Daily Mail | The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.
Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.
Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.
The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.
Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.
And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.
The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely man-made.
Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped down as director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit after the leaking of emails that sceptics claim show scientists were manipulating data.
The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the world and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster efforts by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions.
Red Ice Creations | NASA and CISCO systems welcomes you to the prison planet, a global surveillance infrastructure is being built up. This is total "control" and monitoring on all activity on earth. Just imagine feeding this data into an artificial intelligence.
The following is from the Planetary Skin website:
Planetary Skin Institute will research, develop and prototype an approach to provide near-to-real-time global monitoring of environmental conditions and changes. This will deliver the required decision support capabilities to manage global resources, risks and build environmental markets. Planetary Skin proposes an open and unifying approach to develop the required decision support capabilities to manage global resources, risks and enable the necessary environmental markets.
The UN climate change panel IPCC not only wrongly predicted Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035, it also put more than half of the Netherlands below sea level.
NRC.nl | The Dutch environment minister, Jaqueline Cramer, on Wednesday demanded a thorough investigation into the 2007 report by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change after a Dutch magazine uncovered it incorrectly states 55 percent of the country lies below sea level. The the Dutch national bureau for environmental analysis has taken responsibility for the incorrect figure cited by the IPCC. Only 26 percent of the Netherlands is really below sea level.
The error surfaced at a time when the IPCC is already under fire for another false claim that revealed earlier this week. The 2007 report states glaciers in the Himalayas will disappear by 2035, while the underlying research claims the mountain ice would last until 2350, British newspaper The Sunday Telegraph discovered.
When Cramer heard of that blunder she wrote a letter to the IPCC, saying she was "not amused" there were mistakes in the scientific report she bases the Dutch environmental policies on. Now she is confronted with errors in the data about her own country. "This can't happen again," the minister told reporters in The Hague on Wednesday. "The public trust in science and politics has been badly damaged."
The IPCC based its claim about Dutch vulnerability to rising sea level on data it received from the Netherlands environmental assessment agency PBL. "The Netherlands is an example of a country highly susceptible to both sea-level rise and river flooding because 55% of its territory is below sea level where 60% of its population lives and 65% of its Gross National Product (GNP) is produced," according to the report.”
But the Dutch agency now admits it delivered incomplete wording to the panel. "It should have said 55 percent of the Netherlands is vulnerable to floods; 26 percent of the Netherlands is below sea level and another 29 percent can suffer when rivers flood," the PBL said in a statement after the mistake was uncovered by Dutch weekly Vrij Nederland on Wednesday.
The error features in chapter 12.2.3 of the “Impact, adaptation and vulnerability” section of the IPCC report. This part of the analysis was drafted by the so-called working group II, a different group than the one that wrote the part about the scientific basis of climate change and its causes.
One of the reasons the document is error-prone is in the width of its scope, experts say. A description of consequences of climate change all over the world is bound to touch on areas few people know anything about. In its report, the IPCC draws on publications assessed by outside scientists, reports from organisations like the World Bank and management consulting firm McKinsey, and even descriptions from tourist guides and observations from volunteers. Those sources have to be supported by others and are scrutinised through "qualitative analysis". But a problem in the analysis is there are few scientists in the world who know a lot about regional effects. Few people have enough knowledge and insight to predict longtime trends in ice development in the Himalaya, for example.
The Dutch mistake, however, is of a different order. Scientists missed the incorrect wording of the claim that they received from the PBL. Maarten Hajer, the director of that agency argued the conclusions of the IPCC are still solid: climate is changing, the earth is warming up and human behaviour is to blame for a large part of that. He did acknowledge damage had been done to the reputation of climate scientists. "But I prefer to call it a scratch in the finish rather than a dent," he said.
History Channel full length documentary discusses Chemtrails and H.A.R.P. and how they may be used in conjunction with one another. So if you’ve ever wondered what chemtrails are and what they are for you need to see this video.
This technology presents a serious challenge to those who support Al Gore’s version of Global Warming and the remedy of a CAP and TRADE tax.
The documentary is a frank admission that chemtrails and Weather Warfare technology is causing or contributing to Global Warming: “The temperature of the sky is raised to over 100 deg. F. preventing the accumulation of water vapour that would otherwise form clouds and produce rainfall.”
This stunning conclusion is not new, however Al Gore says the discussion is closed. All the while, Gore and the IPCC have consistently avoided discussion of Chemtrails, aerosols or any other alternate man-made causes of Global Warming, preferring to blame CO2 as the culprit by which to impose an involuntary, global tax.
Prison Planet | As hundreds of people die worldwide as a result of record low temperatures in the midst of a savage winter, scientists are preparing for a conference in which they will discuss measures to use geoengineering to block out the sun.
“The summit of climate scientists, to be held in California in March, will examine drastic techniques for slowing climate change that are controversial and have been described as “geo-piracy,” reports the Telegraph.
“Most techniques focus on ways of reducing the sun’s rays by blocking them using mirrors orbiting in space or by spraying sulphur compounds into the high atmosphere to reflect sunlight away from earth.”
Another proposal involves sending spaceships into the upper atmosphere to spray seawater into the sky and reflect sunlight back into space, an idea that would seem more at home in the context of some bizarre alien invasion movie.
“Most of the talk about these geo-engineering techniques say they should be saved until we get to an emergency situation. Well, the people of the Arctic might say they are in an emergency situation now,” said conference organizer Mike MacCracken.
Governments are already geoengineering the planet in the form of cloud seeding and similar techniques to both cause and prevent rainfall. Many would argue that the upper atmosphere is already being seeded with chemical compounds in the form of chemtrails, which differ from normal contrails emitted by airplanes as they hang in the air for hours and produce criss-cross patterns.
A 2008 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.”
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.
As we have previously highlighted, a prominent supporter of geoengineering proposals is none other than White House science czar John P. Holdren, a key Obama advisor who infamously co-authored a book in which he called for a “planetary regime” to enforce draconian population control measures such as forced abortion, infanticide and mandatory sterilization.
In April last year, Holdren revealed that high-level talks had already taken place to explore the possibility of “geoengineering” the environment by “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays”.
“It’s got to be looked at,” Holdren was quoted as saying, “We don’t have the luxury of taking any approach off the table.” The AP also reported that Holdren said he had raised the concept in administration discussions.
Letting modern day eugenicists like Holdren mess with the planet would be like handing Dr. Josef Mengele control of the health care system. Holdren has proven himself to be a barbarian and a control freak, promoting a brand of bloodthirsty eugenics even more depraved than anything Hitler proposed in his drive for a super race.
Allowing scientists who have been completely exposed as agenda-promoting quacks by the Climategate scandal to experiment with the environment on a mass scale in the name of stopping the increasingly debunked premise of man-made global warming is absolute lunacy and should be stopped at all costs.
___
Emergency measures to slow global warming, such as a ‘solar shield’ to block the sun or artificial trees to soak up CO2, will be discussed at a ‘geo-engineering’ conference.
One proposal is for a fleet of ships that would spray seawater into the sky that would leave behind salt crystals to brighten clouds. Photo: NASA
By Alastair Jamieson
Telegraph | The summit of climate scientists, to be held in California in March, will examine drastic techniques for slowing climate change that are controversial and have been described as “geo-piracy”.
Among the possible measures to be discussed will be ocean fertilisation, which would see iron dumped into the sea to boost plankton growth, and artificial trees that use a chemical process to soak up CO2.
Most techniques focus on ways of reducing the sun’s rays by blocking them using mirrors orbiting in space or by spraying sulphur compounds into the high atmosphere to reflect sunlight away from earth.
One proposal is for a fleet of ships that would spray seawater into the sky that would leave behind salt crystals to brighten clouds, reflecting more sunlight back into space.
The conference, reported in The Guardian, comes amid concern that such techniques may be the only way to prevent average temperatures rising.
Mike MacCracken, a global warming expert at the Climate Institute in Washington DC, who is organising the conference's scientific programme, told the newspaper:
"Most of the talk about these geo-engineering techniques say they should be saved until we get to an emergency situation. Well, the people of the Arctic might say they are in an emergency situation now."
Scientists at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs say the techniques should not be ruled out but that more evidence from experiments is required.
The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation recently described geo-engineering an act of "geo-piracy" and warned that the "the world runs a serious risk of choosing solutions that turn out to be new global problems".
However, some geo-engineering techniques are already being used on a large scale. The Chinese government is thought to use cloud-seeding on a regular basis to encourage precipitation in areas hit by drought.
Al Gore, the former US Vice-President, has become embroiled in a climate change spin row after claiming that the Arctic could be completely ice-free within five years.
By Murray Wardrop
Telegraph | Speaking at the Copenhagen climate change summit, Mr Gore said new computer modelling suggests there is a 75 per cent chance of the entire polar ice cap melting during the summertime by 2014.
However, he faced embarrassment last night after Dr Wieslav Maslowski, the climatologist whose work the prediction was based on, refuted his claims.
Dr Maslowski, of the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, told The Times: “It’s unclear to me how this figure was arrived at.
“I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.”
The blunder follows the controversy over hacked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, which sceptics claim suggest scientists manipulated data to strengthen their argument that global warming is man-made.
Mr Gore, who narrated the Oscar-winning climate change documentary An Inconvenient Truth, told the conference that record melting of Polar and Himalayan ice could deprive more than a billion people of access to clean water.
Alluding to Dr Maslowski’s work, he said: “These figures are fresh, I just got them yesterday.
"Some of the models suggest to Dr Maslowski that there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire polar ice cap during some of summer months could be completely ice free within five to seven years.
"There are more than a billion people on the planet who get more than half of their drinking water – many of them all of their drinking water – from the seasonal melting of snow melt and glacier ice."
His projection strongly contradicted forecasts made eight months ago by the US government agency that the ice cap may nearly vanish in the summer by 2030.
Dr Maslowki said that his latest results give a six-year projection for the melting of 80 per cent of the ice, but he said he expects some ice to remain beyond 2020.
He added: “I was very explicit that we were talking about near-ice-free conditions and not completely ice-free conditions in the northern ocean.”
Following Dr Maslowski’s comments, Mr Gore’s office later said the 75 per cent figure was one used by Dr Maslowksi as a “ballpark figure” several years ago in a conversation with Mr Gore.
Mr Gore’s speech also provoked criticism from leading members of the climate science community, who described the projection as “aggressive”.
Professor Jim Overland, a leading oceanographer at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told The Times: “This is an exaggeration that opens the science up to criticism from sceptics.
“You really don’t need to exaggerate the changes in the Arctic.”
Mark Serreze, of the US National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado, said: “It's possible but not likely. We're sticking with 2030."
Average global temperatures have increased by 1.3F (0.74C) in the past century, but the mercury has risen at least twice as quickly in the Arctic.
Scientists say the make up of the frozen north polar sea has shifted significantly in recent years as much of the thick year-round ice has given way to thin seasonal ice.
In the summer of 2007, the Arctic ice cap dwindled to a record low minimum extent of 1.7 million square miles in September. The melting in 2008 and 2009 was not as extensive, but still ranked as the second and third greatest decreases on record.
Dead Man Musings | Since its inception, the environmental movement has been perpetrating one fraud after another as a means of moving us towards a New World Order. For Example:
1."The Greenhouse effect" : Purportedly Caused Global Warming by trapping the heat from the sun in Carbon Dioxide and other "Greenhouse Gases" in our atmosphere.
2." Global Cooling and the Coming Ice Age": In this scenario pollution blocks out the rays of the sun and the earth plunges into another ice age. I call this the lie before the lie.
3.Ozone Holes: In this scenario we will all be fried by UV rays getting through a hole in the ozone layer. The culprit was freon and aerosol cans.
I could go on and talk about overpopulation, the rain forest, water shortages etc. Instead of focusing on the fraud itself, I will focus on the reasons behind it and the perpetrators.
If you remember nothing else, remember this: The Illuminati are both Fascists and Communists. They want to maximize profits and consolidate political power under a tyrannic one world government. In order to accomplish this, they need to destroy the middle class and industrial bases of North America and Europe.
They know that Americans, Canadians, and Western Europeans won't work for starvation wages or as wage slaves. So, they focus their efforts on undermining our economic and political systems.
1. Tariffs are the enemy to globalism. The United States ran on tariffs for the first part of its existence. Tariffs are taxes on imports that prevent multi-national corporations from "dumping" cheap manufactured goods from a foreign country on a developed country's soil.
2. NAFTA, GATT etc., have taken down these walls of protection that are necessary for an industrialized nation to have a healthy economy and solid industrial base. Now instead of Americans competing against Americans, we have Americans competing against North Korean slave labor.
3. Free Trade is an Illuminati Illusion that will always have a winner and a loser. One country will be depleted at the expense of the other country's growth.
So, what does this have to do with the environmental movement? Plenty! By imposing environmental regulations on developed and industrialized societies, the Illuminati take away their ability to compete globally. Regulations and laws cost money and businesses pass that cost on to the consumer. The result is higher production costs and a loss of competitive advantage.
The organization behind this massive fraud is the Illuminati front organization known as the "Club of Rome":
"The Club of Rome calls for urgent action to avert the growing risk of catastrophic climate change. The most recent scientific data presented to the Assembly by the world’s top climate scientists demonstrate the accelerating impacts of climate change on the natural systems of the planet. Beyond this existential threat to the future of humanity, the Club stresses the need to find a new path for world development to resolve the connected challenges in the fields of environment, global development and the restructuring of economies onto a sustainable path.
"We insist that responsibility for care in the use of energy and resources,responsibility for the environment and social inclusion are not simply costs to the economy, but investments in the future of humanity. Governments have directed trillions of dollars to stabilize the financial system: we call for the required levels of finance to salvage the future of the planet.
We should not aim to recover to the pre-crisis path of economic growth, which leads towards disaster. We call on governments and the business community to recognize the reality and urgency of the problems we face and to provide the leadership and sustained commitment to resolve the challenges of the 21st Century so as to leave a decent future to our children and grandchildren." (Source)
Founded in 1968 at the Rockefeller's Italian Estate, the Club of Rome has played the leading role in propagating the falsehoods of climate change:
"Headed by Anglo-American elites and European nobility, the Club of Rome is an elite 'think tank' specializing in crisis creation via the Hegelian dialectic: Thesis + Antithesis = Synthesis. The main purpose of the club is to formulate crisis, through which the world can be "united" under a world socialist government.
A few notable past and present members of the club include:
* Al Gore - Former U.S. Vice President * Mikhail Gorbachev - Former President of the Soviet Union; co-author of the Earth Charter * Ted Turner - media mogul, founder of CNN * Maurice Strong - head of the U.N. Environment Programme; co-author of the Earth Charter * David Rockefeller - Donated the land where the UN stands in NY * Henry Kissinger - Former U.S. Secretary of State * Javier Solana - Secretary-General of the EU * Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands
In 1991, the Club of Rome published The First Global Revolution, authored by Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider. On pp. 104-105 are found the following statement:
"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill... All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself." (Source)
Such illustrious organizations like "Greenpeace" look to the Club of Rome for Leadership and Guidance. I quote the following from Greenpeace America's blog:
"The Club of Rome and I share a great Louis Talarico deal in terms of how we view the opportunities and problems that our leaders must address. Here is a good point they make.
"Systems of education are less and less adapted to the new issues, to the new emerging global society we are presently involved in. New priorities force us to redefine the role of education, which should be conceived as a permanent learning process. Transmission of knowledge is no longer sufficient, and new objectives such as developing one's own potential and creativity, or the capacity of adaptation to change are becoming essential in a rapidly changing world.
The Club of Rome considers that education is both part of the global problematique and also an essential tool to become an effective actor in control of one's own life and within society. If there are "Limits to Growth", there are "No Limits to Learning" (titles of two Reports to the Club of Rome)." (Source)
While breathing clean air, drinking clean water, and living in a clean environment are what I want for myself and family, the Illuminati really could care less. They haven't eliminated these things. They have simply moved them "off-shore" to developing countries. An example of this is China's use of coal powered plants to produce the electricity needed to run its industrial revolution. (source) Right now, it is the biggest producer of Greenhouse Emissions on the planet. (ibid)
But, it never was an issue of climate after all. Its more of an issue of profit.
And I have pointed out that (1) the giant banks will make a killing on carbon trading, (2) while the leading scientist crusading against global warming says it won't work, and (3) there is a very high probability of massive fraud and insider trading in the carbon trading markets.
Now, Bloomberg notes that the carbon trading scheme will be centered around derivatives:
The banks are preparing to do with carbon what they’ve done before: design and market derivatives contracts that will help client companies hedge their price risk over the long term. They’re also ready to sell carbon-related financial products to outside investors.
[Blythe] Masters says banks must be allowed to lead the way if a mandatory carbon-trading system is going to help save the planet at the lowest possible cost. And derivatives related to carbon must be part of the mix, she says. Derivatives are securities whose value is derived from the value of an underlying commodity -- in this case, CO2 and other greenhouse gases...
Who is Blythe Masters?
She is the JP Morgan employee who invented credit default swaps, and is now heading JPM's carbon trading efforts. As Bloomberg notes (this and all remaining quotes are from the above-linked Bloomberg article):
Masters, 40, oversees the New York bank’s environmental businesses as the firm’s global head of commodities...
As a young London banker in the early 1990s, Masters was part of JPMorgan’s team developing ideas for transferring risk to third parties. She went on to manage credit risk for JPMorgan’s investment bank.
Among the credit derivatives that grew from the bank’s early efforts was the credit-default swap.
Some in congress are fighting against carbon derivatives:
“People are going to be cutting up carbon futures, and we’ll be in trouble,” says Maria Cantwell, a Democratic senator from Washington state. “You can’t stay ahead of the next tool they’re going to create.”
Cantwell, 51, proposed in November that U.S. state governments be given the right to ban unregulated financial products. “The derivatives market has done so much damage to our economy and is nothing more than a very-high-stakes casino -- except that casinos have to abide by regulations,” she wrote in a press release...
However, Congress may cave in to industry pressure to let carbon derivatives trade over-the-counter:
The House cap-and-trade bill bans OTC derivatives, requiring that all carbon trading be done on exchanges...The bankers say such a ban would be a mistake...The banks and companies may get their way on carbon derivatives in separate legislation now being worked out in Congress...
Financial experts are also opposed to cap and trade:
Even George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund operator, says money managers would find ways to manipulate cap-and-trade markets. “The system can be gamed,” Soros, 79, remarked at a London School of Economics seminar in July. “That’s why financial types like me like it -- because there are financial opportunities”...
Hedge fund manager Michael Masters, founder of Masters Capital Management LLC, based in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands [and unrelated to Blythe Masters] says speculators will end up controlling U.S. carbon prices, and their participation could trigger the same type of boom-and-bust cycles that have buffeted other commodities...
The hedge fund manager says that banks will attempt to inflate the carbon market by recruiting investors from hedge funds and pension funds.
“Wall Street is going to sell it as an investment product to people that have nothing to do with carbon,” he says. “Then suddenly investment managers are dominating the asset class, and nothing is related to actual supply and demand. We have seen this movie before.”
Indeed, as I have previously pointed out, many environmentalists are opposed to cap and trade as well. For example:
Michelle Chan, a senior policy analyst in San Francisco for Friends of the Earth, isn’t convinced.
“Should we really create a new $2 trillion market when we haven’t yet finished the job of revamping and testing new financial regulation?” she asks. Chan says that, given their recent history, the banks’ ability to turn climate change into a new commodities market should be curbed...
“What we have just been woken up to in the credit crisis -- to a jarring and shocking degree -- is what happens in the real world,” she says...
Friends of the Earth’s Chan is working hard to prevent the banks from adding carbon to their repertoire. She titled a March FOE report “Subprime Carbon?” In testimony on Capitol Hill, she warned, “Wall Street won’t just be brokering in plain carbon derivatives -- they’ll get creative.”
Yes, they'll get "creative", and we have seen this movie before ...an inadequately-regulated carbon derivatives boom will destabilize the economy and lead to another crash.
FTO | Pascal Lamy, Director-General of the WTO recently said that the EU is the “laboratory of international governance”, meaning the emerging one world government sees the European Union as a model for building a one world government.
He pointed out his belief for the need of global governance in his speech at the Bocconi University in Milan, Itialy on November 9 2009.
This comes as the Copenhagen Climate summit starts and is said to be the place where world leaders will sign away their countries to form global governance. Earlier this year a “new world order” was also announced at the G20 summit in Pittsburg.
Malthusians and Social Darwinists have hijacked the environmental movement
Steve Watson
Prison Planet | In order to fully grasp the magnitude of the ClimateGate scandal, one must understand what purpose the data massaging and blackballing of conflicting science has as part of a larger agenda to use an environmental crisis for social manipulation and control.
Use of the perceived environmental crisis by special interests operates on two different levels.
Firstly, it provides a pretext for controlling the living standards of the masses while acting as an engine for vast financial profitability for the controllers.
From so called “green police”, and children being encouraged to become “climate cops”, to the impending introduction of a global carbon tax, the solutions being offered to combat climate change only serve as forms of social control. They do nothing to overturn or prevent changes in the Earth’s climate which we are incessantly told are threatening our continued existence on the planet.
Furthermore, some “solutions” have had devastating effects on living standards of poorer populations. Speaking about replacing one third of agricultural land to be used for growing bio-fuels instead, Lord Christopher Monckton has pointed out that it has led to a doubling of food prices in just one year.
“If we have to pay twice as much for our food – it’s inconvenient. If you are in a poor country – that difference of a 100% in the price of your food is the difference between life and death,”.
Secondly, the perceived environmental threat is being used as a device to frame the concept of population control and even depopulation. Such ideas on the surface are clearly detestable and are associated with genocide and Nazi eugenics ideology.
However, a disturbing trend being set by several “green” groups is to associate climate change with over-population and suggest that the solution is to implement depopulation policies and punishments for those who flout them.
ABC’s Planet Slayer website featured a cartoon series, complete with a tool called “Prof Schpinkee’s Greenhouse Calculator” to help kids work out their carbon footprint.
The calculator also estimates at what age a person should die so they don’t use more than their fair share of the Earth’s resources. If users were found to have used too much CO2, they were portrayed as an exploding pig, leaving behind a pool of blood and gore.
In 2007, a report published by green think tank the Optimum Population Trust announced that children are ‘bad for planet and ‘having large families should be frowned upon as an environmental misdemeanour in the same way as frequent long-haul flights, driving a big car and failing to reuse plastic bags.
Perhaps the most notorious to endorse the idea of depopulation is current White House science advisor John P. Holdren, who called for lowering global fertility by artificially medicating municipal water supplies in his 1977 book Ecoscience.
Since radical environmentalists are pushing to completely de-industrialize the world, reversing a trend that naturally lowers the amount of children people have, if climate change fanatics are allowed to implement their policies, global population will continue to increase and overpopulation will become a problem – another example of how the global warming hysterics are actually harming the long term environment of earth by preventing overpopulated countries from developing and naturally lowering their birth levels.
Of course, the globalist agenda to reduce world population by 80%, a figure achievable only via draconian and genocidal measures, has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with whittling down the number of slaves so that they can be more easily controlled on the plantation.
The eugenics movement never went away, it simply re-packaged itself to be more palatable to an increasingly skeptical public and its primary camouflage now fronts as the global warming doomsday cult.
While you may think Ideas of sterilization and depopulation could never be accepted by the public, those very concepts are now being embraced and popularized by some as the way forward for humanity.
Alex Jones’ Films Endgame and Fall Of The Republic address the hijacking of the environmental movement by elite social Darwinists in more detail.
Shell Oil and British Petroleum express their vehement support for a global carbon tax in “Copenhagen Communiqué”
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet | The big irony behind top globalists descending on Copenhagen in luxury private jets and stretch limos is not just the fact that their own behavior completely contradicts their self-righteous hyperbole about CO2 emissions, but that their propaganda is vehemently supported by the very same big oil interests they accuse climate skeptics of pandering to.
Probably one of the most flagrant examples of climate cronyism to emerge from the climategate scandal were emails in which CRU scientists, the body that provides much of the foundational global warming data for the UN IPCC, discuss how they conducted meetings with Shell Oil in order to enlist them as a “strategic partner” while getting them to bankroll pro-man made global warming research.
“Now who is the shill for Big Oil again?” asks Anthony Watts. “Next time somebody brings up that ridiculous argument about skeptics, show them this.”
A “Copenhagen Communiqué” put out by leaders of over 500 global corporations in advance of this week’s summit calls for drastic measures on behalf of developed countries to “de-carbonise their economies” – a move that would completely devastate living standards and lead to gargantuan levels of unemployment.
The communiqué also demands that a global carbon tax be implemented via a carbon trading system. Bear in mind that the very people calling for such a system are the same people who will benefit from it to the tune of billions, as we shall explore later.
The statement calls for, “Measures to deliver a robust global greenhouse gas emissions market in order to provide the most effective, efficient and equitable emission reductions. It would be comprised of a growing series of national or regional “cap-and-trade” markets linked together, in which the “caps” are brought down in line with the
targets that have been adopted for emission reduction.”
The document also states that CO2 emissions need to be reduced by a staggering 50-85% by 2050, a process that would return humanity to a near stone age level of development.
And who are the radicals calling for such severe measures in the name of fighting the evil life giving gas that humans exhale and plants breathe? Greenpeace? Al Gore?
Namely – James Smith, chairman of UK Shell Oil, Tony Hayward, Group Chief Executive, British Petroleum, along with hundreds of other global corporate giants, many of whom are directly tied in with big oil, and central banks who, far from bankrolling climate change skeptics, are directly invested in the scam of human-induced global warming.
A common charge leveled against global warming skeptics is that they are on the payroll of transnational oil companies, when in fact the opposite is true, oil companies are amongst the biggest promoters of climate change propaganda, emphasized recently by Exxon Mobil’s call for a global carbon tax.
According to Exxon Mobil chief executive Rex Tillerson, the cap and trade nightmare being primed for passage in the Senate doesn’t go far enough – Tillerson wants a direct tax on carbon dioxide emissions, essentially a tax on breathing since we all exhale this life-giving gas.
In a speech earlier this year, Tillerson brazenly called out the cap and trade agenda for what it was, an effort to impose a carbon tax camouflaged only by a slick sales pitch and deceptive rhetoric.
“It is easier and more politically expedient to support a cap-and-trade approach, because the public will never figure out where it is hitting them,” said Tillerson. “They will just know they hurt somewhere in their pocketbook,” he added, pointing out that he disagreed with this convoluted method of introducing a carbon tax, arguing instead that it would be more successful to openly propose a straight carbon tax.
Tillerson firmly expressed Exxon’s support for climate change alarmists in stating, “I firmly believe it is not too late for Congress to consider a carbon tax as the better policy approach for addressing the risks of climate change.”
Exxon’s push for a carbon tax was subsequently restated by its vice president for public affairs Ken Cohen, who told a conference call that he wants a climate policy that creates “certainty and predictability, which is why we advocate a carbon tax.”
Exxon Mobil and their ilk are not concerned about a carbon tax eating into their profits because they know they won’t have to pay it – the tab will be picked up by the ignorant taxpayer at the fuel pump at an inflated cost which if anything will hand the transnational oil cartels an even bigger cut.
Ideologically, Al Gore and Exxon Mobil are on exactly the same page – the only difference between the oil companies and global warming alarmists is the squabble over who will get to sink their teeth into the taxpayer and reap the dividends of the climate change scam.
Whereas parasites like Al Gore and Maurice Strong, the people who own the very carbon trading systems they claim will save the earth from CO2 emissions, want to enrich themselves to the tune of billions under a cap and trade scheme where they take a percentage of each transaction, the oil companies want to bypass this completely by simply imposing a direct CO2 tax. The consequence for the taxpayer under either scenario will be exactly the same, and the profits under both schemes would go towards filling the coffers of the global government that will enforce the whole scam.
Emphasizing again that oil companies are firmly behind the idea of man-made climate change and the introduction of a CO2 tax, in 2007 the Trilateral Commission, one of the three pillars of the new world order in alliance with Bilderberg and the CFR, met in near secrecy to formulate policy on how best they could exploit global warming fearmongering to ratchet up taxes and control over how westerners live their lives.
At the confab, European Chairman of the Trilateral Commission, Bilderberger and chairman of British Petroleum Peter Sutherland, gave a speech to his elitist cohorts in which he issued a “Universal battle cry arose for the world to address “global warming” with a single voice.”
Echoing this sentiment was General Lord Guthrie, director of N.M. Rothschild & Sons, member of the House of Lords and former chief of the Defense Staff in London, who urged the Trilateral power-brokers to “Address the global climate crisis with a single voice, and impose rules that apply worldwide.” Rules that no doubt will benefit the Rothschild family empire due to their personal ownership of a huge chunk of the carbon trading market.
Allegations that skeptics of the man-made explanation behind global warming are somehow doing the bidding of the elite are laughable in the face of the fact that Rothschild operatives and the very chairman of British Petroleum are the ones orchestrating an elitist plan to exploit global warming fears in order to achieve political objectives.
During the 2007 meeting, elitists along with oil industry kingpins called for imposing a $1 dollar per gallon tax at the fuel pump under the justification of fighting pollution and climate change.
Globalists love global warming. Oil industry kingpins, Bilderbergers and Rothschild minions have all put their weight behind it. This is a fraud conceived, nurtured and promulgated by elite, and to castigate individuals for merely questioning the motives behind climate change fearmongering by accusing them of being mouthpieces for the establishment is a complete reversal of the truth.
Claims by climate change alarmists that “deniers” are all funded by oil companies is yet another crudely contrived hoax. In reality, oil companies are the most vocal proponents of man-made climate change and the most aggressive in pushing to tax CO2 emissions.
The clips below, taken from Alex Jones’ new documentary Fall Of The Republic, expose how Al Gore serves as the front man for the global carbon tax cap and trade scheme, which is designed to bankrupt the United States and drastically lower the living standards of the American people, while introducing nightmare levels of regulation and bureaucracy into their everyday lives. Get the full DVD here.
Prison Planet | Shocking newly uncovered UN strategy documents reveal how elitists are recruiting members of academia from all over the globe in an effort to hide the “end-run” around national sovereignty that their agenda represents, emphasizing how the climategate crooks who were recently caught manipulating scientific data in order to “hide the decline” in global warming are working with the United Nations in the pursuit of a world government justified by the global warming fraud that they are helping to perpetrate.
One of the planning papers, entitled “The UNEP That We Want,” was produced by a specially selected group of influential environmental bureaucrats and delivered to the UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner.
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is the regulatory body that established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the politicized organization that has attempted to slam the lid shut on global warming skepticism by claiming it is the supreme authority, despite the fact that scientists used by the IPCC were caught manipulating data and conspiring to hide evidence of global cooling during the climategate scandal.
The IPCC has attempted to deny the gravitas of climategate by claiming that it has no bearing on their conclusions about global warming, despite the fact that scientists at the University of East Anglia used intimidation and academic witch hunts to ensure that data they didn’t agree with politically was blocked from appearing in the IPCC’s fourth assessment report, which was published in 2007.
Participants who contributed to the first UNEP document included Janos Pasztor, currently head of the team pushing U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s unprecedented Seal the Deal lobbying campaign to pressure U.N. member governments into signing a new environmental agreement at Copenhagen, Dominic Waughray, currently head of environmental initiatives at the World Economic Forum; and Maria Ivanova, and Bulgarian academic Maria Ivanova, director of the Global Economic Governance Project at the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy.
The documents outline a program of implementing a global system of governance based around environmental regulations and laws, stressing the agenda for the “evolutionary nature of strengthening international environmental governance.”
The aim of elevating UNEP’s influence to a position where it dictates rules to nation states, rather than nation states being the supervisors of UNEP as is currently the case, is advocated.
The documents discuss recruiting academia to further the power of UNEP, noteworthy in light of the recent climategate scandal where scientists at major universities were caught hiding evidence of global cooling.
“As the Swiss paper puts it, UNEP “should pioneer a new style of work. This requires going beyond a narrow interpretation of UNEP’s stakeholders as comprising its member states — or even the world’s governments — and recruiting a far wider community of support, in civil society, the academic world and the private sector.” At the same time the paper warns that these groups need to be “harnessed to the UNEP mission without appearing to make an end-run around the member governments,” summarizes Fox News’ George Russell.
This passage is fairly damning, as the UN is all but admitting that the program does represent an “end-run around member governments,” and that they have to do their best to hide the fact. That academics should be “harnessed to the UNEP mission” and not harnessed to producing unbiased scientific data about global warming also reveals how the climate change issue has been hijacked to serve the requirements of a global elite hell-bent on world government.
The first document also calls for an “Environmental Bretton Woods for the 21st Century,” where the environmental agenda is inextricably linked with the economy and the UN’s role is to have command over the economies of national governments.
The goals included in the four-year strategy paper include “efforts at local, national and global levels” to raise “sufficient finance to meet environmental challenges, including climate change,” which translates as using the problem of global warming to raise money for the operation of the global government structure which is being called for in the planning papers.
The goals enshrined in the documents, a counterpart to the globally binding agreement the UN is seeking to achieve in Copenhagen next month, are “certain to remain a UNEP rallying cry long after the Copenhagen meeting is over — and while the other brainstorming ideas that went into the new four-year strategy, not to mention the strategy itself, go into effect,” writes Russell.
This document represents yet another smoking gun proving that the climate cult movement is all about expanding the power of a dictatorial, unelected global government, diluting powers of nation states, seizing control of the global economy, eviscerating the middle class with a raft of new regulations and laws, and shutting down industry with impossible CO2 reduction mandates, while erecting environmentalism, which is really a thin veil for global fascism, as the new universal religion.
This has nothing to do with saving the earth and, as the climategate scandal has illustrated, nothing to do with the real science – but everything to do with a relatively small clique of globalists running roughshod over humanity itself in pursuit of their malthusian control freak agenda.
The research director at the centre of a row over climate change data said he would stand down from the post while there is an independent review.
BBC News | Professor Phil Jones, director of the Norwich-based University of East Anglia's (UEA) Climatic Research Unit (CRU), has said he stands by his data.
Sceptics claim the e-mails, leaked after a UEA server was hacked into, showed data was being manipulated.
The hacking of the computer is being investigated by Norfolk Police.
The files stolen from the computer include documents, detailed data and private e-mails exchanged between leading climate scientists.
'Continue research'
Professor Jones said he would stand aside as director until the completion of the independent review.
It is being conducted in the wake of the allegations by climate "sceptics".
The material was taken from servers at the world-renowned research centre before it was published on websites run by climate change sceptics.
Professor Jones said: "What is most important is that CRU continues its world-leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible.
"After a good deal of consideration I have decided that the best way to achieve this is by stepping aside from the director's role during the course of the independent review."
Professor Peter Liss will become acting director while the review is conducted, the university said.
'Out of context'
At the time that the theft of the data was revealed climate sceptics picked up on the word "trick" in one e-mail from 1999 and talk of "hiding the decline".
Professor Jones said the e-mail was genuine but taken "completely out of context".
He released a copy of the actual e-email which reads: "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."
Professor Jones said: "The first thing to point out is that this refers to one diagram - not a scientific paper.
"The word 'trick' was used here colloquially as in a clever thing to do. It is ludicrous to suggest that it refers to anything untoward."
We just slashed our prices to bare minimum on winter and summer gear at our Cafepress storefront. Most of out T-shirts are $19.99, take advantage of these prices throughout the Spring and help us expand the reach of JustGetThere to your neck of the woods.
Support Us
Help us continue to be a source for illuminating information. Any amount is appreciated. Thanks!
Daily Mail | The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.
Recent Comments