2011

We’ve seen that kind of thinking before. Authoritarianism.

Forget democracy, human freedom and free markets. These concepts, which have made today’s human prosperity and long lifespans a reality for humans, wherever and whenever they are given the chance to work, are upsetting a small but very elitist group of individuals who view these concepts as a disruption and a threat to their world view.

German Hans Joachim Schellnhuber has a “Master Plan” for society. Source: http://nachhaltigkeit2009.commerzbank.de/reports/commerzbank/annual/2009/nb/German/3010/_innovations-chancen-nutzen_.html

The English edition of Der Spiegel has a recent interview with Prof Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. In this interview Schellnhuber announced that he would unveil his “Master Plan” for transforming society – one no doubt that suits his world view. In Schellhuber’s view, human society needs to be scaled back and managed by an elite group of “wise men” who know what is best for the rest.

Schellnhuber’s contempt for today’s organisation of western soctety is illustrated by his statements. For example Der Spiegel stumps Schellnhuber with a simple question: “Why is it that your messages haven’t been all that well received until now?” Schellnhuber responds:

I’m neither a psychologist nor a sociologist. But my life experiences have shown that the love of convenience and ignorance are man’s biggest character flaws. It’s a potentially deadly mixture.”

Oh the contempt. So we are all too comfortable and ignorant. It’s time for “wiser men” to think for the rest of us. Your message, Mr Schellnhuber, has not been well received because it is anti-democratic and authoritarian. Your kind of thinking is a threat to the principles of Germany’s Constitution and so belongs under government observation.

Schellnhuber indeed has a very poor understanding of history. History teaches us a different lesson - that it is not the combination of love for convenience and ignorance that is man’s greatest flaw, rather it is the combination of towering arrogance and ignorance that is man’s greatest flaw, and so that is the real threat to society. Schellnhuber also denies climate history and concocts his own fraudulent version to warrant an authoritative intervention.

The belief that the planet needs to be dictated by a higher authority is what makes people like Schellnhuber so dangerous. Their impatience and frustration with democracy, and their claim to have superior knowledge, remind us of others who have led us us down very dark paths back in the 20th century.

These people are convinced they are all-knowing. Der Spiegel asks: “Do you feel that the government’s abrupt change of course in relation to its energy policy is adequate?” Schellnhuber replies:

No. It can only be the beginning of a deep-seated shift. The German Advisory Council on Global Change, which I chair, will soon unveil a master plan for a transformation of society. Precisely because of Fukushima, we believe that a new basis of our coexistence is needed.”

A master plan for transforming society drafted by a climate scientist, a person who admits having no background in sociology. This plan no doubt will be asserted by authority, and not democracy. Schellnhuber has indicated many times that democracy is flawed and is a nuisance. It’s getting in the way of solving the ”world’s crises” (like zero temperature growth over the last 15 years).

Here is a little history lesson for the all-knowing Herr Schellnhuber and his gang, who are frustrated with democratic principles and individual freedom, on where this type of contempt can take us if left unchecked:

This is the concentration camp and crematorium at Auschwitz. This is where people were turned into numbers. Into this pond were flushed the ashes of 4 million people. And that was not done by gas. It was done by arrogance. It was done by dogma. It was done by ignorance. When people believe they have absolute knowledge with no test in reality, this is how they behave. This is what men do when they aspire to the knowledge of gods.”

This I’ve brought this up before, and am bringing it up again, and will continue to bring it up in the future. Watch the entire series, Knowledge or Certainty:

Ascent of Man – Knowledge or Certainty Part 1
“There is no absolute knowledge. And those who claim it, whether they’re scientists or dogmatists, open the door to tragedy.”

Ascent of Man – Knowledge or Certainty Part 2
“Year by year we devise more precise instruments with which to observe nature with more fineness. And when we look at the observations, they are as uncertain as ever.” … “[Göttingen students] are not here to worship what is known, but to question it.”

Ascent of Man – Knowledge or Certainty Part 3
“We had hoped that the human errors would disappear and that we ourselves would have God’s view.”

Ascent of Man – Knowledge or Certainty Part 4
“It’s a major tragedy that in my lifetime and yours, that here in Göttingen scientists were refining to the most exquisite position of the principle of tolerance and turning their backs on the fact that all around them tolerance was crashing to the ground beyond repair.”

Ascent of Man – Knowledge or Certainty Part 5
“The ascent of man against the despotic throwback belief to the notion that they have absolute certainty.”

Ascent of Man – Knowledge or Certainty Part 6
“It was done by arrogance. It was done by dogma.”

Other links:
EU master plan to ban cars from cities by 2050.
ALERT-German Climate Advisor proposes creation of a CO2 budget

 read more ...

Tony Cartalucci | The very idea that bankers actually care about the environment is ridiculous.



What that kook Al Gore doesn’t tell you: CO2 has been 1000′s of times higher during the Cretaceous period and sea levels have been so high North America featured an inland sea. Antarctica was covered in temperate forests and dinosaurs.

Nothing embodies the corporate hijacked environmental movement more than the despicable hoax that is “Earth Hour.” Once a year, we are bombarded worldwide by a feel-good advertising campaign on TV, radio, billboards, fliers, in the newspaper and in every other conceivable way for an event that involves turning off the lights for one hour per year, to “take a stand against climate change.”

Not only has science failed to prove that anthropogenic climate change is happening – to the extent proponents like the White House’s John Holdren have relabeled “Global Warming” to “Global Climate Change” to the now most ambiguous version, “Global Climate Disruption,” but the evidence suggests that the “scientists” peddling this theory have defrauded the public again and again. Worth noting, is that John Holdren himself is a creature of Harvard’s Belfer Center, which is named in fact, after corrupt oil tycoon Robert Belfer. Much of the policy coming out of the Belfer Center ends up in front of delegates attending the very fraudulent and ineffective climate change summits held, most recently in Copenhagen and Cancun.

The Corbett Report breaks down “Climate Gate.”

When we look at say, Earth Hour’s corporate sponsors, or the WWF’s corporate sponsors, or the myriad of banksters and oilmen that steer climate policy centers like Harvard’s Belfer Center we should realize that not only has big oil and the rest of the corporations defiling the planet hijacked environmentalism along with multitudes of well-intentioned activists, but these corporate interests are using it to defile the planet and its population further, only now with a perceived moral justification.

Could we expect anything less from an organization so large, with so many corporate affiliations?

Deutsche Bank’s “Carbon Clock.” The very idea that bankers, perhaps the most universally recognized mongers of greed and human misery, actually care about the environment is ridiculous. When you consider Deutsche is one of the “leading participants” in the carbon credit market, then it makes sense.

The proposed solutions of course, involve greater consolidations of power in the government’s hands to solve these problems – the solutions being carbon taxes that get paid directly to private bankers, rules, regulations and laws that only megalithic corporations can afford to comply with thus shutting out competition, and a laundry list of other non-effectual solutions that only empower the very corporations that have caused real, verifiable environmental damage.

What about real environmental hazards? How about the unfettered nuclear industry, depleted uranium being dumped over the ever expanding theaters of conflict the West is engaged in, or the genetically modified plants and animals that are displacing and corrupting the natural species that inhabit this planet? Or how about the ineffective, logistical & petroleum intensive mega-agricultural industry, poisonous herbicides and pesticides dumped onto our food by companies like Monsanto, free-trade that sees tons of diesel fuel burned to bring plastic trinkets from Chinese factories to America’s shores, and the list goes on ad infinitum.

Real solutions generally don’t involve corporations or government, in fact, as a necessity must exclude them. The marriage between corporate interests and government regulations should be something all of us can agree on, regardless of where we sit on the political spectrum.

Real solutions involve a real education in science, technology, design, and manufacturing. This empowers people in all levels of society to accurately assess problems and apply local solutions. This, coupled with modern manufacturing technology enables more to be done on a local level, short-circuiting the petroleum intensive logistical chains WWF sponsors like Walmart couldn’t live without.

Organic farming on a local level coupled with local farmers’ markets eliminates entirely the need for Monsanto poison, fertilizers, and genetically modified franken-crops, along with the replacement of the petroleum intensive logistical networks that distribute big-agri’s products.

In fact, when you think about it, almost all of these real solutions involve real community and local action. These are not solutions that involve policies, taxes, and regulations, but rather technology, education, constructive, pragmatic, technical solutions that not only would make our environment more livable, but make our local economies and communities more viable and self-sufficient. The catch is, and the reason why this isn’t being done, you will notice that none of these activities require WWF sponsors like Walmart, Nike, IBM, Toyota, Bank of America, Coca-Cola, HSBC, Citi, IKEA, Nokia, etc.

Does it make sense then, to see why real problems and their solutions have become the target of hijackers like the corporate conglomeration that is the WWF? Does it make sense to see them offering “alternative” centralized, corporate dependent solutions that replace local activism?

Please investigate for yourself, WWF’s corporate sponsors and see how many of them end up on this list, “Naming Names,” which exposes the corporations and special interests that keep us at perpetual war and on the edge of financial ruin.

Do we honestly think that these corporations care about the responsible stewardship of the planet? Do they care about people? Do they care about the environment? Are they not at the center of the most horrific scandals, atrocities, and wars of our age? If you care about your environment, do yourself a favor, keep your lights on during the next “Earth Hour”, and do some reading on how you can empower yourself, your community, and become independent from the petroleum hungry, world ravaging corporations that are promoting their version of “environmentalism” through hijacked organizations like the WWF. They have created in their own image a human-hating Malthusian religion of servile obedience to a world government that “promises” to fix the problems they themselves have created.

Let’s be smarter than this, let’s look past the slick public relations stunt that is “Earth Hour,” and look around locally at real solutions. Think and act locally. You know what’s wrong with your hometown and most likely you know how to fix it. Most importantly you and your neighbors can see it is in your best interest to do so, and it doesn’t require charlatans like Al Gore to hold your hand, paying him carbon taxes while you do it.

For more on real solutions that not only promote freedom and liberty, but give us the tools to create cleaner and more efficient technological solutions locally please read on:

Self-Sufficiency

Alternative Economics

The Lost Key to Real Revolution

Boycott the Globalists

This post first appeared on Tony Cartalucci’s blog, The Land Destroyer Report.

 read more ...

Climate ’skeptic’ website ICECAP posted this item noting Google’s latest gambit in global warming activism, which includes bringing on board as an advisor an academic whose name and address pop up with some frequency in the ClimateGate emails.

Christopher C. Horner
Big Government
March 24, 2011

Boy, them Googlers Act Fast.

Climate ’skeptic’ website ICECAP posted this item noting Google’s latest gambit in global warming activism, which includes bringing on board as an advisor an academic whose name and address pop up with some frequency in the ClimateGate emails.

Apparently in response, Google has flagged ICECAP’s website with this warning, discouraging traffic:

“This site may be compromised.“

ICECAP host Joe D’Aleo, the first meteorologist at the Weather Channel before that operation sold out to the alarmist industry, brought this to my attention and assures me this warning was not the case until now. He also attests that the site is not compromised. We just have a co-incidence of challenge followed by inaccuracy, is all.

So not only are the Google crowd global warming rent-seekers looking to rob Peter (you, the taxpayer and ratepayer) to pay their Paul, they are activists who fit in very well with their chosen crowd.

One more good reason to go elsewhere for your searching.

 read more ...

Wanna know when the chemtrails are coming? Check your phone and look at the forecast.

Zen Gardner
Before It’s News
March 24, 2011

Wanna know when the chemtrails are coming? Check your phone and look at the forecast.

Yes, the “weatherman” is in on it, folks, and they know the spray days. All to make it look “natural”.

See for yourself
I checked my phone for the weather while walking under a clear blue sky in San Diego this morning. Sure enough, that nasty filmy cloud was over the sun on my iphone weather app.

Probably gonna be chemtrails today. It may turn out to be a real weather system coming in but let’s see what happens. It’s been clear a while and the chemtrails are overdue. They may also be laying low somewhat with the increased radioactivity from Japan, especially in the upper atmosphere.

We’ve had nice clear skies for partial days with the rains and wind clearing the air. We may have more moisture coming later as real clouds (which did happen) but too often this stringy cloud over the sun foretells chemtrails. Follow the weather and the forecasts closely and you’ll see this to be true. A perfectly blue sky with no real clouds nor reason for them will be turned into an overcast or partly overcast day, all by chemtrails, as you watch them sprayed in the sky, and you’ll see that forecasted on your phone.

They haven’t been able to spray for days so I know they’re itching to get their levels back up, so I decided to document it.

Today at 10:30 am it looked like this:

Nice. On the horizon just over the ocean, the natural look is a darkish haze from the pollution in the area. When that is white, it’s usually a bank of chemtrails coming in, unless it’s a real front, which is much less frequent. Looks so far like they haven’t started spraying, but they could be out there. I see it happen a lot.

And then…

2 hours later I checked outside at 12:30, and this crap is over our heads. It even has that telltale evil HAARPed out pattern as well. (This came in before a bank of real clouds followed later on its heels.)

Thinking HAARP’s active is never a comforting thought, especially with the Pacific Ring of Fire seeing so much activity.

These only appear periodically, but they do appear, sometimes also displaying the rainbow colors but always in an odd shape.

Same time as the above shot.

One of their ploys is to lay the banks of chemtrails way out at sea and float them on shore, so they appear to be natural weather changes. You can spot the tell-tale signs that these are chemtrail or chemtrail augmented clouds, especially the clear spray of filthy chemicals in the above left.

Chemtrails do attract water vapor under certain conditions and sometimes morph into more natural looking formations, almost like a disguise. Sometimes, however, there’s not a lick of moisture and it’s just horrible cross patterns as they fill in from what they started out at sea, and then spread out to cover the sky.

But keep looking–they’ll often separate out and you’ll see the chemicals dispersing at different rates force the chemtrails to give themselves away for the death dealing crap that they are.
Try to tell me this one I just shot is “natural”….

They don’t spray during windy days over about 25mph, although they do spray above clouds, snow and rain. Just wait for a break in the clouds and check for the trails.

Here along the coast we’ll have coastal fog and it’ll clear to an absolute mess they’ve been spewing for hours. (coastal fog clearing lower left and bottom center. 2 days ago)

So, the weatherman is in on it?

It it any wonder, when Raytheon is involved.

Brought to you by the same military-corporate-banking complex that runs America ‘s permanent wars, Raytheon Corp is already profiting from new weather warfare technologies. The world’s fourth largest military weapons maker bought E-Systems in 1995, just one year after that military contractor bought APTI, holder of Bernard Eastlund’s HAARP patents. Raytheon also owns General Dynamics, the world’s leading manufacturer of military Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.

Raytheon reports the weather for NOAA through its Advanced Weather Information Processing System. Source

All weather forecasting and reporting is now routed through this central Raytheon system. No wonder the weatherman won’t say a peep about chemtrails and they so often don’t even show up on TV radar–it’s doctored. Chemtrails and their cover up is a concerted, military controlled effort. Welcome to Orwellia.

And no wonder they’re also involved with HAARP. Nice one-two punch. The military industrial complex rolls on.

More on Raytheon, HAARP, Chemtrails and the Weather

Raytheon Corporation, the world’s fourth largest military weapons command, fabrication, and contracted operations facilitator, bought the HAARP patent after only a short time, effectively placing the US Air Force and US Navy in the power seat without labeling them so. Raytheon is the same corporation, at a standoff with Northrop Grumman, who runs the US Air Force’s federal jetliner aerosol programs for military radar weapons conductivity enhancement, which is openly stated as “global warming mitigation.”

Aside from being co-management, with other corporate political military
entities of the UKUSA group, of the ECHELON base, the world’s biggest global
on-demand electronic invasion surveillance system situated in Europe, Raytheon
runs bomb experimentation, laser weapon creation, and now actually reports the
weather for NOAA through Raytheon Information Services’ AWIPS (Advanced
Weather Information Processing System) computers, in direct link with their UAV weather modification units and radar weaponry systems programs. NOAA gave them over $300 million for this currently active, 10-year project.

Thus, weather reporting, for businesses and scientific organizations everywhere, is custom tailored for publishing as the Department of Defense manipulates it to be through their various programs. Source

These are nasty people, mad military fake scientists experimenting with our planet and its people.
Keep exposing them. The darkness cannot stand the light.

-Zen
www.zengardner.com

P.S. Chemtrails in the news in California

 read more ...

In all of human history, what was believed and promoted by the majority of service intellectuals (high priests) in each civilization was only created and maintained to support the hierarchy and the place of the high priests within the hierarchy.

Activist Teacher
Denis G. Rancourt
March 23, 2011

In all of human history, what was believed and promoted by the majority of service intellectuals (high priests) in each civilization was only created and maintained to support the hierarchy and the place of the high priests within the hierarchy. To believe that the present is any different regarding any issue managed by our “experts”, whether in medicine, psychology, cosmology, economics, law and governance, population health or ecology, is pure distilled idiocy.

Never mind that the whole climate change scam is now driven by the top-level financiers newly eyeing a multi-trillion-dollar paper economy of carbon trading and that this is the reason it’s now a dominant mainstream media and corporate messaging presence [1].

Never mind that this paper economy of carbon trading will be the largest financial extortion enterprise since the invention of the US-centered military-backed global finance structure of predation itself.

Never mind that establishment scientists are service intellectuals who virtually never diverge from supporting power, who at best look for sanitized and hypothetical “problems” that do not threaten hierarchy and who feed their false self-image of relevance [2][3].

Never mind also the pathetic recent historical record of science with regard to identifying or solving public health and environmental problems [4][5][6].

Never mind all that. Take the red pill by considering the climate “science” fairy tale itself and examine its story elements.

Here goes, in five story-element steps.

Step-1: Combustion of fossil fuels produces CO2

These fairy tales always start with some basic science or empirical truism. In this case: Burning fossil fuel produces CO2 gas. Yup the combustion reaction can, for simplicity, be represented as the inverse of the photosynthesis reaction as:

COH2 + O2 = H2O + CO2 + energy,

just like breathing, or a similar reaction for more of a hydro-carbon where each C atom in the fuel gives rise to one CO2 molecule in the product gas.

Step-2: This large amount of CO2 from fossil fuel burning goes into the atmosphere

OK, now believers next want to say that the CO2 from fossil fuel burning is a large amount and that it goes into the planet’s atmosphere. Already in Step-2 there are some pesky conceptual and empirical difficulties, as follows.

First of all, the global industrial-age historic amount of fossil fuel burned to date is a known amount. The post-industrial extra CO2 contained in the planet’s atmosphere is also a known amount. (These numbers are, for example, given here: [7].) But the post-industrial CO2 in the atmosphere is half of the amount that would have resulted from the industrial burning (and its measured temporal evolution function does not follow or match the known temporal evolution of historic post-industrial fossil fuel burning).

This is not some small difference due to measurement errors. It is a factor of two difference. This should give some pause to even the most fervent believers: Half of all the historic fossil fuel burning is unaccounted for.

The atmosphere is not a receptacle that is filled but rather one compartment of many in a planetary system of carbon transport and exchanges. Is it a large receptacle? Are there much larger and active exchangeable carbon receptacles on the planet? Is the rate of input of carbon into the atmosphere from fossil fuel burning large compared to other rates of atmospheric carbon inputs and outputs?

After all, something is only large (or small) compared to a relevant something else. We are talking about planetary processes.

And there are two types of measures: (1) The rates (or fluxes) of carbon in and out of each given planetary compartment such as the atmosphere (measured in number of carbon atoms per year, C/y, say) and (2) the quantities of carbon at a given time in the planetary compartments for exchangeable carbon (or carbon pools) (measured in number of carbon atoms, C, say; or tons of CO2 equivalent, or whatever).

Regarding the rates, consider this. The present (2010) global rate of CO2 production from fossil fuel burning is approximately equal to the present global rate of CO2 production from anthropogenic animal breathing [8].

This implies that reducing anthropogenic animal metabolic rates can have a greater effect than many industry-scale changes in energy use and leads to suggestions that we breathe less [9]. It also shows that demonizing CO2 production demonizes life itself [9].

Among other things, the anthropogenic animal breathing calculation [8] also means that the rate of loss of carbon from the atmosphere is at least four times greater than the rate of measured post-industrial increase in atmospheric CO2.

Where is all that atmospheric carbon going? We don’t know because the other planetary carbon pools with which the atmosphere exchanges are so large (compared to the atmosphere) that the incremental additions of carbon to these larger pools (such as the oceans) cannot be detected.

Again regarding rates, the present (2010) historic maximum of anthropogenic (caused by humans) fossil fuel burning is only 8% or so of global primary production (GPP) (both expressed as kilograms of carbon per year, kg-C/y) [7]. GPP is the rate at which new biomass (living matter) is produced on the whole planet.

Similarly, the rate of fossil fuel burning energy release is miniscule (0.006%) compared to the rate of the sun’s delivery of energy to the planet [7].

And in terms of quantities, how large is the total historic atmospheric stash of post-industrial CO2? Here is an answer [7]:

“[T]he present planetary biomass alone (1 x 10^15 kg-C) is approximately three times the amount of total post-industrialization fossil fuel burned to date where even this biomass carbon is only carbon in living organisms.

In addition there is at least 10 times more carbon contained in non-living organic matter than in biomass – in organic detritus, soils, bogs, natural waters, lake sediments, marine sediments, and so on. For example, from my own research, the boreal forest (the largest ecosystem on Earth) contains millions of lakes that have not even been counted. These virtually unstudied lakes have accumulated organic-rich bottom sediments (preserved by anoxia) that have not yet been included in global carbon accounting studies.

Furthermore, there is approximately fifty times more dissolved carbon in ocean water than contained as CO2 in the atmosphere.

These bio-available carbon pools (biomass, organic matter, atmosphere, ocean water) do not include geological stores and sources from volcanoes and active geothermal sites. Volcanic activity, in particular, is unpredictable and has been highly variable in intensity since life burst onto the planet (billions of year ago), with often dramatic impacts on global ecology.

In summary, the total amount of post-industrial fossil fuel burned to date (and expressed as kilograms of carbon) represents less than 1% of the global bio-available carbon pools.

More importantly, bio-available carbon is a minor constituent of the Earth’s surface environment and one that is readily buffered and exchanged between compartments without significant consequences to the diversity and quantity of life on the planet. The known history of life on Earth (over the last billions of years) is unambiguous on this point.”

Environmental scientists working from the CO2 climate hypothesis want post-industrial atmospheric CO2 to be large for the same reason they want their penises to be large. The question is: Compared to what? Next, we need to remind them that CO2 is a trace constituent of the atmosphere.

Step-3: Post-industrial atmospheric CO2 produces an increased planetary greenhouse effect

Here believer scientists, when they dare pull their heads from their asses, are going to have to actually contend with two problems: (1) CO2 is a trace constituent of the atmosphere which alone can have no significant effect on climate and (2) the physical correctness of a posited planetary greenhouse effect (on a planet with a greenhouse-effect-gas-bearing atmosphere) is not established and is hotly debated by planetary physicists.

Start with the latter point, which makes the former point irrelevant.

A planetary atmosphere is not a pane of glass which is transparent to visible light and blocks infrared light. There is no greenhouse. (Note also that the dominant physical mechanism for the traditional greenhouse effect is itself in question [10].)

A so-called “greenhouse effect gas” is a gas whose molecules resonantly scatter infrared light in all directions, all directions. This gas is not located in a discrete layer (like a pane of glass) but is distributed throughout the thickness of the atmosphere. You can see how that gets complicated because downward radiation can be re-scattered upwards; the atmosphere itself emits radiations; etc.; such that calculating the resulting mean surface temperature at a given altitude is a non-trivial problem.

The present (virulent) theoretical physics debate about whether a physical mechanism for a planetary greenhouse effect exists is illustrated by these articles: [11], [12], [13], [14].

In simple terms, the atmosphere can be considered part of the “surface” of the planet and the only parameters that physically determine the resulting “surface” temperature of the planet in steady state are the “surface” albedo (i.e., the fraction of incident electromagnetic radiation reflected by the surface) and the solar constant (i.e., the intensity of electromagnetic radiation from the planet’s sun). So it is not too surprising that this debate would occur.

Geophysicists have always correctly assumed that solar constant and planet albedo were the key parameters over the course of Earth’s climate history. This greenhouse thing is a tentative blip in geophysical conceptualization. If you want to predict planetary mean surface temperature and even regional climates on a planet better look at solar radiation input variations and large-area changes in surface albedo. The latter can arise from changes in agricultural practices, land use, particulate deposition on snow and ice, insect infestations, etc. [2]

However, regarding CO2 as a greenhouse effect gas, even if we use the (incorrect) planetary greenhouse effect equations of the climate models, the post-industrial amount of atmospheric CO2 (as a trace quantity) does not alone have a predicted significant climate effect.

The believer modellers need to “amplify” the effect of CO2 in their models.

This is conveniently achieved by the so-called “amplification hypothesis” whereby, in the absence of any justifying empirical evidence, the modellers simply amplify the amount of greenhouse effect gas using a multiplicative factor applied to the concentration of CO2. The factor is simply chosen “to make it work”.

This arbitrary adjustment is rationalized as follows. The main greenhouse effect gas in Earth’s atmosphere is water vapour. The “logic” is that a small increase in CO2 would cause a small increase in temperature which in turn would cause more vaporization of water thereby resulting in more atmospheric water vapour causing more greenhouse warming – ta-da… a “positive feedback” to give us the needed leverage to affect our climate model predictions. (All current climate models require this machination.)

There are three main problems with this amplification hypothesis. First, there is no empirical support or experimental verification for it. Global average atmospheric water vapour concentration is impossible to measure because water constantly changes phase (vapour, liquid, ice) and is distributed inhomogeneously (vapour, rain, snow, clouds, fog, surface condensation/sublimation/vaporisation, etc.).

Second, there are innumerable hypothetical mechanisms whereby any feedback between CO2 and water vapour could be negative rather than positive and no practical way to evaluate most of these possible mechanisms. For example, just to name one, an increase in CO2 could change the plant ecology in such a way as to reduce evaporation from plants. One could sit and invent hundreds of such plausible scenarios (all equally irrelevant with respect to global climate).

Thirdly, it is likely that there are other negative (or positive?) also negligible climate feedbacks with CO2 that do not depend on coupling with water vapour. CO2 can be a growth limiting plant nutrient such that its impact on albedo might produce greater climate leverage than any greenhouse effect gas coupling could ever achieve?

In summary, as I showed in 2007 [2]: “There is of course much more wrong with state-of-the-art global circulation models (climate models) than the assumption and implementation of CO2-H2O feedback. Although these models are among the most elaborate predictive models of complex non-linear phenomena, they are nonetheless sweeping oversimplifications of the global climate system and its mechanistic intricacies.”

Overall, therefore, there is no established reason to believe that CO2 could be a climate driver and many reasons to conclude that, although CO2 may often follow or correlate with climate indicators [2], climate drivers are related to solar irradiance and albedo and have nothing to do with CO2.

Step-4: The increased planetary greenhouse effect causes planetary warming

So, if despite all the carbon pools and inter-pool fluxes on the planet we (a) accept that the increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration is due to fossil fuel burning, (b) believe that the concept of a planetary greenhouse effect is physically justified, and (c) believe that CO2 as a trace gas in the atmosphere can impact climate via the invented but-some-believe-justified amplification hypothesis, then we must next look for planetary warming (or some other global climate effect?) that can be attributed to increasing CO2.

Note that, given the above discussion, a plausible alternative to even point-a is that the increase in atmospheric CO2 is a response to some global or solar-system change(s) that affect carbon fluxes – rather than arising from a simplistic addition from fossil fuel burning. That is, that trace atmospheric CO2 “follows” rather than “drives” (e.g., [2][15][16]).

Never mind! Let’s just look for warming.

Now at this stage it gets really difficult for the believer scientists. They must contend both with the largest scientific data hording and data manipulating scandal since Newton (Climategate, [17]) and the fact that the mathematical statisticians have shown that a global (space-and-time-) average temperature from (space-and-time-) discrete measurements of temperature is “ill-posed” (i.e., cannot be reliably evaluated) [2][18].

Mathematical statistics experts Essex et al. put it this way in their 2007 abstract [18]:

“Physical, mathematical, and observational grounds are employed to show that there is no physically meaningful global temperature for the Earth in the context of the issue of global warming. While it is always possible to construct statistics for any given set of local temperature data, an infinite range of such statistics is mathematically permissible if physical principles provide no explicit basis for choosing among them. Distinct and equally valid statistical rules can and do show opposite trends when applied to the results of computations from physical models and real data in the atmosphere. A given temperature field can be interpreted as both “warming” and “cooling” simultaneously, making the concept of warming in the context of the issue of global warming physically ill-posed.”

In addition, analytic forecasting experts assessed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Working Group One (WG1) 2007 Report and found that [19]:

“The forecasting procedures that were described violated 72 [established forecasting] principles. Many of the violations were, by themselves, critical. The forecasts in the Report were not the outcome of scientific procedures. In effect, they were the opinions of scientists transformed by mathematics and obscured by complex writing. Research on forecasting has shown that experts’ predictions are not useful in situations involving uncertainly and complexity. We have been unable to identify any scientific forecasts of global warming. Claims that the Earth will get warmer have no more credence than saying that it will get colder.”

This all occurred after the ludicrous “hottest year in the hottest decade of the last thousand years” madness of the 1990s, now politely referred to as the “hockey stick controversy” [20]. And recently Climategate has conclusively settled the latter controversy [17]: The hockey stick was a sham even allowing for statistical ignorance regarding the instrumental temperature record.

In addition, it is stunning to note the almost total disregard for proper error propagation and sensitivity analysis that was the norm in climate science (both with the modellers and those reporting proxy and instrumental data) into the beginnings of the 2000s. This is true to the point that the first tentative reports of error and sensitivity analysis on the models were considered top-rate scientific news for the elite journals Science and Nature (e.g., [21][22][23][24]) – as though scientists had just discovered reliability evaluation!

Several papers then questioned the further practical difficulty of correctly quantifying true prediction uncertainties given that all the contending climate models make virtually the same model assumptions (e.g., [25]) – as though that were a surprise.

These were fatal blows (mean global temperature not defined and cannot be measured or predicted) that did not even require that the previously debated and arguably insurmountable difficulties of measuring a given temperature (instrumentally or by proxy) be addressed (see [2] for discussion).

These are the reasons that “global warming” became “climate change”. Model extractions and empirical evaluations of a mean global temperature were shown to be hog wash.

Something other than “warming” was now needed to save the field.

Step-5: Climate chaos and melting glaciers

In the final stage before its mental environment death, and as the financiers and their minions implement carbon trading, it’s really a circus. We pull climate chaos out of the non-linear physics hat and every weather event and habitat destruction observation on the planet becomes evidence for climate change.

Now melting glaciers are melting from temperature increases that cannot be measured, islands and shorelines will be flooded, tropical storms, hot winters, cold winters, cold summers, hot summers, heavy rains, droughts… it’s all climate change.

The modellers are relevant again, showing predicted regional climate changes “forced” by CO2, on their colour-coded computer maps…

The only problems are a few pesky scientists from “outside the field” (i.e., whose careers are not tied to computer climate models), like statistical climatologists, field geologists, radiation experts, and the like.

These pesky outsiders point out alternative mechanisms for glacier melting [2], question satellite image interpretations, show that weather events are within statistical norms (e.g., [26][27][28][29]) and generally misbehave.

Maybe the modellers are not aware of it, but significant regional climate changes have been around since well before the industrial period and have been documented (in proxy, sedimentary and sequential records) to have occurred on the decadal and centennial time scales for at least one thousand years towards the last ice age (e.g., [2]).

Conclusion

Climate change “science” is part of just another screw-the-brown-people scam [2]:

“Environmental scientists and government agencies get funding to study and monitor problems that do not threaten corporate and financial interests. It is therefore no surprise that they would attack continental-scale devastation from resource extraction via the CO2 back door. The main drawback with this strategy is that you cannot control a hungry monster by asking it not to shit as much. … All in all, the best way to not pollute and destroy the environment is to not pollute and destroy the environment. The best way to not exploit others is to not exploit others.”

Or is the societal goal to use the fabricated sanitized problem of CO2 in order to mask the real problems and to shield us from our responsibilities as influential First Worlders? – So as to not see our obvious responsibilities to ourselves and to others [2]:

“It’s about exploitation, oppression, racism, power, and greed. Economic, human, and animal justice brings economic sustainability which in turn is always based on renewable practices. Recognizing the basic rights of native people automatically moderates resource extraction and preserves natural habitats. Not permitting imperialist wars and interventions automatically quenches nation-scale exploitation. True democratic control over monetary policy goes a long way in removing debt-based extortion.”

The climate change scam fits into a now common pattern of public manipulation [5]; that works well on a public which benefits from being manipulated.

Endnotes

[1] David F. Noble. “The Corporate Climate Coup”.
http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/2007/05/dgr-in-my-article-entitled-global.html

[2] Denis G. Rancourt. “Global Warming: Truth or Dare?” (And see the many “Selected Supporting References” section.)
http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/2007/02/global-warming-truth-or-dare.html

[3] David F. Noble. “Regression on the Left”.
http://climateguy.blogspot.com/2007/05/regression-on-left.html

[4] Aaron Wildavsky. “But is it true? A citizen’s guide to environmental health and safety issues”. Harvard University Press. 1995.

[5] Denis G. Rancourt. “Some big lies of science”.
http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/2010/06/some-big-lies-of-science.html

[6] Denis G. Rancourt. “On the False Science of a Fundamental Basis for Progress”.
http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/2011/01/on-false-science-of-fundamental-basis.html

[7] Denis G. Rancourt. “Is the burning of fossil fuel a significant planetary activity?”
http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/2010/08/is-burning-of-fossil-fuel-significant.html

[8] Denis G. Rancourt. “CO2 emission from fossil fuel burning is not more than from breathing”.
http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/2010/08/co2-emission-from-fossil-fuel-burning.html

[9] David F. Noble and Denis G. Rancourt. “Taking CO2 seriously”.
http://climateguy.blogspot.com/2007/05/taking-co2-seriously.html

[10] A. Neil Hutton. Climate Change. (see Chap.IV: The Greenhouse Effect.) Originally published as a ten-part series in the Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists’ monthly magazine, The Reservoir, between January and November 2009.
http://friendsofginandtonic.org/page1/assets/hutton%20-%20climate%20change.pdf

[11] “Falsification Of the atmospheric CO2 greenhouse effects within the frame Of Physics” by Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D. Tscheuschner; International Journal of Modern Physics B, Vol. 23, No. 3 (2009) pages 275-364.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0707/0707.1161v4.pdf

[12] “Proof of the atmospheric greenhouse effect” by Arthur P. Smith; arXiv:0802.4324v1 [physics.ao-ph]
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0802/0802.4324v1.pdf

[13] “Comments on the “Proof of the atmospheric greenhouse effect” by Arthur P. Smith” by Gerhard Kramm, Ralph Dlugi, and Michael Zelger; arXiv:0904.2767v3 [physics.ao-ph]
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0904/0904.2767.pdf

[14] “Reply to ‘Comment on ‘Falsification Of the atmospheric CO2 greenhouse effects within the frame Of Physics’ by Joshua B. Halpern, Chistopher M. Colose, Chris Ho-Stuart, Joel D. Shore, Arthur P. Smith, Jorg Zimmermann” by Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D. Tscheuschner, International Journal of Modern Physics B, Vol. 24, No. 10 (2010) pages 1333–1359.
http://www.skyfall.fr/wp-content/gerlich-reply-to-halpern.pdf

[15] Veizer, J, Godderis, Y, François, LM. 2000. “Evidence for decoupling of atmospheric CO2 and global climate during the phanerozoic eon”. Nature 408 (2000) pages 698-701.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v408/n6813/abs/408698a0.html

[16] Caillon, N, Severinghaus, JP, Jouzel, J, Barnola, J-M, Kang, J, Lipenkov, VY. “Timing of atomospheric CO2 and Antarctic temperature changes across termination III.” Science 299 (2003) pages 1728-1731.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/299/5613/1728.short

[17] Google “Climategate”. And, for example, THESE POSTS on ClimateGuy.
http://climateguy.blogspot.com/search/label/Climategate
Also, THIS VIDEO is hilarious.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAlMomLvu_4&feature=player_embedded#at=16

[18] Christopher Essex, Ross McKitrick, Bjarne Andresen. “Does a Global Temperature Exist?” Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics, Feb 2007, Vol.32, No.1, pages 1-27.
http://www.reference-global.com/doi/abs/10.1515/JNETDY.2007.001
https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~wsoon/ArmstrongGreenSoon08-Anatomy-d/EssexMcKitrickAndresen07-globalT_JNET2007.pdf

[19] Kesten C. Green, J. Scott Armstrong. Global Warming: Forecasts by Scientists Versus Scientific Forecasts. Energy & Environment, Volume 18, Number 7 – 8 / December 2007, pages 997-1021.
http://multi-science.metapress.com/content/cx27431844018158/

[20] Hockey Stick Controversy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy

[21] Caldeira, K, Jain, AK, Hoffert, MI. 2003. Climate sensitivity uncertainty and the need for energy without CO2 emission. Science 299: 2052-54
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/299/5615/2052.short

[22] Murphy, JM, Sexton, DMH, Barnett, DN, Jones, GS, Webb, MJ et al. 2004. Quantification of modelling uncertainties in a large ensemble of climate change simulations. Nature 430: 768-72
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v430/n7001/abs/nature02771.html

[23] Stainforth, DA, Alna, T, Christensen, C, Collins, M, Pauli, N et al. 2005. Uncertainty in preditions of the climate response to rising levels of greenhouse gases. Nature 433: 403-06
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v433/n7024/abs/nature03301.html

[24] Gerard H. Roe, Marcia B. Baker. Why Is Climate Sensitivity So Unpredictable? Science, 2007, Vol.318, No. 5850, pages 629-632.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/318/5850/629.short

[25] Mikyoung Jun, Reto Knutti, Douglas W Nychka. Spatial Analysis to Quantify Numerical Model Bias and Dependence. Journal of the American Statistical Association. September 1, 2008, 103(483): 934-947. doi:10.1198/016214507000001265.
http://pubs.amstat.org/doi/abs/10.1198/016214507000001265?journalCode=jasa

[26] Balling Jr, RC, Cerveny, RS. 2003. Compilation and discussion of trends in severe storms in the United States: Popular perception v. climate reality. Natural Hazards 29: 103-12

[27] Changnon, SA. 2003. Shifting economic impacts from weather extremes in the United States: A result of societal changes, not global warming. Natural Hazards 29: 273-90

[28] Mudelsee, M, Börngen, M, Tetziaff, G, Grünewald, U. 2003. No upward trends in the occurrence of extreme floods in central Europe. Nature 425: 166-69

[29] Kevin Trenberth. Uncertainty in Hurricanes and Global Warming. Science 308 (2005) 1753-1754.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/308/5729/1753.short

Addendum

The climate science lie is so large that one has to expect many considered objections from independent thinkers. Here are some examples:

 read more ...

Prof. Knut Löschke, a solid state physicist, who conducted research until 1986, founded PC-Ware AG, and then turned it into a European IT company before leaving in 2009, had some harsh words about climate science and policy in an interview with the magazine Smart Investor.

 

 

 read more ...

By: The Associated Press

Date: Thursday Mar. 10, 2011 7:38 AM PT

 read more ...

Paul Joseph Watson | Former head of SDI blows the whistle on the militarization of space.Robert M. Bowman, a former Director of Advanced Space Programs Development for the U.S. Air Force in the Ford and Carter administrations has been targeted with death threats, government harassment and three tax audits in two years as a consequence of his bold truth-telling activism, which all started when he blew the whistle on the fact that Reagan’s Star Wars program was an offensive act of military conquest in space and a means of waging aggressive pre-emptive warfare, disguised as a defensive program.

This special video interview for Prison Planet.tv subscribers features a discussion with Robert M. Bowman, a former Director of Advanced Space Programs Development for the U.S. Air Force in the Ford and Carter administrations, and a former United States Air Force Lieutenant Colonel with 101 combat missions. He holds a Ph.D. in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from the California Institute of Technology. Bowman is a prominent critic of the Strategic Defense Initiative, aka “Star Wars,” and has also been a vocal advocate for the 9/11 truth movement. Since the early 1980′s, Bowman has headed up an organization called The Patriots (http://www.thepatriots.us), which mainly consists of former top ranking military officers. The goal of the group is to make public servants follow the Constitution, honor the truth and serve the American people.

Bowman has been targeted with death threats, government harassment and three tax audits in two years as a consequence of his bold truth-telling activism, which all started when he blew the whistle on the fact that Reagan’s Star Wars program was an offensive act of military conquest in space and a means of waging aggressive pre-emptive warfare, disguised as a defensive program. Bowman notes that his dissent was in fact encouraged by Reagan’s own Joint Chiefs of Staff, who privately thought that the whole idea was “military lunacy”. The initial intention was to use the space shuttle as a platform from which to test the star wars technology against targets on earth, states Bowman, a prospect that alarmed the JCS who feared that this would confirm Soviet suspicions that the space shuttle was nothing more than a weapons platform disguised as a component of a peaceful space exploration program.

Bowman compares the notion that John F. Kennedy was killed by a lone assassin by a shot fired from behind when the footage clearly shows the fatal shot came from the front to the equally ludicrous explanations offered for the collapse of WTC Building 7 on 9/11, and points to how the likes of BBC and CNN reported that the building had collapsed over an hour before it actually fell. The difference between 1963 and now, points out Bowman, is the fact that after Kennedy was shot almost everyone had heard about the grassy knoll, whereas the vast majority of Americans have no idea about Building 7 because the mainstream media has completely failed to investigate the matter.

One of the ongoing issues that concerns Bowman is the preparation for a military attack on Iran, and through his organization he encourages the Pentagon and soldiers of all ranks to refuse to obey unconstitutional orders, a duty codified under the Nuremberg code. Bowman states that if Israel is given the green light to attack Iran, which seems to be the current attitude under the Obama administration, that all US aid to Israel should cease immediately.

Speaking on the subject of how Obama has abandoned almost every ideal he talked about before he became President, Bowman points to the fact that Obama’s top foreign policy advisor is Zbigniew Brzezinski, the author of the grand chessboard and a guru of geopolitical manipulation, and how Obama has merely accelerated the move towards global government under his watch. Bowman notes that the American people are being divided by hot button issues which in reality have little significance, while there is absolute consensus amongst the global elite when it comes to major issues no matter who is in the Oval Office.

Watch the trailer below.

Subjects covered in the interview include;

- Secrets and lies behind Star Wars

- 9/11 and Building 7

- The assassination of JFK

- The plan for a military attack on Iran

- The expansion of “missile defense” to encircle Russia

- The Obama deception

- The left/right scam and how it is used to divide and conquer

- NAFTA and the race to the bottom

 

 read more ...

We mentioned this previously on WUWT, now it is officially peer reviewed and accepted. Maybe this will be a lesson to those in the MSM and eco blogland who immediately jump on every newsworthy weather event, and with no supporting evidence, attribute it to “global warming”, “climate change”, or “climate disruption” or whatever the marketing phrase of the day is.

 

Watts Up With That?
March 10, 2011

We mentioned this previously on WUWT, now it is officially peer reviewed and accepted. Maybe this will be a lesson to those in the MSM and eco blogland who immediately jump on every newsworthy weather event, and with no supporting evidence, attribute it to “global warming”, “climate change”, or “climate disruption” or whatever the marketing phrase of the day is. The factual science is in, and the answer that we knew all along? To paraphrase James Carville, It’s the weather, not climate, stupid.

NOAA: Natural Variability Main Culprit of Deadly Russian Heat Wave That Killed Thousands

Source here

The deadly Russian heat wave of 2010 was due to a natural atmospheric phenomenon often associated with weather extremes, according to a new NOAA study. And while the scientists could not attribute the intensity of this particular heat wave to climate change, they found that extreme heat waves are likely to become increasingly frequent in the region in coming decades.

The research team drew from scientific observations and computer climate models to evaluate the possible roles of natural and human-caused climate influences on the severity of the heat wave. The study was accepted for publication in Geophysical Research Letters, a publication of the American Geophysical Union.

“Knowledge of prior regional climate trends and current levels of greenhouse gas concentrations would not have helped us anticipate the 2010 summer heat wave in Russia,” said lead author Randall Dole, deputy director of research at NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory, Physical Science Division and a fellow of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES). “Nor did ocean temperatures or sea ice status in early summer of 2010 suggest what was to come in Russia.”

Temperatures in the upper 90s to above 100 F scorched western Russia and surrounding areas from July through mid-August, 2010. In Moscow, the long-term daily average temperatures for July range from 65-67 F; in 2010, daily average July temperatures soared up to 87. Daily average temperatures include the night. The exceptional heat over such a long duration, combined with poor air quality from wildfires increased deaths by at least 56,000 in Moscow and other parts of western Russia, according to Munich Reinsurance, and led to massive crop failures in the region.

While a contribution to the heat wave from climate change could not be entirely ruled out, if it was present, it played a much smaller role than naturally occurring meteorological processes in explaining this heat wave’s intensity.

The researchers cautioned that this extreme event provides a glimpse into the region’s future as greenhouse gases continue to increase, and the signal of a warming climate, even at this regional scale, begins to emerge more clearly from natural variability in coming decades. Climate models evaluated for the new study show a rapidly increasing risk of such heat waves in western Russia, from less than one percent in 2010, to 10 percent or more by the end of this century.

“It appears that parts of Russia are on the cusp of a period in which the risk of extreme heat events will increase rapidly,” said co-author Martin Hoerling, a research meteorologist, also from ESRL.

Dole called the intensity of this heat wave a “climate surprise,” expected to occur only very rarely in Russia’s current climate. With the possibility of more such events in the future, studying the Russian event better prepares scientists to understand climate phenomena that will affect the U.S. and other parts of the globe.

Map of observed global temperature anomalies for July 2010, from NOAA analyses produced by the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). Anomalies are determined with respective to the base period 1971 to 2000.

High resolution (Credit: NOAA)

The team — led by Dole, Hoerling, and Judith Perlwitz from the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences at the University of Colorado in Boulder — sifted through long-term observations and results from 22 global climate models, looking for trends that might help explain the extraordinarily high temperatures in western Russia during the 2010 summer. They also ran atmospheric models that used observed global sea surface temperatures, Arctic sea ice conditions and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations in 2010 to assess whether such factors might have contributed to the heat wave.

The heat wave was due primarily to a natural phenomenon called an atmospheric “blocking pattern”, in which a strong high pressure system developed and remained stationary over western Russian, keeping summer storms and cool air from sweeping through the region and leading to the extreme hot and dry conditions. While the blocking pattern associated with the 2010 event was unusually intense and persistent, its major features were similar to atmospheric patterns associated with prior extreme heat wave events in the region since 1880, the researchers found.

They also found that western Russia has not experienced significant climate warming during the summer season over the 130 years from 1880-2009, despite significant warming of globally averaged temperatures during that time. Such a “warming hole” is not unique to that region and is not entirely unexpected, as the Earth is not uniformly warming and experiences distinct geographic areas that may be warmer or cooler than the average trend.

“We know that climate change is not taking place at the same rate everywhere on the globe,” said Hoerling. “Western Russia is one of the parts of the world that has not seen a significant increase in summertime temperatures. The U.S. Midwest is another.”

Dole compared his team’s findings to trying to hear a quiet conversation underneath the roar of a noisy fan: a summertime signal due to climate change over western Russia was drowned out by the much larger climate “noise,” or variability, resulting from natural processes.

Authors of the new paper, “Was There a Basis for Anticipating the 2010 Russian Heat Wave?” are Randall Dole¹, Martin Hoerling¹, Judith Perlwitz², Jon Eischeid², Philip Pegion², Tao Zhang², Xiao-Wei Quan², Taiyi Xu², and Donald Murray². The team is part of a NOAA effort to better understand the underlying causes of high-impact weather and climate events, with the ultimate goal of better anticipating them.

NOAA’s mission is to understand and predict changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and to conserve and manage our coastal and marine resources. Visit us on Facebook.

¹NOAA/Earth System Research Laboratory, Physical Sciences Division, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
²Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado.

h/t to WUWT reader “Ray”

 read more ...

Sources confirm that a federal inspector has questioned Eugene Wahl and Wahl has confirmed that Mann asked him to delete emails. Wahl has also informed the inspector that he did delete emails as the result of this request.

Steven Mosher
Watts Up With That?
March 9, 2011

Sources confirm that a federal inspector has questioned Eugene Wahl and Wahl has confirmed that Mann asked him to delete emails. Wahl has also informed the inspector that he did delete emails as the result of this request.

There are times during the course of Climategate when you feel like you are in a twilight zone episode, especially the kind where the ambiguous meaning of terms plays a critical role, like “To Serve Man”.



That episode is apt because of the central role trust plays and because of the role puzzle solvers play in uncovering that the do-gooder aliens cannot be trusted. “Serving”, of course, has now taken on new meanings, as in “you got served” or pwned. With the release of the news that Mann successfully instructed Wahl to delete emails, it’s clear that Mann got served or pwned by Wahl; but more importantly, he got served or assisted by Dr. Pell, Dr. Scaroni, Dr Brune, and Dr. Foley. Who are they? They are the Penn State team who served Dr. Mann by purporting to exonerate him in the Penn State inquiry, despite Mann’s own non-responsive response to a key question being on its face evasive, and begging followup questions. Regardless, Mann’s non-answer did not even purport to support their conclusion about his actions. In short, they covered for him.

The puzzle begins back in 2006. Keith Briffa the author of chapter 6 in the 4^th Assessment Report of the IPCC (AR4) is struggling under the directive of review editor Johnathan Overpeck, who has encouraged him to come up with something “more compelling than the Hockey Stick”, that iconic symbol of Global warming created by Michael Mann in the third assessment report.

Briffa is struggling with the comments and suggestions of a particular reviewer who we now know was Steve McIntyre, the citizen scientist who has been dogging Mann for several years. In what appears to be violation of IPCC rules Briffa writes to Eugene Wahl asking for assistance in answering McIntyre’s comments. More important than this communication being apparently at odds with IPCC directives, is that Briffa is asking Wahl to comment on McIntyre’s work, a process that is clearly supposed to take place in peer reviewed literature. Wahl and McIntyre had both been critical of each other’s work and such disputes are most fairly handled by independent third parties and not by the disputants themselves.

In mid 2006 the following exchange occurs between Briffa and Eugene Wahl:

From: Keith Briffa [mailto:k.briffa@xxxxxxxxx.xxx]
Sent: Tue 7/18/2006 10:20 AM
To: Wahl, Eugene R
Subject: confidential

Gene
I am taking the liberty (confidentially) to send you a copy of the reviewers[McIntyre’s] comments (please keep these to yourself) of the last IPCC draft chapter. I am concerned that I am not as objective as perhaps I should be and would appreciate your take on the comments from number 6-737 onwards , that relate to your reassessment of the Mann et al work. I have to consider whether the current text is fair or whether I should change things in the light of the sceptic comments. In practise this brief version has evolved and there is little scope for additional text , but I must put on record responses to these comments – any confidential help , opinions are appreciated . I have only days now to complete this revision and response

Wahl responds

Thoughts and perspective concerning the reviewer’s comments per se. These are coded in blue and are in the “Notes” column between pages 103 and 122 inclusive. It got to the point that I could not be exhaustive, given the very lengthy set of review thoughts, so I am also attaching a review article Caspar [Ammann] and I plan to submit to Climatic Change in the next few days….Please note that this Ammann-Wahl text is sent strictly confidentially — it should not be cited or mentioned in any form, and MUST not be transmitted without permission. However, I am more than happy to send it for your use, because it succinctly summarizes what we have found on all the issues that have come up re: MBH. As you can see, we agree at some level with some of the criticisms raised by MM [McIntyre] and others, but we do not find that they invalidate MBH in any substantial way.

Briffa responds

Gene
here is where I am up to now with my responses (still a load to do) you can see that I have “borrowed (stolen)” from 2 of your responses in a significant degree – please assure me that this OK (and will not later be obvious) hopefully.You will get the whole text(confidentially again ) soon. You could also see that I hope to be fair to Mike[Mann] – but he can be a little unbalanced in his remarks sometime – and I have had to disagree with his interpretations of some issues also. Please do not pass these on to anyone at all.
Keith

Wahl responds, jumping into the “divergence” problem which has come to be known as the “hide the decline” problem.

Hi Keith:

Here is the text with my comments. I will go over the “stolen” parts (highlighted in blue outline) for a final time tomorrow morning, but I wanted to get this to you ASAP. The main new point I have to make is added in bold/blue font on pp. 101-103. I question the way the response to the comment there is currently worded, as it seems to imply that the divergence issue really does invalidate any dendro-based reconstructions before about 1850–which I imagine is not what you would like to say. I give a series of arguments against this as a general conclusion. Maybe I got over-bold in doing so, as in my point (1) I’m examining issues that are at the very core of your expertise! Excuse me that one, but I decided to jump in anyway. Let me know if I got it wrong in any way!

Briffa responds

First Gene – let me say that I never intended that you should spend so much time on this – though I really appreciate your take on these points. The one you highlight here – correctly warns me that in succumbing to the temptation to be lazy in the sense of the brief answer that I have provided – I do give an implied endorsement of the sense of the whole comment. This is not, of course what I intended. I simply meant to agree that some reference to the “divergence” issue was necessitated . I will revise the reply to say briefly that I do not agree with the interpretation of the reviewer. I am attaching what I have done (see blue highlighting) to the section in response to comments (including the addition of the needed extra section on the “tree-ring issues” called for by several people). I have had no feedback yet on this as it has not been generally circulated , but thought you might like to see it. PLEASE REMEMBER that this is “for your eyes only ” . Please do NOT feel that I am asking /expecting you to go through this in any detail – but given the trouble you have taken,I thought it reasonable to give you a private look. Cheers
Keith

So, Briffa writes confidentially to Wahl for help and Wahl assists him by passing a copy of a paper that has yet to be published. The aim is to answer concerns that McIntyre as reviewer has raised. Wahl and Amman’s words are incorporated in the response to McIntyre with the hope that no one will ever notice.

Two years later, someone does notice. It’s May 24^th 2008, Steve McIntyre, climate science puzzle solver, is reading the reviewer comments to chapter 6 of AR4 written in 2006. In the course of reviewing Briffa’s replies to him, McIntyre notes something peculiar. Briffa’s replies, written in 2006, seemed to plagiarize an unpublished paper by Casper Amman and Eugene Wahl published in 2007. That is, in 2006 Briffa was repeating the argument of a paper that was not published until 2007. How could Briffa plagiarize an article that hadn’t been published? Why would he repeat the arguments almost word for word? Who was feeding Briffa his arguments? How was Briffa doing this if all communication with the authors had to be part of the official record?

At the time, in May of 2008, McIntyre assumed that Briffa was getting information from Casper Ammann since Ammann was listed as a contributing author to chapter 6. It did not occur to McIntyre that Wahl was the source of the text. Thanks to the individual who liberated the Climategate emails, we now know that Wahl was the source of that text. The Climategate emails, quoted above, show Briffa and Wahl exchanging emails about the way McIntyre’s arguments should be handled. Confidentially, outside the process of the IPCC which is designed to capture reviewer objections and authors’ responses to those objections. Wahl is brought in by Briffa to defend his own work. And defend it with literature that has not been published yet.

At the same time in 2008, across the ocean, David Holland had been reading McIntyre’s work and he had issued an FOIA request to the Climatic Research Unit–CRU. That FOIA request covered all correspondence coming in and out of CRU relative to chapter 6 of AR4. The hunt for the source that was feeding Briffa was on, with Holland leading the charge. At CRU, FOIA officer Palmer instructs the team that they must do everything “by the book” because Holland will most certainly appeal a rejection letter.

In that context, Jones writes the famous email to Mann. Jones requests that Mann delete his emails and he requests that Mann contact Wahl and have Wahl delete his emails. Is Jones covering his bases in case of an appeal? Is he covering his bases against an FOIA request that might be served on Mann and Wahl in the US? In any case, he appears to be conspiring with others to deny Holland his FOIA rights.

Mike,
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.We will be getting Caspar to do likewise. I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper

Mann responds that he will contact Wahl ASAP, which he does.

Hi Phil,

laughable that CA would claim to have discovered the problem. They would have run off to the Wall Street Journal for an exclusive were that to have been true. I’ll contact Gene about this ASAP. His new email is: generwahl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
talk to you later,
mike

As Wahl told the investigators in 2011, Mann contacted him and Wahl deleted his mails.

In 2010, in an effort to clear Mann of any wrong doing, a committee of inquiry was set up at Penn State. We now know that committee failed miserably. They failed for many reasons, but the Wahl admission is the starkest example.

Here is one allegation the committee investigated:

Allegation 2: Did you engage in, or participate in, directly or indirectly, any actions with the intent to delete, conceal or otherwise destroy emails, information and/or data, related to AR4, as suggested by Phil Jones?

Finding 2. After careful consideration of all the evidence and relevant materials, the inquiry committee finding is that there exists no credible evidence that Dr. Mann had ever engaged in, or participated in, directly or indirectly, any actions with intent to delete, conceal or otherwise destroy emails, information and/or data related to AR4, as suggested by Dr. Phil Jones. Dr. Mann has stated that he did not delete emails in response to Dr. Jones’ request. Further, Dr. Mann produced upon request a full archive of his emails in and around the time of the preparation of AR4. The archive contained e-mails related to AR4.

The committee found this because they apparently failed to understand Mann’s reply. As they reported:

He [Mann] explained that he never deleted emails at the behest of any other scientist, specifically including Dr. Phil Jones, and that he never withheld data with the intention of obstructing science; …

What can we make of this? Mann was apparently asked the question: “Did you engage in or participate in, directly or indirectly, any actions with the intent to delete emails.”

And it seems clear he only answered half of the question, leaving the unanswered second part dangling: did you contact anyone or otherwise ‘indirectly’ participate in deleting records? This either did not strike, or did not interest, the Penn State ‘investigators’. This despite that Mann, it appears, answered “carefully” and incompletely. He only answered that he hadn’t deleted emails. He never directly denies partaking, indirectly, in the deletion of Wahl’s emails. He apparently withheld the information that he had asked Wahl to delete emails.

Is this a lie? Not directly. It’s more what Wikipedia would describe as “Careful Speaking”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie

Careful speaking is distinct from the above in that the speaker wishes to avoid imparting certain information or admitting certain facts and, additionally, does not want to ‘lie’ when doing so. Careful speaking involves using carefully-phrased statements to give a ‘half-answer’: one that does not actually ‘answer’ the question, but still provides an appropriate (and accurate) answer based on that question. As with ‘misleading’, below, ‘careful speaking’ is not outright lying.

So why did the inquiry, stocked with Mann’s fellow professors, fail to ask good follow up questions? We really do not know because we don’t have access to the transcript of their interview with Mann. Did he intend to deceive? Or did he just speak “carefully?” It would seem that the actual transcript of the questions and answers should be published. Perhaps Congress should serve the members of the inquiry with a subpoena. That would allow people to decide if Mann lied or if he just spoke carefully.

And there are a few more questions we need to ask. Mann claims that he never deleted the emails. But he asked Wahl to delete the emails. This makes no sense. It makes no sense that Mann would participate in a cover up by passing along a message to another participant of that cover-up downstream and not delete emails himself. It defies any logical reconstruction of events. Why would Mann ask Wahl to do something that he himself would not do? We also know from the inquiry that Mann delivered emails to the inquiry. From that evidence and his testimony they concluded that he deleted no emails. This does not compute. [S.M: See update below for a possible explanation ]

Jones requested of Mann: Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?

The inquiry stated: The archive contained e-mails related to AR4. (Hmm…more “Careful Speaking”?)

Did the inquiry find any emails of Mann communicating with Briffa re AR4 or just some emails related to AR4?

Did Mann turn over all the emails he wrote/received or only those he didn’t delete?

Was the email from Phil Jones requesting deletion among the emails Mann delivered to the inquiry?

Did the IT staff serve Mann, by letting him know that what he initially attempted to delete were in fact retained on the University mail server?

Did Mann turn over emails to the inquiry that he had previously deleted, deleted and then recovered with the help of some sympathetic University IT staff?

These questions need to be asked.

Perhaps Congress should serve Mann a subpoena.

Perhaps, the IG, the NSF, or some other suitable independent third party can investigate this with people who know how to watch for the pea under the thimble, and not be mislead by “Careful Speaking”.

=================================================================

UPDATES:

Steve McIntyre at Climate Audit has the goods in this: Wahl Transcript Excerpt

Chris Horner at DailyCaller also has a review: Penn State whitewashed ClimateGate

In fact, Chris Horner and the Competitive Enterprise Institute were instrumental in efforts over a year to get this and other forthcoming FOIA info into the public domain. – Anthony

==========================================================

h/t SF Grand Master, Damon Knight, who was the author of the original short story this Twilight Zone episode was based upon.

Jones specifically asked Mann to delete emails with Briffa with regard to AR4. Mann claims that he deleted no mails. This is entirely possible, especially if there were no mails fitting the description. Canvasing the Climategate mails, we can only find a few mails between Briffa and Mann related to Ar4. If there were few or no mails to delete, then it does make sense that Mann could have passed the instruct to delete onto Wahl, without deleting mails himself. S. Mosher.

 read more ...

In what is perhaps the most startling and disturbing mass animal die-off yet, countless millions of dead anchovies were found this morning floating in King Harbor Marina in Redondo Beach, Calif., according to reports fromThe Daily Breeze. Officials say they do not know the cause of the event at this time and that investigations are underway.

Be sure to check out the NaturalNews.TV video report of the event, which includes shocking pictures fromThe Daily Breezeand aerial footage from KTLA News 5 in Los Angeles:
http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=7DEC1…

Like the many other animal die-off events in recent months, experts have been quick to dismiss the situation and provide otherwise reasonable-sounding hypotheses for why the event occurred. One idea put forth by Sgt. Phil Keenan of the Redondo Beach Police Department suggests that there must have been too many anchovies packed into one area and that the oxygen supply in the water became depleted.

But such explanations hardly seem valid in light of the event and the circumstances surrounding it. Reports say that some onlookers noted that the birds were not feeding on the anchovies the morning they were discovered, indicating that perhaps the birds knew something about condition of the dead fish that was not visible with the naked eye.

“Yesterday, everything looked absolutely normal,” said Walter Waite, a man who lives on a boat in the harbor, to The Daily Breeze. “This morning when I got up, there were millions and millions of them floating everywhere,” adding that, strangely, none of the birds in the area were feeding on the anchovies.

Any number of factors may be responsible for the mass die-off, but one thing is for sure: the “scientific” destruction of our earth has consequences. The spread of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), the widespread use of pesticides, and the pollution of the environment with pharmaceutical drug waste all play a role in altering the world’s delicate ecosystems. When will the madness stop?

http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=7DEC1…

Sources for this story include:

http://www.dailybreeze.com/latestne…

 read more ...

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee members sparred Wednesday over whether there existed a consensus in the 1970s that the earth was cooling.

Amanda Carey
The Daily Caller
March 3, 2011

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee members sparred Wednesday over whether there existed a consensus in the 1970s that the earth was cooling.

During the hearing, Republican Sens. James Inhofe of Oklahoma and John Barrasso of Wyoming questioned the supposed need to enact policies to combat global warming by pointing to similar predictions in the 1970s of a global cooling phenomenon.

The exchange started with Barrasso addressing the committee’s witness, Environmental Protection Agency Director Lisa Jackson.

“Forty years ago, the same scientists that are predicting the end of the world now from global warming were predicting the end of the world from global cooling,” said Barrasso. “So if we had committed the same amount of taxpayer resources and government manpower that the administration now wants us to commit to prevent global warming — if we’d done that prevent global cooling, we wouldn’t be the most prosperous nation on earth.”

 read more ...

Eric Blair
Infowars.com
March 1, 2011

Taxing the air we exhale, rationing human necessities, a global one-child policy, geoengineering (high-altitude chemical spraying), and now nuclear war have all been proposed to combat global warming. Have climate theorists lost their marbles, or just their humanity?

There has not been much middle ground found between global warming believers and the “it’s a hoax” crowd. I started as a believer after watching An Inconvenient Truth. I struggled to even look into the alternative view because the establishment had so successfully made the deniers seem insane.

However, having now done extensive research, I can attest that the “hoax” crowd has just as much, if not more, compelling evidence on their side as believers do. Furthermore, most global warming deniers won’t disagree that the climate is changing or shifting in some noticeable way, only that man-made CO2 is not the primary cause.

This article is not intended to debate the questions surrounding the man-made global warming theory, but rather the proposed “solutions.” Most believers genuinely care about the environment and view deniers as selfish “takers” who care not for mother nature. This is not the case at all. In fact, I would argue that most deniers feel just as passionately about environmental issues as believers. The difference seems to be that deniers focus their energy on tangible and measurable problems in the environment like water, air and soil pollution, GMO food, excessive pharmaceuticals, chemical spraying, and results from oil spills and gas fracking to name a few.

None of these very real threats to human and environmental health are addressed by the global warming crowd, save for possibly air pollution. When one dissects the proposals to combat global warming, it seems clear that the environmental movement has been hijacked by CO2 propagandists for an ulterior motive. Even though hardcore believers seem to have a healthy distrust for bankers, corporations, and their puppet politicians, they have a very difficult time challenging the establishment’s science or solutions pertaining to global warming. They seem too busy defending the theory to make the connection to what they’re actually supporting — which is a cabal of big banks, big oil, and big brother seeking further control of society by hyping unprovable environmental threats that they never actually intend to fix in the first place.

At the very least, eyebrows should be raised since “hacked” emails exposed that the science data had been manipulated to fit the theory. Alarm bells should go off when we learn that, as Vice President, Gore designed the proposed Cap and Trade system with Enron’s criminal CEO Ken “Kenny Boy” Lay years before the global warming theory had been introduced to the public. And for progressives, a full blown revolt should take place knowing that the scandalous international Banksters and Big Oil have shaped Cap and Trade to line their pockets. Finally, as with any modern legislative proposal, it is designed as a Robin-Hood-in reverse scheme where provisions appear to tax personal human choices, while major corporate polluters are exempt.

Regardless of what we believe about the man-made global warming theory, it certainly appears that the establishment’s fix fits their problem-reaction-solution model of social engineering where many proposed solutions distort humanity’s moral compass. Below are 5 proposals to combat global warming that should make all environmentalists and humanitarians cringe with embarrassment for supporting them:
1. Taxes to International Bankers: Does anyone still trust the international bankers after their wholesale looting of the general public? Do genuine environmentalists actually believe it’s a good thing to have this criminal institution in charge of collecting and regulating carbon taxes. The thought of being forced to give more power and more money to the banks seems utterly foolish to support, no matter what environmental catastrophes we may face. The carbon market is almost entirely voluntary and is still in its infancy, yet there is already major financial fraud occurring which is par for the course for the banksters. We should be ashamed to promote them as any part of a solution.

2. One-Child Policies: After vilifying China’s one-child policy since its inception, the Western world is now warming to the idea to combat CO2. In fact, Canada joined China in publicly calling for a Worldwide One-Child Policy during Copenhagen climate talks in 2009. Forcing this type of law on a previously free society will surely result in forced abortions and other horrific consequences. It is the epitome of tyranny for the State to take away such basic rights to life. It seems that the numerous heavyweights pushing this agenda are hell-bent on population reduction in spite of the global warming theory. If forcing your friends and neighbors into a one-child policy makes sense to you, you may have already lost your humanity to a theoretical fear.

3. Geoengineering: The AP reported during the 2010 Cancun climate talks that “we may need geoengineering as a ‘Plan B,’ if nations fail to forge agreement on a binding treaty to rein in greenhouse gases.” Geoengineering (sometimes referred to as chemtrailing), is high-altitude chemical spraying. They are the unnatural crisscrossed long white trails left by planes that take days to dissipate. Their patents are high in nanoparticle aluminum and barium, both of which have been found in dangerously high concentrations in otherwise pristine locations. For decades this program was top secret, and environmental activists were called conspiracy theorists for questioning it. Now, it is being promoted as the savior to global warming, claiming the extremely poisonous chemicals reflect sunlight away from earth. To learn more about what you would be advocating for as ‘Plan B’ to stop global warming, please watch the very reputable new film What in the World are They Spraying?

4. Rationing: At the COP16 climate meeting in Cancun during record cold temperatures this winter “Some climate change experts say World War II-style rationing in developed countries may be needed to bring down carbon emissions to fight against global warming.” We all know who is most affected by rationing: the average little citizen. I’m reminded of the character Winston Smith in 1984 getting his allotments of fabricated coffee and fuel-like alcohol while the controllers lived in the lap of luxury. Perhaps, if we’re lucky, the State will take control of local farm harvests for rationed distribution circa the Soviet Union. Ahh, freedom is on the march with this proposal.

5. Nuclear War: Last, but certainly not least, the idea has been floated that a small nuclear war may save us from the global warming bogeyman. Yes, for the good of humanity and the environment, let’s blow a couple of million people to smithereens and radiate thousands of square miles to force the cooling of the earth. This is not some fringe group proposing this, but instead NASA, the National Geographic and Ted Turner-owned Time magazines floating the idea. They say, “Models suggest that though the world is currently in a warming trend, small-scale war could lower global temperatures 2.25 degrees F for two-to-three years following war.” It seems this scenario will do nothing to reduce CO2, but simply block and absorb heat from the sun. In fact, they admit it may add carbon into the atmosphere. If you can’t tell how wrong this concept is on multiple levels then perhaps it’s more appropriate to refer to you as a world-is-flat Neanderthal.

Despite differences in theories, can’t we all agree that these proposals seem downright tyrannical, if not evil? They all seem to further crush the poorest among us, while eliminating basic individual rights, to openly promoting reducing the human population. And that means you too by the way. Believers won’t be exempt from the darkest wrath of these proposals.

And worst of all, none of these proposals will do anything to solve authentic environmental degradation, or even CO2 concentrations for that matter. So, it’s all right to believe any theory you wish, but just be more informed and honest when defending the establishment’s proposed solutions. They are not designed or intended to protect you or the environment from global warming.

 read more ...

CLICK to see ‘Global warming no threat to humanity’ by Madhav L. Khandekar – epaper from Hindustantimes.com

 

Climate Realists
Feb 28, 2011

CLICK to see ‘Global warming no threat to humanity’ by Madhav L. Khandekar – epaper from Hindustantimes.com

  read more ...

The new pathogen appears associated with serious pervasive diseases in plants – sudden death syndrome in soybean and Goss’ wilt in corn – but its suspected effects on livestock is alarming. Huber refers to “recent reports of infertility rates in dairy heifers of over 20%, and spontaneous abortions in cattle as high as 45%.”

Cryptogon
Thursday, February 24, 2011

Via: Institute of Science in Society:

An open letter appeared on the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance founded and run by Judith McGeary to save family farms in the US [1, 2]. The letter, written by Don Huber, professor emeritus at Purdue University, to Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, warns of a pathogen “new to science” discovered by “a team of senior plant and animal scientists”. Huber says it should be treated as an “emergency’’, as it could result in “a collapse of US soy and corn export markets and significant disruption of domestic food and feed supplies.”

The letter appeared to have been written before Vilsack announced his decision to authorize unrestricted commercial planting of GM alfalfa on 1 February, in the hope of convincing the Secretary of Agriculture to impose a moratorium instead on deregulation of Roundup Ready (RR) crops.

The new pathogen appears associated with serious pervasive diseases in plants – sudden death syndrome in soybean and Goss’ wilt in corn – but its suspected effects on livestock is alarming. Huber refers to “recent reports of infertility rates in dairy heifers of over 20%, and spontaneous abortions in cattle as high as 45%.”

This could be the worst nightmare of genetic engineering that some scientists including me have been warning for years [3] (see Genetic Engineering Dream or Nightmare, ISIS publication): the unintended creation of new pathogens through assisted horizontal gene transfer and recombination.

Huber writes in closing: “I have studied plant pathogens for more than 50 years. We are now seeing an unprecedented trend of increasing plant and animal diseases and disorders. This pathogen may be instrumental to understanding and solving this problem. It deserves immediate attention with significant resources to avoid a general collapse of our critical agricultural infrastructure.”

The complete letter is reproduced below.

Dear Secretary Vilsack:

A team of senior plant and animal scientists have recently brought to my attention the discovery of an electron microscopic pathogen that appears to significantly impact the health of plants, animals, and probably human beings. Based on a review of the data, it is widespread, very serious, and is in much higher concentrations in Roundup Ready (RR) soybeans and corn-suggesting a link with the RR gene or more likely the presence of Roundup. This organism appears NEW to science!

This is highly sensitive information that could result in a collapse of US soy and corn export markets and significant disruption of domestic food and feed supplies. On the other hand, this new organism may already be responsible for significant harm (see below). My colleagues and I are therefore moving our investigation forward with speed and discretion, and seek assistance from the USDA and other entities to identify the pathogen’s source, prevalence, implications, and remedies.

We are informing the USDA of our findings at this early stage, specifically due to your pending decision regarding approval of RR alfalfa. Naturally, if either the RR gene or Roundup itself is a promoter or co-factor of this pathogen, then such approval could be a calamity. Based on the current evidence, the only reasonable action at this time would be to delay deregulation at least until sufficient data has exonerated the RR system, if it does.

For the past 40 years, I have been a scientist in the professional and military agencies that evaluate and prepare for natural and manmade biological threats, including germ warfare and disease outbreaks. Based on this experience, I believe the threat we are facing from this pathogen is unique and of a high risk status. In layman’s terms, it should be treated as an emergency.

A diverse set of researchers working on this problem have contributed various pieces of the puzzle, which together presents the following disturbing scenario:

Unique Physical Properties
This previously unknown organism is only visible under an electron microscope (36,000X), with an approximate size range equal to a medium size virus. It is able to reproduce and appears to be a micro-fungal-like organism. If so, it would be the first such micro-fungus ever identified. There is strong evidence that this infectious agent promotes diseases of both plants and mammals, which is very rare.

Pathogen Location and Concentration
It is found in high concentrations in Roundup Ready soybean meal and corn, distillers meal, fermentation feed products, pig stomach contents, and pig and cattle placentas.

Linked with Outbreaks of Plant Disease
The organism is prolific in plants infected with two pervasive diseases that are driving down yields and farmer income-sudden death syndrome (SDS) in soy, and Goss’ wilt in corn. The pathogen is also found in the fungal causative agent of SDS (Fusarium solani fsp glycines).

Implicated in Animal Reproductive Failure
Laboratory tests have confirmed the presence of this organism in a wide variety of livestock that have experienced spontaneous abortions and infertility. Preliminary results from ongoing research have also been able to reproduce abortions in a clinical setting.

The pathogen may explain the escalating frequency of infertility and spontaneous abortions over the past few years in US cattle, dairy, swine, and horse operations. These include recent reports of infertility rates in dairy heifers of over 20%, and spontaneous abortions in cattle as high as 45%.

For example, 450 of 1,000 pregnant heifers fed wheatlege experienced spontaneous abortions. Over the same period, another 1,000 heifers from the same herd that were raised on hay had no abortions. High concentrations of the pathogen were confirmed on the wheatlege, which likely had been under weed management using glyphosate.

Recommendations
In summary, because of the high titer of this new animal pathogen in Roundup Ready crops, and its association with plant and animal diseases that are reaching epidemic proportions, we request USDA’s participation in a multi-agency investigation, and an immediate moratorium on the deregulation of RR crops until the causal/predisposing relationship with glyphosate and/or RR plants can be ruled out as a threat to crop and animal production and human health.

It is urgent to examine whether the side-effects of glyphosate use may have facilitated the growth of this pathogen, or allowed it to cause greater harm to weakened plant and animal hosts. It is well-documented that glyphosate promotes soil pathogens and is already implicated with the increase of more than 40 plant diseases; it dismantles plant defenses by chelating vital nutrients; and it reduces the bioavailability of nutrients in feed, which in turn can cause animal disorders. To properly evaluate these factors, we request access to the relevant USDA data.

I have studied plant pathogens for more than 50 years. We are now seeing an unprecedented trend of increasing plant and animal diseases and disorders. This pathogen may be instrumental to understanding and solving this problem. It deserves immediate attention with significant resources to avoid a general collapse of our critical agricultural infrastructure.

Sincerely,

COL (Ret.) Don M. Huber
Emeritus Professor, Purdue University
APS Coordinator, USDA National Plant Disease Recovery System (NPDRS)

References

1. “Researcher: Glyphosate (Roundup) or Roundup Ready Crops May Cause Animal Miscarriages”, Jill Richardson, La Vida Locavore, 18 February 2011

http://www.lavidalocavore.org/diary/4523

2. “Researcher: Glyphosate (Roundup) or Roundup Ready Crops May Cause Animal Miscarriages”, 18 February 2011, http://farmandranchfreedom.org/gmo-miscarriages

3. Ho MW. Genetic Engineering Dream of Nightmare? The Brave New World of Bad Science and Big Business, Third World Network, Gateway Books, MacMillan, Continuum, Penang, Malaysia, Bath, UK, Dublin, Ireland, New York, USA, 1998, 1999, 2007 (reprint with extended Introduction). http://www.i-sis.org.uk/genet.php

Research Credit: RJF

 read more ...

 

For decades, climate change alarmists have generated a host of doomsday scenarios, all based on the theory of anthropogenic global warming: human CO2 emissions will force Earth’s climate to warm uncontrollably causing all manner of unpleasantness.

The Resilient Earth
Feb 18, 2011

For decades, climate change alarmists have generated a host of doomsday scenarios, all based on the theory of anthropogenic global warming: human CO₂ emissions will force Earth’s climate to warm uncontrollably causing all manner of unpleasantness. A new study, published by theCenter for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, addresses the major predicted effects of global warming head on. Making extensive use of peer reviewed research papers, the dire predictions of climate alarmists are demolished point by point. In fact, the authors conclude that rising atmospheric CO₂ concentrations associated with the development of the Industrial Revolution have actually been good for the planet.

The 168 page report, “Carbon Dioxide and Earth’s Future: Pursuing the Prudent Path,” authored by Craig D. Idso and Sherwood B. Idso, addresses the bewildering morass of climate change disinformation using solid science to refute predictions of future environmental disaster. As the authors’ state “The villain of the story is industrial man, who has “altered the course of nature” by releasing large quantities of carbon dioxide into the air via the burning of coal, gas and oil.” The questions the report addresses are framed in the executive summary:

As presently constituted, earth’s atmosphere contains just slightly less than 400 ppm of the colorless and odorless gas we call carbon dioxide or CO₂. That’s only four-hundredths of one percent. Consequently, even if the air’s CO₂ concentration was tripled, carbon dioxide would still comprise only a little over one tenth of one percent of the air we breathe, which is far less than what wafted through earth’s atmosphere eons ago, when the planet was a virtual garden place. Nevertheless, a small increase in this minuscule amount of CO₂ is frequently predicted to produce a suite of dire environmental consequences, including dangerous global warming, catastrophic sea level rise, reduced agricultural output, and the destruction of many natural ecosystems, as well as dramatic increases in extreme weather phenomena, such as droughts, floods and hurricanes.

As strange as it may seem, these frightening future scenarios are derived from a single source of information: the ever-evolving computer-driven climate models that presume to reduce the important physical, chemical and biological processes that combine to determine the state of earth’s climate into a set of mathematical equations out of which their forecasts are produced. But do we really know what all of those complex and interacting processes are? And even if we did — which we don’t — could we correctly reduce them into manageable computer code so as to produce reliable forecasts 50 or 100 years into the future?

 

Craig D. Idso, who is the founder and chairman of the board of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, has a PhD in Geography from Arizona State University. He is the brother of Keith E. Idso and son of Sherwood B. Idso. In 2009 he coauthored the book “CO₂, Global Warming and Species Extinctions: Prospects for the Future” with his father.

Sherwood B. Idso assumed the Presidency of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change on 4 October 2001. Prior to that time he was a Research Physicist with the US Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service at the US Water Conservation Laboratory in Phoenix, Arizona.

Dr. Idso is the author or co-author of over 500 scientific publications including the booksCarbon Dioxide: Friend or Foe? (1982) and Carbon Dioxide and Global Change: Earth in Transition (1989). He served on the editorial board of the international journalAgricultural and Forest Meteorology from 1973 to 1993 and since 1993 has served on the editorial board of Environmental and Experimental Botany. Over the course of his career, he has been an invited reviewer of manuscripts for 56 different scientific journals and 17 different funding agencies, representing an unusually large array of disciplines. In other words, he is very much a main stream environmental scientist.

According to Idso and Idso’s detailed analysis, real-world observations fail to confirm essentially all of the alarming predictions made by global warming catastrophists and, in the case of climate models, they reveal many shortcomings and inadequacies. Observation of nature demonstrates that, even though the world has warmed substantially over the past century or more, none of the nasty environmental side effects that are predicted by climate alarmists has ever come to pass

The report directly addresses ten different assertions made by the IPCC reports and associated climate scientists. All are purported to be a direct result of rising atmospheric CO₂ levels—levels that are being driven by human activity. Here are the specific charges that are examined:

 

1. Unprecedented Warming of the Planet — With respect to air temperature, the climate-alarmist contention is multifaceted. It is claimed that over the past several decades: (a) earth’s temperature has risen to a level that is unprecedented over the past millennium or more, (b) the world has been warming at a rate that is equally unprecedented, and (c) both of these dubious achievements have been made possible by the similarly unprecedented magnitude of anthropogenic CO₂ emissions, due to humanity’s ever-increasing burning of fossil fuels such as coal, gas and oil.
2. More Frequent and Severe Floods and Droughts — As a result of the global warming and change in weather patterns that climate models predict will occur in response to the ongoing rise in the air’s CO₂content, it is claimed that floods and droughts will become both more numerous and severe throughout the world.
3. More Frequent and Severe Hurricanes — CO₂-induced global warming will increase the frequency, intensity and duration of hurricanes.
4. Rising Sea Levels Inundating Coastal Lowlands — Anthropogenic-induced global warming will lead to rapidly melting polar ice sheets, rapidly rising sea levels and catastrophic coastal flooding.
5. More Frequent and Severe Storms — Among the many highly-publicized catastrophic consequences that climate alarmists contend will attend the ongoing rise in the air’s CO₂ content are predicted increases in the frequency and severity of a variety of different types of storms.
6. Increased Human Mortality — Human mortality will escalate due to increasingly more severe and frequent heat waves, as well as a result of the enhanced spreading abroad of numerous vector-borne diseases, all brought about by CO₂-induced global warming.
7. Widespread Plant and Animal Extinctions — With respect to plants and animals, global warming alarmists have long contended that the increase in temperature predicted to result from the ongoing rise in the atmosphere’s CO₂ concentration will be so great and occur so fast that many species of plants and animals will not be able to migrate poleward in latitude or upward in elevation rapidly enough to avoid extinction.
8. Declining Vegetative Productivity — Rising temperatures and increased weather extremes will decimate the productivity of critical earth ecosystems.
9. Frequent Coral Bleaching — Rising ocean temperatures driven by CO₂-induced global warming is killing the world’s corals.
10. Marine Life Dissolving Away in Acidified Oceans — Rising atmospheric CO₂ concentrations are lowering seawater pH, resulting in reduced calcification, metabolism, fertility, growth and survival of many marine species.

     

Resilient Earth readers will find all of these claims familiar and searching our site will return many articles addressing these same topics. The great service that the Idso study performs is consolidating many lucid counter arguments and a wealth of supporting references in a single document. It would be hard to do justice to each of the ten categories in a single blog post so, instead, I will try to capture the flavor of the study by examining the first topic, Unprecedented Warming of the Planet.

Unprecedented Warming of the Planet

The authors begin by quoting work done by Petit et al. in 1999 (see “Climate and atmospheric history of the past 420,000 years from the Vostok ice core, Antarctica”). They found that during the Holocene, which is actually just the latest in a long series of interglacial periods, peak temperatures have been the coldest of the last five interglacials. The four interglacials that preceded the Holocene were, on average, more than 2°C warmer (see figure below).

Proxy temperature anomalies derived by Petit et al.

This position is backed up with a more recent study (2009) by L. C. Sime et al. (see “Evidence for warmer interglacials in East Antarctic ice cores”). According to that paper the “maximum interglacial temperatures over the past 340,000 years were between 6.0°C and 10.0°C above present-day values.” These findings led Idso and Idso to conclude that temperatures during the current interglacial were indeed unusual, but not unusually warm—quite to the contrary, they have been unusually cool.

They also discuss more recent temperature history citing work by F. C. Ljungqvist, who developed a 2000-year temperature history of the extra-tropical portion of the Northern Hemisphere (30-90° North Latitude). Contrary to attempts by Mann et al. to rewrite the temperature history of the last 2000 years, Ljungqvist found “a Roman Warm Period c. AD 1-300, a Dark Age Cold Period c. AD 300-800, a Medieval Warm Period c. AD 800-1300 and a Little Ice Agec. AD 1300-1900, followed by the twentieth-century warming.” These data are shown below.

Reconstructed extra-tropical (30-90°N) mean decadal temperature variations

These alternating warm/cold periods, in Ljungqvist’s words, “probably represent the much discussed quasi-cyclical c. 1470 ± 500-year Bond Cycles (Bond and Lotti, 1995; O’Brien et al., 1995; Bond et al., 1997, 2001; Oppo, 1997),” which “affected both Scandinavia and northwest North America synchronically (Denton and Karlen, 1973)” and have “subsequently also been observed in China (Hong et al., 2009a,b), the mid-latitude North Pacific (Isono et al., 2009) and in North America (Viau et al., 2006), and have been shown to very likely have affected the whole Northern Hemisphere during the Holocene (Butikofer, 2007; Wanner et al., 2008; Wanner and Butikofer, 2008), or even been global (Mayewski et al., 2004).” As can be seen, the Idso report is replete with references.

The section ends with an analysis of the impact of CO₂ on Earth’s temperature. The observed disconnect between temperature and atmospheric CO₂ levels is examined and the amount of CO₂ increase is put into perspective. Much more detail is available in the actual report but here is how the chapter ends:

In light of these results, it is difficult to claim much about the strength of the warming power of the approximate 75-ppm increase in the atmosphere’s CO₂ concentration that occurred from 1875 to 2000, other than to say it was miniscule compared to whatever other forcing factor, or combination of forcing factors, was concurrently having its way with the climate of the Arctic. One cannot, for example, claim that any of the 1917 to 1937 warming was due to the 8-ppm increase in CO₂ that accompanied it, even if augmented by the 12-ppm increase that occurred between 1875 and 1917; for the subsequent and much larger 55-ppm increase in CO₂ led to no net warming over the remainder of the record, which suggests that just a partial relaxation of the forces that totally overwhelmed the warming influence of the CO₂ increase experienced between 1937 and 2000 would have been sufficient to account for the temperature increase that occurred between 1917 and 1937. And understood in this light, the air’s CO₂ content does not even begin to enter the picture.

Its detailed level of analysis and abundance of references make this study an invaluable asset for climate change skeptics everywhere. If you have any interest in climate change and the global warming debate I urge you to download the PDF today. Perhaps the most controversial portion of the document is the closing commentary, in which the case is made that rising CO₂ emissions are actually a blessing and something humanity should not try to stop. Their stand echos sentiments expressed in my post “The Case For Doing Nothing About Global Warming.” Here is how the report concludes.

We humans, as stewards of the earth, have got to get our priorities straight. We must do all that we possibly can, in order to preserve nature by helping to feed humanity and raise living standards the world over; and to do so successfully, we have got to let the air’s CO₂ content maintain its natural upward course for many decades to come. This is the prudent path we must pursue.

No doubt that statement will raise the ire of traditional climate scientists. Irrespective of the actual findings, this document stands as proof that claims of scientific consensus are bunk, that no respected scientists doubt the global warming gospel. Both Idso’s are established scientist and the elder Idso is an Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) highly cited researcher. Together, these two skeptical scientists have driven another sizable nail into the coffin of anthropogenic global warming.

Science marches on as it always does: weak and erroneous theories are discarded along the way based on the strength of observed real-world phenomena. No incorrect theory can survive forever, no mater how insistent or how vocal its supporting clique of self-serving scientists is. So it will be with anthropogenic global warming. AGW will rank with perpetual motion machines and Piltdown man in the scientific fraud hall of fame, an object of ridicule and derision, and a cautionary tail for future generations of scientists—this is not how science is supposed to be done.

Be safe, enjoy the interglacial and stay skeptical.

 read more ...