Zahir Ebrahim
| Project
Humanbeingsfirst.org
Last
Updated Wednesday, March 6, 2019
11:00 pm
“In
questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the
humble reasoning of a single individual”
--- Galileo Galilei
There
is an unhidden Agenda behind the crisis of Global Warming: To
implement UN Agenda 21 for Sustainable Development Worldwide, as the
Solution to this “man-made” crisis! This solution is
drastic and inimical to human life. It is formulated by the elite
among the elites, who think of mankind as a virus infecting the
earth. Is the earth's perceived climate change man-made? Or is it
significantly by natural causes beyond the control of man? Should
nations of the world urgently accept implementing Agenda 21 due to
its saintly wording and pleasing sounding goals under the existential
threat of an impending catastrophe that will otherwise leave the
earth barren for future generations?
The New York
Times reported on Nov.
3, 2017:
“Directly contradicting much of the Trump administration’s
position on climate change, 13 federal agencies unveiled an
exhaustive
scientific report
on Friday that says humans are the dominant cause of the global
temperature rise that has created the warmest period in the history
of civilization. ... The report was approved for release by the White
House, but the findings come as the Trump administration is defending
its climate change policies.”
Exactly nine
months earlier, 22
MIT Faculty Members
working on Climate had addressed a letter
to President Trump, dated March
02, 2017,
pre-justifying that blanket assertion by the 13 federal agencies in
their exhaustive scientific report: “It has come to our
attention that our colleague Richard Lindzen, Professor Emeritus at
MIT, has sent you a letter
urging you to withdraw from the UN climate convention, claiming that
actions with respect to global climate are not scientifically
justified. As his colleagues at MIT in the Program in Atmospheres,
Oceans, and Climate, all of whom are actively involved in
understanding climate, we write to make it clear that this is not a
view shared by us, or by the overwhelming majority of other
scientists who have devoted their professional lives to careful study
of climate science. The risks to the Earth system associated with
increasing levels of carbon dioxide are almost universally agreed by
climate scientists to be real ones. This include, but are not limited
to, sea level rise, ocean acidification, and increase in extreme
flooding and droughts, all with serious consequences for mankind.”
So,
is there, or isn't there, man-made Global Warming? American President
Donald Trump's position on virtually every matter including global
warming is usually one of strawman --- for the American and
international establishment's actual policies are rarely if ever
crafted in the White House itself. The fact of the matter is that all
establishments and their scientists worldwide tote a common
party-line: they religiously claim that Global-Warming / Climate
Change is man-made. Their staunchest detractors also religiously
claim that there isn't any global warming at all, but are then hard
pressed to explain the drastic changes in weather seen occurring
worldwide which is now presented by the establishment party-line not
as Global Warming as it was a decade ago, but as planetary level
Climate Change. Some other detractors suggest that Climate Change may
be real, but that it is principally not due to man's activity; that,
planetary level climate change is predominantly a natural cyclic
phenomenon based on the sun's activity, and therefore it is likely
solar system wide phenomenon. While still others, only a handful,
perhaps more in tune with the political vagaries of Machiavellian
statecraft and the making of the public mind with Hegelian Dialectic
imposed political choices, suggest that the alarmist attitude is to
Machiavellianly fashion a boogieman as the problem pretext, in order
to usher in Carbon Credit as the solution. They believe that the real
agenda behind these pseudo science laced political shenanigans is to
curtail humanity's unbridled growth and population explosion --- the
long running real agenda of the oligarchy driving nation-states
towards one-world government. This group of detractors fear that the
ultimate political agenda of the world government exponents is
dystopic eugenics, selective mass population reduction, and the
enactment of global laws for controlled living, controlled breeding,
wherein, birthing is transformed from the natural right of the human
species to a law-sanctioned privilege as has been witnessed in
Communist China! They see big government surreptitiously in the
making under the United Nations umbrella through its various
programs, agendas, working groups, and international bodies, all of
which are designed to usher in Global Governance in baby steps. Once
one baby step is taken, it is a fait accompli toward the next baby
step, until the eventual outcome, which would be unpalatable to
virtually everyone if forcibly taken in one giant step, is eagerly
accepted by everyone; indeed, demanded by everyone.
This
rather well-read intelligent lot of detractors who comprehend social
engineering, and who understandably so fear dystopia that they
perceptively see its seeds being planted in virtually every global
policy that is signed off by the so called representative governments
which surreptitiously erode national sovereignty in small baby-steps,
are generally dismissed by the establishment and their plethora of
experts and academics as “conspiracy theorist”, kooks and
nut-jobs. To assist in that labeling and marginalization of truth, a
great deal of “beneficial cognitive diversity” is
also cunningly introduced into the mix of public opinion which
pitches outlandish and absurd theories.
All
this creates massive confusion in the public mind. Whom to believe?
What to believe? No sensible mind would throw the baby out with the
bath water, but who has the time and inclination to sift through this
noise from the Mighty Wurlitzer? Is science really divorced from
political science? Is pseudo science being used to globally push an
elitist agenda down mankind's throat? What a Hegelian Mind-fck!
The
public mind, now thoroughly confused by the plethora of “expert”
opinions, naturally gravitates towards officially sanctioned
authority figures to tell them what is true and what isn't --- and in
this way their new political beliefs are cast, and old ones
reinforced, and their behavior molded. That officialdom's authority
figures have, in this November 2017, released its official bible of
sacred truths for the global public at large – for whatever is
true for the United States of America with respect to climate change,
is obviously also true for the rest of the world as well. The new
sacred truths are part of the new religion being fashioned worldwide,
that it is humanity that is causing Global Warming / Climate Change,
and that the planet must be saved from humanity in order for the
planet to be saved for humanity!
This
report dismantles that sacred truth as being nothing more than a
Noble Lie – like the WMDs in Iraq which facilitated its
invasion by the United States of America. Once such a step is fait
accompli, no power can undo it. No “oops” and
“intelligence failure” can put the fired bullet back into
the gun. Precisely because of its irreversibility, that the public
must first understand and then oppose this sacred truth which makes
mankind out as a virus infecting the earth. Without first
unraveling the overarching political theory upon which the many
misanthropic chemotherapy protocols designed to control this human
virus proliferation in the guise of benevolence are based, such as
the United Nations Agenda 21, the Carbon Credit, the World Wildlife
Fund or Federation, the mandatory vaccination programs under the WHO
that provide the scientific as well as political mechanism for
stealth sterilization, etc., the public as well as their local and
national governments are easily fooled into signing off on them. The
subsequent generations will end up living in growth chains under a
dystopian world social order unless man comes to grips with the
multifaceted devils running the world today.
|
He is just an
ordinary fellow, a common man. But one who suffers no fools, takes no
prisoners, bows before no authority figures as bearers of divine
truths, and remains just as unimpressed by the metaphysics of the
turban as by the scholarship of the gown. There is not
much else to say about him. He was quite imperfectly educated in the
elite secular universities of both the United States of America and
Pakistan, which is perhaps how he managed to escape from these
factories of jahiliya with his mind still intact and his brain
still firing on all cylinders. It is only because of the imperfection
of his education, and because of the failure of the system to
obedience train him to United We Stand with absurdities, that
his deconstruction of the global warming scam is able to capture
reality the way it actually is, minus all of truth's protective
layers. At least me thinks so. My name is Zahir Ebrahim, and I am
the archetype plebeian antidote to hectoring hegemons. My
contribution to making America great again can be gleaned at
the United States Patent Office ( https://tinyurl.com/Zahir-Patents
). My contribution to making her almost human can be read at my
website http://humanbeingsfirst.org
.
Caption
Creating Pseudo Science by the Process of Self-fulfilling Prophecy –
The naïve and simplistic view of Corruption of Science in the
Service of Empire (Image source Richard S. Lindzen, Science in
the Public Square: Global Climate Alarmism and Historical
Precedents, Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Volume
18 Number 3 Fall 2013)
My
shrewd take on this question is that so long as ushering Carbon
Credit is the principal underlying agenda of Global Governance,
so long as global warming menace is the means employed by the United
Nations Agenda 21 to forcibly induce changes in attitude and behavior
that give preference to the natural processes of “Gaia”
over human existence and human experience, so long as political will
and its legalisms continue to be enacted on the core premise laid out
in the Club of Rome report “In
searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water
shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality
and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat
which must be confronted by everyone together. ... All these dangers
are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only
through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The
real enemy then is humanity itself.”, the
principal focus of the public's attention, as well as the scientists'
and all the national and international political pied pipers', should
not be on this red herring question of is there or isn't there Global
Warming.
Climate
change due to sun's activity is a natural and cyclic phenomenon. To
overload that phenomenon with the Machiavellian motivation to search
“for a common enemy against whom we
can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of
global warming, water shortages, famine and the like,” is
a cunning misdirection that is sucking up the productive energies of
well-intentioned and concerned people, while enlisting useful idiots
at the grass-roots level to the cause of UN Agenda 21.
Caption
'On thin Ice – The hockey stick graph fraud' Climategate
U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no
global warming since 1995 ----- So, is there, or isn't there,
man-made Global Warming? What a Hegelian Mind-fck! (image source The
Daily Mail UK, Feb 14, 2010)
The
common public attention should instead be focused on the Carbon
Credit scam and the Global Governance agenda under UN Agenda 21 which
is being diabolically legalized using a multiplicity of propaganda
covers including the fear of Climate Change in order to lend that
exercise “legal” and political legitimacy.
The
subversion by misdirection is worldwide --- no statesman who has any
standing, is standing up to this Big Lie. This grotesque reality of
universal co-option was most perceptively captured in 1970 by a
former FBI agent after reading Carroll Quigley's 1966 book Tragedy
& Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, with these
portentous words:
'The
real value of Tragedy and Hope ... [is the] bold and boastful
admission by Dr. Quigley that there actually exists a relatively
small but powerful group which has succeeded in acquiring a
choke-hold on the affairs of practically the entire human race. Of
course we should be quick to recognize that no small group could
wield such gigantic power unless millions of people in all walks of
life were “in on the take” and were willing to knuckle
down to the iron-clad regimentation of the ruthless bosses behind the
scenes. As we shall see, the network has
succeeded in building its power structure by using tremendous
quantities of money (together with the vast influence it buys) to
manipulate, intimidate, or corrupt millions of men and women and
their institutions on a world-wide basis.' (W. Cleon
Skousen, The Naked Capitalist, pg. 6)
The
tortuous reality of global co-option, as stated by the powers that be
themselves, is that:
“The
few who understand the system will either be so interested in its
profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no
opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body
of people, mentally incapable of comprehending [the system], will
bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even
suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests.”
Caption
Graph Reality Versus Alarm --- Concerned Scientists Reply on Global
Warming 'From the graph it appears that the projections
exaggerate, substantially, the response of the earth's temperature
to CO2 which increased by about 11% from 1989 through 2011.
Furthermore, when one examines the historical temperature record
throughout the 20th century and into the 21st, the data strongly
suggest a much lower CO2 effect than almost all models calculate.'
(image source The Wall Street Journal, op-ed February 21, 2012)
Today,
in the latter part of the second decade of the twenty-first century,
the empirical reality around me just tells me that it is only a
matter of time before carbon credit is a done deal, a fait
accompli.
The
red herring question whether or not there is Global Warming or
Climate Change due to man's activity would soon become a moot point
as global masses come to accept and live in growth chains under the
United Nations Agenda 21. Unlike in nuclear fission reaction which
requires compression pressure to increase to the point of critical
mass to set off the nuclear chain reaction to make a nuclear
explosion, mankind does not appear to have such a critical mass of
compression. We have demonstrated throughout our short history on
earth how much we are able to be oppressed with ease and still get
used to it --- mankind's innumerable prophets' lofty platitudes of
boldly casting aside the chains of servitude notwithstanding.
This
is what the powers that be are banking on --- our infinite capacity
to not just voluntarily accept servitude, but under the right set of
perception management / psychologically persuasive / pharmacological
cocktails, even come to love it.
Aldous Huxley
had called this latter control the “ultimate in malevolent
revolution”. That is the path which has been ordained for
humanity by the powers that be and it is not obvious how hoi
polloi can effectively counter it before it is fait accompli.
Platitudes abound, including my
own two cents worth.
These look rather nice on paper, or from pulpits and podiums, even
appear self-evident, but, in the history of civilizations that is
recorded, has never come to pass en masse. In our modernity which is
characterized by universal deceit, when just speaking the plain truth
is deemed to be a “revolutionary act”, when false hopes
and false prophets shepherd the herd to this and that form of
“awakening” and run them in circles, the real ray of hope
perhaps comes from witnessing the daily courage of resistance of the
indigenous common man in occupied places like Palestine and Kashmir.
Caption
Graph Annual Global Mean Surface Temperature Anomalies “No
warming since 1997 and no statistically significant warming since
1995 (the red fuzz represents the error ‘bars’)”
(Image source MIT Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, Richard
Lindzen, via WUWT, March 11, 2008)
To
percolate that courage upwards, from oppression by visible bayonet
that is resisted through the fight or flight natural response, to
oppression by the more intangible mind-behavior control methods when
one is made to love one's servitude and consequently disarmed of all
courage to resist ab initio, is the hard challenge. A
challenge for those few who do understand the system and are neither
interested in its profits and nor so dependent upon its favours that
it can stop them without killing them.
Here is an
excerpt from statements of dissenting scientists worldwide which puts
an immediate end to the Big lie of “consensus”. The
latest version of this 2008
excerpted report
is the December
8, 2010 U.S. Senate Minority Report
( http://cfact.org/pdf/2010_Senate_Minority_Report.pdf
) which updates this 2008 number of More Than 700 (Previously 650),
to More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made
Global Warming Claims to Debunk Fading “Consensus”.
It begs the question why newsmedia, politicians, scholars, pulpits,
governments, just ignore it. The self-evident answer – those
who know are already playing in the shell game. And those who don't
know? At least some among them refuse to know but think they know
enough to write a whole handbook on it: Unprecedented
Climate Mobilization: A Handbook for Citizens and Their Governments.
The rest --- well, efforts like these is for their sake.
- “I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
- “Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical...The main basis of the claim that man’s release of greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology, and formerly of NASA, who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”
Caption
“In September 2015, the international scientific journal
Nature published a cartoon showing the temple of “Robust
Science” in a state of collapse. What is going on?”
-- Rupert Sheldrake. Arguably, what's going on in the most naïve
apolitical sense is the merging of epistemological problems
naturally arising in applying the Scientific Method under
the human limitations of Data
Availability Bias and Data
Assimilability Bias, with
self-interest created by the publish or perish culture of
modern science that naturally induces Confirmation
Bias and moral clarity (see
https://tinyurl.com/Some-Problems-in-Epistemology#[7]).
In the shrewd Machiavellian sense, it is diabolically engineering
consent for an unpalatable political agenda by creating pretexts
for it using the gibberish of pseudo science, and disseminating it
with the propaganda machinery of the Mighty Wurlitzer (see
https://tinyurl.com/MightyWurlitzer).
Also see Bibliography Corruption of Science,
https://tinyurl.com/Science-in-Service-of-Empire#Bibliography
. (Image courtesy of Nature via Rupert Sheldrake, The
Replicability Crisis in Science, a brief survey of the
epistemology of Science pertaining to replicability failure,
September 2015,
http://www.sheldrake.org/about-rupert-sheldrake/blog/the-replicability-crisis-in-science)
- Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
- “The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.
- “So far, real measurements give no ground for concern about a catastrophic future warming.” - Scientist Dr. Jarl R. Ahlbeck, a chemical engineer at Abo Akademi University in Finland, author of 200 scientific publications and former Greenpeace member.
- “Anyone who claims that the debate is over and the conclusions are firm has a fundamentally unscientific approach to one of the most momentous issues of our time.” - Solar physicist Dr. Pal Brekke, senior advisor to the Norwegian Space Centre in Oslo. Brekke has published more than 40 peer-reviewed scientific articles on the sun and solar interaction with the Earth.
Technetronic Weather ModificationToday, based on the understanding from the rich bibliography on this subject, it also does not take a rocket scientist to see that the climate change menace potentially has many other covert man-made technetronic helpers besides the sun's natural activity, neither of which is accounted for in the propaganda spiel of man-made carbon emissions causing Global Warming in what appears to be a universal conspiracy of dunces that sees no evil, hears no evil, and speaks no evil.
Whenever the great political and intellectual leaders of mankind get together to sign global Accords on Climate Change, only man-made CO2 is put on the table and its rectification is signed off as the “green” solution. That's because the stealth agenda is to force a global transformation using any pretext, be it wholly propagandistic, or manufactured technetronically, to lend credibility to the propaganda campaign. As the Report from Iron Mountain had perceptively suggested: “Credibility, in fact, lies at the heart of the problem” for any mind-game to succeed.
Unlike the sex prostitutes in every major city on earth who earn their honest keep selling their bodies without deceiving their customers about the nature of their services, the prostitutes of empire do so by wearing the garb of academic respectability, morality, piety, and concern for humanity, outright deceiving their customers. Jesus had just one word for such “moralists”. The Bible calls them hypocrites. The problem however is far more severe than mere hypocrisy. It is criminal. A war crime. For it is the ubiquitous war on the public mind which can only be waged credibly by way of deception.
The wolf must appear in sheep's clothing in order to guide its flock first to the constricted hen house and then to the slaughter house. And it must also convince those most in the position to understand its overarching game-plan, to pretend to not notice it.
It's a shell game from top to bottom and permeates science as much as it permeates political science. - “The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico
- “It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.
- “Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.
- “After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.
- “The Kyoto theorists have put the cart before the horse. It is global warming that triggers higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, not the other way round…A large number of critical documents submitted at the 1995 U.N. conference in Madrid vanished without a trace. As a result, the discussion was one-sided and heavily biased, and the U.N. declared global warming to be a scientific fact,” Andrei Kapitsa, a Russian geographer and Antarctic ice core researcher.
- “I am convinced that the current alarm over carbon dioxide is mistaken...Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science.” - Award Winning Physicist Dr. Will Happer, Professor at the Department of Physics at Princeton University and Former Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy, who has published over 200 scientific papers, and is a fellow of the American Physical Society, The American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Academy of Sciences.
- “Nature's regulatory instrument is water vapor: more carbon dioxide leads to less moisture in the air, keeping the overall GHG content in accord with the necessary balance conditions.” – Prominent Hungarian Physicist and environmental researcher Dr. Miklós Zágoni reversed his view of man-made warming and is now a skeptic. Zágoni was once Hungary’s most outspoken supporter of the Kyoto Protocol.
- “For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.
- “Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.
- “The quantity of CO2 we produce is insignificant in terms of the natural circulation between air, water and soil... I am doing a detailed assessment of the UN IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science.” - South Afican Nuclear Physicist and Chemical Engineer Dr. Philip Lloyd, a UN IPCC co-coordinating lead author who has authored over 150 refereed publications.
- “Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.
- “All those urging action to curb global warming need to take off the blinkers and give some thought to what we should do if we are facing global cooling instead.” - Geophysicist Dr. Phil Chapman, an astronautical engineer and former NASA astronaut, served as staff physicist at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
- “Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.
- “CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.
- “The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.” - Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata.
- “Whatever the weather, it's not being caused by global warming. If anything, the climate may be starting into a cooling period.” Atmospheric scientist Dr. Art V. Douglas, former Chair of the Atmospheric Sciences Department at Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska, and is the author of numerous papers for peer-reviewed publications.
- “But there is no falsifiable scientific basis whatever to assert this warming is caused by human-produced greenhouse gasses because current physical theory is too grossly inadequate to establish any cause at all.” - Chemist Dr. Patrick Frank, who has authored more than 50 peer-reviewed articles.
- “The ‘global warming scare’ is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision making. It has no place in the Society's activities.” - Award-Winning NASA Astronaut/Geologist and Moonwalker Jack Schmitt who flew on the Apollo 17 mission and formerly of the Norwegian Geological Survey and for the U.S. Geological Survey.
- “Earth has cooled since 1998 in defiance of the predictions by the UN-IPCC….The global temperature for 2007 was the coldest in a decade and the coldest of the millennium…which is why ‘global warming’ is now called ‘climate change.’” - Climatologist Dr. Richard Keen of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at the University of Colorado.
- “I have yet to see credible proof of carbon dioxide driving climate change, yet alone man-made CO2 driving it. The atmospheric hot-spot is missing and the ice core data refute this. When will we collectively awake from this deceptive delusion?” - Dr. G LeBlanc Smith, a retired Principal Research Scientist with Australia’s CSIRO (The full quotes of the scientists are later in this report)
Backdrop
Galileo on Science
When
I had entered MIT to study science and engineering in the 1970s as
any excited kid in a candy story, little did I understand that like
political science and religion, science and pseudo science also
interplay in the service of empire. The following is my contribution
to speaking up following in the footsteps of the first patron saint
of modern science to have demonstrated the courage of his
convictions at the risk of the gallows, Galileo. Just look
through the telescope, he hath pleaded before the church of his
time, countering their divine authority with uncommon boldness: “In
questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the
humble reasoning of a single individual”. Except
that today it is the church of science that has taken over from the
Church of Christendom. The risks today are also substantially the
same. Only the labels might be different. Among the tens of
thousands of scientists and engineers worldwide, there are evidently
too few Galileos alive to make any impact on the new Church of
Science that has taken hold in the twenty-first century.
There
is an overarching social-political theory behind the propaganda of
Global Warming / Climate Change. And that is the construction of
one-world government. That entails, inter alia, how mankind should be
organized, governed, their attitudes and behavior changed, in a
massive reboot of all civilizations into a standardized civilization
with standardized new religion, new habits, new lifestyles, with much
of the planet earth off limits to the vast masses of humanity in the
name of preserving nature, wildlife, environment, Gaia (mother
earth), for future generations. Individual rights to be subsumed
under community rights. Private property rights abolished for the
public (not for the elite who hold property under corporations,
tax-exempt foundations, non-governmental organizations called NGOs,
etc.) Such a massive overhaul of mankind, a global transformation,
cannot be brought about by peoples and nations simply agreeing to
giving up their rights and national sovereignty. So it is to be
accomplished by stealth, in baby-steps, disguised firstly in
nice-sounding mantras easily palatable to the public mind. One of
those nice sounding things is the “green” agenda called
“Sustainable Development”. Secondly, the stealth is
disguised as solutions to crises and menaces that people and
governments would easily accept under conditions of psychological
fear and physical terror. One of those menaces is Global Warming /
Climate Change and its solution is Carbon Credit and Agenda 21.
Similarly, another menace is terrorism, and its solution is global
war on terror that enables instituting global standardized
police-state polices. There are many more aspects to this and covers
the whole gamut of human activity.
The
Council on Foreign Relations
To
understand the overarching big picture and why these methods are
actually masks for a Machiavellian game plan, let's begin with the
CFR, Council on Foreign Relations:
“In
short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built
from the bottom up, rather than from the top down. It will look like
a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William
James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around
national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much
more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.
Of
course, for political as well as administrative reasons, some of
these specialized arrangements should be brought into an appropriate
relationship with the central institutions of the U.N. system, but
the main thing is that the essential functions be performed.
The question is
whether this more modest approach can do the job. Can it really bring
mankind into the twenty-first century with reasonable prospects for
peace, welfare and human dignity? The argument thus far suggests it
better had, for there seems to be no alternative. But the evidence
also suggests some grounds for cautious optimism.” --- Richard
N. Gardner, The Hard Road to World Order, 1974, published in CFR's
Foreign Affairs,
http://thepowerhour.com/articles/HardRoadtoWorldOrder.pdf
So
let's observe the bottom up methods
applied to build the ‘house of world
order’ to bring mankind into the twenty-first century with
reasonable prospects for peace, welfare and human dignity.
Report
from Iron Mountain 1967
The
environmental menace, and specifically climate change and pollution,
is mentioned in this 1967 Report
from Iron Mountain
published by The Dial Press, as the alternate means of corralling
human behavior based on fear in the absence of the menace of war
corralling mankind. The report stated:
“The
existence of an accepted external menace, then, is essential to
social cohesiveness as well as to the acceptance of political
authority. The menace must be believable, it must be of a magnitude
consistent with the complexity of the society threatened, and it must
appear, at least, to affect the entire society.”
If the
overarching agenda is to form a one-world government, even if just
for a moment the skeptic may entertain that hypothesis which is being
openly pursued by the CFR (and of course the United States
influential newspaper The
Financial Times,
read by virtually every business executive on earth worth his weight
in gold, also explicitly laid the method out in December
2008),
then, what better global menace than the environment which threatens
the whole world! It is easily made believable,
and especially if the ecological menace can be coincided with natural
ecological / climate cycles due to sun's activity, and the requisite
political as well as cultural propaganda employing credible “experts”
is brought to bear on the principal cause being man-made.
After fait accompli, it would be a moot point whether the
menace was politically invented, or natural or man-made.
This
is what the shockingly uncanny report, commissioned in 1961-62 at the
height of the Cold War in the aftermath of the Cuban missile crisis
when it was already being anticipated by the powers that be that the
Cold War would soon end with nary a new enemy in sight, stated in its
Section 6, Substitutes for the Function of War, for new Political
alternatives to war. The reader should be mindful that this study is
well over a half century old. Whether real or fictionalized political
treatise, it is uncannily in the footprints of Machiavelli's The
Prince, the diabolical political blueprint for political
authority to engineer consent from the public mind for their own
behavior control by politically structured means:
“Nevertheless,
an effective political substitute for war would require "alternate
enemies," some of which might seem equally farfetched in the
context of the current war system. It may be, for instance, that
gross pollution of the environment can eventually replace the
possibility of mass destruction by nuclear weapons as the principal
apparent threat to the survival of the species. Poisoning of the air,
and of the principal sources of food and water supply, is already
well advanced, and at first glance would seem promising in this
respect; it constitutes a threat that can be dealt with only through
social organization and political power. But from present indications
it will be a generation to a generation and a half before
environmental pollution, however severe, will be sufficiently
menacing, on a global scale, to offer a possible basis for a
solution.”
Note
the coincidence of that last sentence with the emergence of
the Global Warming mantra which was kicked off first in the
intellectual space by the private elitist Club of Rome publishing
their report in a book titled: The First Global Revolution in 1991;
followed by major league governmental participation of virtually all
nations of the world in what is called the United Nations Earth
Summit in 1992; followed by vicariously kicking off public alarm in
the mainstream by former vice president Al Gore in the 2000s making
his Global Warming documentary. It was watched by millions in the
mainstream worldwide and brought the public's fears on board the same
page. Note that all these fall on precisely that timeline,
“generation
to a generation and a half before environmental pollution,
however severe, will be sufficiently menacing, on a global scale, to
offer a possible basis for a solution.”
Newspapers, books, television shows, Hollywood movies, have continued
to echo that menace in different flavors.
The
entire diabolical subsection titled POLITICAL and a few shocking
passages each from subsections titled SOCIOLOGICAL and ECOLOGICAL, of
Section 6 of Report from Iron Mountain are reproduced below to lend
full overarching context under which the latter day Global Warming /
Climate Change menace, as well as many other menaces for behavior and
population control which should easily be familiar today, are
potentially being engineered to make the public mind. It is
once again for the reader to make up his or her own damn mind whether
the adverb “potentially” in that last sentence should be
“actually”, or some other. Don't bow to any authority
figures --- if you can help it. It is well for the reader to also
remember what the Report on Iron Mountain itself stated at the very
outset about the lay public mind “unexposed
to the exigencies of higher political or military responsibility”
not having the intellectual and moral capacity to appreciate this
report (and this actually works to your advantage if you are not a
sociopath and become filled with disgust reading it for it helps undo
their propaganda system):
“Because
of the unusual
circumstances surrounding the establishment of this Group, and in
view of the nature of its findings, we do not recommend that this
Report be released for publication. It is our affirmative judgment
that such action would not be in the public interest. The uncertain
advantages of public discussion of our conclusions and
recommendations are, in our opinion, greatly outweighed by the clear
and predictable danger of a crisis in public confidence which
untimely publication of this Report might be expected to provoke. The
likelihood that a lay reader, unexposed to the exigencies of higher
political or military responsibility, will misconstrue the purpose of
this project, and the intent of its participants, seems obvious. We
urge that circulation of this Report be closely restricted to those
whose responsibilities require that they be apprised of its
contents.”
Begin Excerpt
From Section 6, Report
from Iron Mountain
POLITICAL
The
war system makes the stable government of societies possible. It does
this essentially by providing an external necessity for a society to
accept political rule. In so doing, it establishes the basis for
nationhood and the authority of government to control its
constituents. What other institution or combination of programs might
serve these functions in its place?
We
have already pointed out that the end of the war means the end of
national sovereignty, and thus the end of nationhood as we know it
today. But this does not necessarily mean the end of nations in the
administrative sense, and internal political power will remain
essential to a stable society. The emerging "nations" of
the peace epoch must continue to draw political authority from some
source.
A
number of proposals have been made governing the relations between
nations after total disarmament; all are basically juridical in
nature. They contemplate institutions more or less like a World
Court, or a United Nations, but vested with real authority. They may
or may not serve their ostensible post-military purpose of settling
international disputes, but we need not discuss that here. None would
offer effective external pressure on a peace-world nation to organize
itself politically.
It
might be argued that a well-armed international police force,
operating under the authority of such a supranational "court,"
could well serve the function of external enemy. This, however, would
constitute a military operation, like the inspection schemes
mentioned, and, like them, would be inconsistent with the premise of
an end to the war system. It is possible that a variant of the
"Unarmed Forces" idea might be developed in such a way that
its "constructive" (i.e., social welfare) activities could
be combined with an economic "threat" of sufficient size
and credibility to warrant political organization. Would this kind of
threat also be contradictory to our basic premise?--that is, would it
be inevitably military? Not necessarily, in our view, but we are
skeptical of its capacity to evoke credibility. Also, the obvious
destabilizing effect of any global social welfare surrogate on
politically necessary class relationships would create an entirely
new set of transition problems at least equal in magnitude.
Credibility,
in fact, lies at the heart of the problem of developing a political
substitute for war. This is where the space-race
proposals, in many ways so well suited as economic substitutes for
war, fall short. The most ambitious and unrealistic space project
cannot of itself generate a believable external menace. It has been
hotly argued that such a menace would offer the "last, best hope
of peace," etc., by uniting mankind against the danger of
destruction by "creatures" from other planets or from outer
space. Experiments have been proposed to test the credibility of an
out-of-our-world invasion threat; it is possible that a few of the
more difficult-to-explain "flying saucer" incidents of
recent years were in fact early experiments of this kind. If so, they
could hardly have been judged encouraging. We anticipate no
difficulties in making a "need" for a giant super space
program credible for economic purposes, even were there not ample
precedent; extending it, for political purposes, to include features
unfortunately associated with science fiction would obviously be a
more dubious undertaking.
Nevertheless,
an effective political substitute for war would require "alternate
enemies," some of which might seem equally farfetched in the
context of the current war system. It may be, for instance, that
gross pollution of the environment can eventually replace the
possibility of mass destruction by nuclear weapons as the principal
apparent threat to the survival of the species. Poisoning of the air,
and of the principal sources of food and water supply, is already
well advanced, and at first glance would seem promising in this
respect; it constitutes a threat that can be dealt with only through
social organization and political power. But from present indications
it will be a generation to a generation and a half before
environmental pollution, however severe, will be sufficiently
menacing, on a global scale, to offer a possible basis for a
solution.
It
is true that the rate of pollution could be increased selectively for
this purpose; in fact, the mere modifying of existing programs for
the deterrence of pollution could speed up the process enough to make
the threat credible much sooner. But the pollution problem has been
so widely publicized in recent years that it seems highly improbably
that a program of deliberate environ- mental poisoning could be
implemented in a politically acceptable manner.
However
unlikely some of the possible alternate enemies we have mentioned may
seem, we must emphasize that one must be found, of credible quality
and magnitude, if a transition to peace is ever to come about without
social disintegration. It is more probably, in our judgement, that
such a threat will have to be invented, rather than developed from
unknown conditions. For this reason, we believe further
speculation about its putative nature ill-advised in this context.
Since there is considerable doubt, in our minds, that any viable
political surrogate can be devised, we are
reluctant to compromise, by premature discussion, any possible option
that may eventually lie open to our government.
SOCIOLOGICAL
Another
possible surrogate for the control of potential enemies of society is
the reintroduction, in some form consistent with modern technology
and political processes, of slavery. Up to now, this has
been suggested only in fiction, notably in the works of Wells,
Huxley, Orwell, and others engaged in the imaginative anticipation of
the sociology of the future. But the fantasies projected in Brave New
World and 1984 have seemed less and less implausible over the years
since their publication. The traditional
association of slavery with ancient preindustrial cultures should not
blind us to its adaptability to advanced forms of social
organization, nor should its equally traditional incompatibility with
Western moral and economic values. It is entirely possible that the
development of a sophisticated form of slavery may be an absolute
prerequisite for social control in a world at peace. As a
practical matter, conversion of the code of military discipline to a
euphemized form of enslavement would entail surprisingly little
revision; the logical first step would be the adoption of some form
of "universal" military service.
When
it comes to postulating a credible substitute for war capable of
directing human behavior patterns in behalf of social organization,
few options suggest themselves. Like its political function, the
motivational function of war requires the existence of a genuinely
menacing social enemy. The principal difference is that for purposes
of motivating basic allegiance, as distinct from accepting political
authority, the "alternate enemy" must imply a more
immediate, tangible, and directly felt threat of destruction. It must
justify the need for taking and paying a "blood price" in
wide areas of human concern.
In
this respect, the possible enemies noted earlier would be
insufficient. One exception might be the environmental-pollution
model, if the danger to society it posed was genuinely imminent.
The fictive models would have to carry the weight of extraordinary
conviction, underscored with a not inconsiderable actual sacrifice of
life; the construction of an up-to-date mythological or religious
structure for this purpose would present difficulties in our era, but
must certainly be considered.
Games
theorists have suggested, in other contexts, the development of
"blood games" for the effective control of individual
aggressive impulses. It is an ironic commentary on the current state
of war and peace studies that it was left not to scientists but to
the makers of a commercial film to develop a model for this notion,
on the implausible level of popular melodrama, as a ritualized
manhunt. More realistically, such a ritual
might be socialized, in the manner of the Spanish Inquisition and the
less formal witch trials of other periods, for purposes of "social
purification," "state security," or other rationale
both acceptable and credible to postwar societies. The
feasibility of such an updated version of still another ancient
institution, though doubtful, is considerably less fanciful than the
wishful notion of many peace planners that a lasting condition of
peace can be brought about without the most painstaking examination
of every possible surrogate for the essential functions of war. What
is involved here, in a sense, is the quest for William James' "moral
equivalent of war."
It
is also possible that the two functions considered under this heading
may be jointly served, in the sense of establishing the antisocial,
for whom a control institution is needed, as the "alternate
enemy" needed to hold society together. The
relentless and irreversible advance of unemployability at all levels
of society, and the similar extension of generalized alienation from
accepted values may make some such program necessary even as an
adjunct to the war system. As before, we
will not speculate on the specific forms this kind of program might
take, except to note that there is again ample precedent, in the
treatment meted out to disfavored, allegedly menacing, ethnic groups
in certain societies during certain historical periods.
ECOLOGICAL
Considering
the shortcomings of war as a mechanism of selective population
control, it might appear that devising substitutes for this function
should be comparatively simple. Schematically this is so, but the
problem of timing the transition to a new ecological balancing device
makes the feasibility of substitution less certain. ...
There
is no question but that a universal requirement that procreation be
limited to the products of artificial insemination would provide a
fully adequate substitute control for population levels. Such a
reproductive system would, of course, have the added advantage of
being susceptible of direct eugenic management. Its
predictable further development---conception and embryonic growth
taking place wholly under laboratory conditions--would extend these
controls to their logical conclusion. The ecological function of war
under these circumstances would not only be superseded but surpassed
in effectiveness.
The
indicated intermediate step--total control of conception with a
variant of the ubiquitous "pill," via water supplies or
certain essential foodstuffs, offset by a controlled "antidote"---is
already under development. There would appear to be no
foreseeable need to revert to any of the outmoded practices referred
to in the previous section (infanticide, etc.) as there might have
been if the possibility of transition to peace had arisen two
generations ago.
End
Excerpt
Report
by the Council of the Club of Rome - The First Global Revolution 1991
Directly
upon the heels of the Machiavellian prescriptions laid out in the
Report from Iron Mountain, came the infamous Club of Rome's actual
recipe to propagandize the ecological global threat. In its carefully
worded report on environment and habitat of Man on earth titled: The
First Global Revolution, 1991, the Club of Rome authors, Alexander
King and Bertrand Schneider, made global warming and climate change
the new hard menace to corral mankind towards the behavior and
attitude change desired by the powers that be:
“The
Common enemy of humanity is Man: In searching for a common enemy
against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution,
the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like,
would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these
phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by
everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we
fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about,
namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by
human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through
changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real
enemy then is humanity itself.”
--- Ch 5, The Vacuum, pg 75 (pg 86 / 184 in PDF:
https://archive.org/stream/TheFirstGlobalRevolution#page/n85/mode/2up
.
The
United Nations Agenda 21 and Social Engineering Play Book 1992
Immediately
upon the heels of the Club of Rome report, came the United Nations
Agenda 21 in 1992. In the United Nations Conference on Environment
and Development (UNCED), also known as the Rio de Janeiro Earth
Summit, held in Brazil in June 1992, virtually all member countries
of the UN signed on to this Agenda 21, including the United States of
America. Its prime-mover was the 1991 Club of Rome recommendations
that had identified all the menaces facing humanity including
humanity itself, rectification of all of which suddenly became
internationally endorsed global policies known as United Nations
Agenda 21. It is an actual play by play rule book for attitude and
behavior modification in a massive global reset and reboot
that covers the gamut of present day organizational combines from
international to national to districts to cities to local to
neighborhood and community levels.
The
United Nations Agenda 21 is intended to force mankind to make broad
changes in its attitudes, behaviors, and lifestyles in accordance
with the wishes of the powers that be. The macro social change is to
be wrought, and is being brought about, in baby steps, legally, just
as in the Global Warming / Climate Change scam, with the blunt force
of hammer unto anvil by international treaties, global laws,
and local statutes. And just as for international agreement on
limiting carbon emissions under the magical “climate change”
propaganda cover, United Nations Agenda 21 is cloaked in the magical
propaganda word “sustainable”, as in Sustainable
Development, in order to make it appear to be in the public's own
best interest.
Only
nutters, fools, crazies and evil-doers would ever argue with
“Sustainable Development”! And therefore, any dissent and
public resistance to draconian and austerity measures in the name of
“sustainable” is easily managed and dispensed with by
labels such as kooks, crazies, mentally ill, and when all else fails,
eco-terrorists with invitation to enjoy state hospitality centers.
Mike,
Can
you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re (IPCC)? Keith
will do likewise. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the
same?
When
the FOI requests began here, the FOI person said we had to abide by
the requests. It took a couple of half hour sessions – one at
a screen, to convince them otherwise…
I’ve
got to know the FOI person quite well and the Chief Librarian –
who deals with appeals. The VC is also aware of what is going on
At
present, I’m damned and publicly vilified because I refused to
provide McIntyre with the data he requested.
had
I acceded to McIntyre’s initial request for climate model
data, …I would have spent years of my scientific career
dealing with demands for further explanations
Please
write all emails as though they will be made public.
Keep
this quiet also, but this is the person who is putting in FOI
requests for all emails Keith and Tim have written … We think
we’ve found a way around this.
If
they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK,
I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone.
The motivation
for the scientific sounding mechanics of Global Warming / Climate
Change “Problem”
or dogma employing crafty
pseudo science
(see: Crafting Pseudo Science Out Of Thin Air: The East Anglia
Emails, in sidebar), under the stewardship of UN international
body called The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC),
established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and
the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 to “provide
the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of
knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and
socio-economic impacts”, and subsequently endorsed by the
UN General Assembly to make it legal, cannot be fully appreciated in
isolation to the profound justification that it lends to its big
brother “Solution”
umbrella, the United Nations Agenda 21.
And
don’t leave stuff lying around on ftp sites – you never
know who is trawling them.
I’m
getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station
temperature data. Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the
UK has a Freedom of Information Act !
IPCC
I
tried hard to balance the needs of the science and the IPCC , which
were not always the same.
As
we all know, this isn’t about truth at all, its about
plausibly deniable accusations,
PEERS
I
can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC
report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we
have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!
I’m
having a dispute with the new editor of Weather. I’ve
complained about him to the RMS Chief Exec. If I don’t get him
to back down, I won’t be sending any more papers to any RMS
journals and I’ll be resigning from the RMS.
I
think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as
a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our
colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to,
or cite papers in, this journal.
The broader
picture of full spectrum global control of humanity and the planet
easily emerges once Global Warming / Climate Change is seen as just
one among the many enabling threat components of the overall
perception control system, the “Problem” component.
Virtually all of these “Problem” components are based on
this and that threat, some real, some imagined, some fabricated to
look real, but in every case exaggerated with propaganda machinery of
the Mighty
Wurlitzer,
to lend justification to the madness of the “Solution”
proposed for solving it. In this case, the singular pursuit of
“green” under United Nations Agenda 21 which, in itself,
is also just one among the many “Solution” means being
pursued to complete the transformation of national sovereignty of
nation states to Global Governance under one world government.
The
powers that be pushing for Global Governance have employed several
programs under the central institutions of the United Nations to
accomplish this global transformation – just as the CFR author
had openly stated in The Hard Road to World Order, 1974: “In
short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built
from the bottom up, rather than from the top down. It will look like
a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William
James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around
national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much
more than the old-fashioned frontal assault. Of course, for political
as well as administrative reasons, some of these specialized
arrangements should be brought into an appropriate relationship with
the central institutions of the U.N. system,”.
I
will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing
more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome
editor.
One
approach is to go direct to the publishers and point out the fact
that their journal is perceived as being a medium for disseminating
misinformation under the guise of refereed work.
I
use the word ‘perceived’ here, since whether it is true
or not is not what the publishers care about — it is how the
journal is seen by the community that counts.
If
you think that Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if
we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through
official AGU channels to get him ousted.
HIDE
THE DECLINE
it
would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”,
even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction
available that far back…
Keith
succeeding in being very restrained in his response. McIntyre knew
what he was doing when he replaced some of the trees with those from
another site.
I
swear I pulled every trick out of my sleeve trying to milk something
out of that.
I
don’t think it’d be productive to try and juggle the
chronology statistics any more than I already have
United
Nations WHO institution for instance is legally chartered by
international treaty to globally control and direct each nation's
domestic response to WHO's unilateral declaration of Pandemic.
Individual nation's right to adjudicate on the matter through one's
own scientific minds, and to apply one's own national remedies, have
been stripped away for all nations who have signed on to the WHO
Convention. That is virtually all nations of the world; just like in
the case of Agenda 21. WHO works hand in glove with the United States
CDC and big-pharma to push global vaccination programs using
manufactured and/or propagandized threats (as for instance the Swine
Flu scare of 1976, 2009), just like the fictitious threat of WMD from
Iraq in 2003 under the United Nations Security Council aegis which
had led to the preplanned “solution” of invading that
defenseless Muslim nation by the strongest military in the world.
When sovereign nations can be invaded under cover of propaganda
systems and legalisms enforced under the United Nations institutions
in the name of protecting other nations, invading individual people's
bodies, private lives, and lifestyles in the name of protecting other
people hardly poses a moral dilemma. This should be self-evident just
by observation, that moral calculus plays no role in international
relations, or in the pursuit of any political agenda, except as PR
for rallying the public to the cause célèbre du
jour.
The
fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment
and it is a travesty that we can't. The CERES data published in the
August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more
warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is
inadequate.
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) amd from
1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.
Land
warming since 1980 has been twice the ocean warming — and
skeptics might claim that this proves that urban warming is real and
important.
Also,
it is important for us if you can transfer the ADVANCE money on the
personal accounts which ... will not be more than 10,000 USD. Only
in this case we can avoid big taxes and use money for our work as
much as possible.
We
cherry-picked the tree-ring series in Eurasia.
everyone
in the room at IPCC was in agreement that this was (cooling trend) a
problem and a potential distraction / detraction from the reasonably
concensus viewpoint we’d like to show
I
believe that the recent warmth was probably matched about 1000 years
ago.
This is the
natural outcome of seeking global control with “military style
objectivity” – the ubermensch's uber rationality
for achieving any political objective by any means irrespective of
its consequences to the lesser humanity. This is termed
“amoral” --- devoid of the calculus of morality; the
force majeure of power over its subjects from time immemorial.
This topic of uber rationality that leads to justification for any
agenda, any goal, any outcome, is explored further in the essay:
Morality
derived from the Intellect leads to Enslavement!.
The dystopic consequences which naturally follow from uber
rationality drawing upon “will to power”, can easily be
gleaned in uber rationalist philosopher Bertrand Russell's
“respectable” justification for one-world government in
his book: Impact
of Science on Society.
One
cannot pretend that because a modicum of rational thinking is
necessary for sensible human existence in order to rise above what
appears to be man's natural proclivity for superstitions, that insane
amounts of rationality wielded by uber sociopaths is insanely good
for humanity. This rationality trap of uber self-interest
which calculatingly removes empathy and the absoluteness of the
Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you
have others do unto you; and don't do to others what you don't want
others to do to you” from its calculus, as these
principles do not serve the self-interest of power, is the bane of
rationality.
To
reject this rationality trap that is sprung upon mankind using
dogmas of science and technology is in itself rational and an
existential self-defence. Its blanket rejection neither constitutes
an endorsement of irrationality nor belief in tooth-fairies. To
accuse those who reject this rationality trap as being
irrational is part of ensuring that Unspeakable remain unspoken. This
is what's behind marginalizing those who do not accept the dogma of
man-made Global Warming / Climate Change.
The
fact that we can not account for what is happening in the climate
system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as
we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not! It is a
travesty!
“As
you know, I'm not political. If anything, I would like to see the
climate change happen, so the science could be proved right,
regardless of the consequences. This isn't being political, it is
being selfish.” --- Phil Jones, head of CRU, University of
East Anglia, to climatologist John Christy, University of Alabama, 5
July 2005
“On
20 November 2009, emails and other documents, apparently originating
from with the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East
Anglia. The authenticity of these emails has been confirmed by most
of the relevant parties including the CRU at Univeristy of East
Anglia and many of the authors. These emails contain some quite
surprising and even disappointing insights into what has been
happening within the climate change scientific establishment.
Worryingly this same group of scientists are very influential in
terms of economic and social policy formation around the subject of
climate change.” --- East
Anglia Confirmed Emails from the Climate Research Unit
(https://tinyurl.com/eastangliaemails-archives)
(https://tinyurl.com/eastangliaemails-archives)
There
is a systematic method to the apparent madness of these (often
phantasmic) threats arising out of nowhere and the officialdom's
heavy-handed response to them once the layers of green, white, and
other humanitarian or security masks are peeled off. These responses
almost always strip away individual freedom, engender more conformity
to dogmas, more standardization in individual behavior as well as in
global policy prescriptions, and more world government which looks
more and more like global police state with unified draconian
policies that span the gamut of human activity, from banking to
breathing.
One
only has to read their own hand writings spanning the gamut of
political theory, from those expressed in fables to those couched in
philosophical justifications, in order to fully comprehend the whole
which, as any perceptive system analyst understands, is often masked
by focus on individual components that appear (and at times made to
appear) disconnected and unrelated to each other.
Important system
and causal properties (cause and effect) of a complex system often
remain hidden in the interconnection between components. To get at
the whole understanding of the system, one has to be able to see all
the forces that shape events; not just what's happening near to one.
Specious and false arguments, clever misdirections and red herrings
are cunningly prepared by uber minds to ensure that this
understanding of the whole does not arise in the public mind; the
Unspeakable remain unspoken. Those able to reconstitute the whole
from the components are craftily dismissed by employing many
sophisticated perception management techniques. Some of these
techniques have been examined in Anatomy
of Conspiracy Theory.
The
public documents listed below outline the scope of United Nations
Agenda 21 for “Sustainable Development”, of which the
mantra of climate change is but one part, to secure the earth from
the menace of man in the name of saving man from his own excesses.
Just as the Club of Rome had stated: “All
these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes,
and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can
be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”
Agenda
21 is designed to corral all mankind in all nations of the world into
a state of existence that the world's public would, of their own
volition, never select for themselves. Therefore, the objectives of
United Nations Agenda 21 are to be achieved by stealth, in
incremental stages, in the pretext of solving this and that menace.
The menace is manufactured, or exponentially amplified, with
propaganda cover expositing full spectrum of deceit from clever
half-truths to outright lies that most people without much thinking
would immediately agree with. Such as “Sustainable
Development”.
Who in their
right mind would not like the word “sustainable” as the
panacea for the global threats of rising pollution, rising population
explosion, rising food shortages, rising water shortages, rising
famine, increased aridity of land, increasing terrorism, frequent
pandemics, fear of global warming causing rising sea levels and
destroying coastal cities, then fear of global cooling freezing out
agriculture and rain forests, etc. etc. etc. The powers that be are
only constrained by the imagination of the Rand Corporation and other
think-bodies such as the Rockefeller Foundation to come up with new
threat scenarios and menaces
from where the Rand expert group assembled at Iron
Mountain
had left off in 1962. The powers that be are also only constrained by
the technological advancements of the Technetronic Era to
actually tickle crisis by intervention, to exacerbate it at will, or
to outright manufacture it. Geo-engineering
is used for weather modification and is examined in the full
report.
Advanced nations have long held command over environmental
modification techniques
as a Weapon
of War
that can change weather patterns, cause flood or drought at will,
prolong or shorten monsoon season, melt polar ice caps or winterize,
change atmospheric charge, temperature, and pressure to generate
storms or to mitigate them.
'The
beginning of experimental weather modification is credited to the
first forced precipitation of rain - "cloud seeding" - by
Vincent Schaefer useing dry ice in 1946.
The following year the same effect was demonstrated by Bernard
Vonnegut using silver iodide crystals. ...
“Army,
Navy and Air Force are spending close to a million dollars a year on
weather modification and their tremendous interest suggests that
military applications extend far beyond visiting a few showers upon
an enemy.
It does
not require a sharp mind to figure out that wartime storms might
readily be infected with virulent bacteriological and radiological
substances.” ... Orville also
reported that the USSR “... had
conducted numerous unpublicized but still detectable experiments
apparently aimed at finding ways to speed melting of polar icecaps;
and has even offered to join the United States in a project to turn
the Arctic Ocean into a sort of warm water lake by melting the polar
icecap.” ' (pgs. 4-5
WEATHER
MODIFICATION)
The United
States Air Force has a 1996 public document outlining “owning
the weather” completely by
2025 as a Force
Multiplier.
The then United States Secretary of Defence, William S. Cohen,
publicly stated his apprehension of “eco-
type of terrorism” as the
justification for the United States also pursuing the same
capabilities. In his DoD
News Briefing in 1997,
William Cohen, responding to the question: “how prepared we are
to deal with [threats]”, said: “There are some
reports, for example, that some countries have been trying to
construct something like an Ebola Virus, and that would be a very
dangerous phenomenon, to say the least. Alvin Toeffler has written
about this in terms of some scientists in their laboratories trying
to devise certain types of pathogens that would be ethnic specific so
that they could just eliminate certain ethnic groups and races; and
others are designing some sort of engineering, some sort of insects
that can destroy specific crops. Others
are engaging even in an eco- type of terrorism whereby they can alter
the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use
of electromagnetic waves. So there are plenty of ingenious minds out
there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror
upon other nations. It's real, and that's the reason why we have to
intensify our efforts, and that's why this is so important.”
Official documents uncovered show the British RAF caused the flood of
1952 in the Devon village of Lynmouth in England due to their cloud
seeding experiments under Operation
Cumulus.
The British government had of course termed the disastrous flood
which killed 35 people “the
hand of God”, but, as the UK
Guardian newspaper reported, 'new evidence from previously
classified government files suggests that a team of international
scientists working with the RAF was experimenting with artificial
rainmaking in southern Britain in the same week and could possibly be
implicated. “We flew
straight through the top of the cloud, poured dry ice down into the
cloud. We flew down to see if any rain came out of the cloud. And it
did about 30 minutes later, and we all cheered.” '
(ibid.)
The
list of public disclosures is endless. The bibliography on the
admission of technetronic capability for modifying weather as
weapon available to many nations (and of course to the “terrorists”
just like their possessing “WMD”) is easily accessible.
To what extent is this capability actually deployed as a weapon on
any given instance of weather anomaly, of course only becomes known
ex post facto, years later, and on which historians, newspaper
columnists, and hungry scholars earn their keep (and some even their
Ph.D.) as they proudly strut their new found discoveries of a past
which cannot be changed. Shame that few learn from history to
understand the present and to preempt the future while waiting for
its receipts: “We are made wise not by
the recollections of our past, but by the responsibility for our
future.” This shortsightedness is deliberate and
calculated – for it does not take great deal of intelligence to
see that a pound of flesh is extracted for breaking the code
of silence when it can make the most difference to the deeds of
history's actors:
“We're
an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while
you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act
again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and
that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and
you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”
(New York Times, Oct. 17, 2004)
Today,
based on the understanding from the rich bibliography on this
subject, it also does not take a rocket scientist to see that the
climate change menace potentially has many other covert man-made
technetronic helpers besides the sun's natural activity,
neither of which is accounted for in the propaganda spiel of man-made
carbon emissions causing Global Warming in what appears to be a
universal conspiracy of dunces that sees no evil, hears no evil, and
speaks no evil.
Whenever
the great political and intellectual leaders of mankind get together
to sign global Accords on Climate Change, only man-made CO2 is put on
the table and its rectification is signed off as the “green”
solution. That's because the stealth agenda is to force
a global transformation using any pretext, be it wholly
propagandistic, or manufactured technetronically, to
lend credibility to the propaganda campaign. As the Report from Iron
Mountain had perceptively suggested: “Credibility,
in fact, lies at the heart of the problem” for
any mind-game to succeed.
Unlike
the sex prostitutes in every major city on earth who earn their
honest keep selling their bodies without deceiving their customers
about the nature of their services, the prostitutes of empire do so
by wearing the garb of academic respectability, morality, piety, and
concern for humanity, outright deceiving their customers. Jesus had
just one word for such “moralists”. The Bible calls them
hypocrites. The problem however is far more severe than mere
hypocrisy. It is criminal. A war crime. For it is the ubiquitous war
on the public mind which can only be waged credibly by way of
deception.
The
wolf must appear in sheep's clothing in order to guide its flock
first to the constricted hen house and then to the slaughter house.
And it must also convince those most in the position to understand
its overarching game-plan, to pretend to not notice it.
It's
a shell game from top to bottom and permeates science as much as it
permeates political science.
Religion
permits no falsification of its axioms, its presuppositions of
faith, its core beliefs. Religion therefore, is generally considered
to be a noun (except when one embarks on a spiritual journey in
search of truth where nothing is presupposed, and where there are no
axioms). Whereas, axioms of science, its own presuppositions of
convenience, its assumptions that are often necessary in any domain
and upon which the scientific method is built to discover and
develop that domain, are contingent upon their being falsifiable.
This means that when the axioms of science are so chosen that they
cannot ever be proved to be true (or false), or, not permitted to be
scrutinized at all by the fiat of power, then these turn into
dogmatic axioms of religion. Science thus becomes like religion, a
noun rather than the verb it is intended to be; the process by which
to rationally and empirically discover reality the way it actually
is. Science now becomes faith based; faith in dogmas that become
religiously held by its high priests, and whose validity is not
permitted to be scrutinized by the fiat of unchallengeable power.
The Church of Science is born. And
when it engages in pseudo science gibberish to achieve some
political agendas, this church becomes part of social engineering in
service of empire. Every
Church needs a Galileo to break its dogmatic hold.
The
skeptical reader who has bought into the religion of Global Warming
must surely realize by now that the “sustainable”
project, by necessity, requires a “credible problem” and
propaganda system to affect the draconian changes to public attitudes
and behavior that are inimical to their interests. That's just
self-evident. And what has been demonstrated here is that when the
“credible problem” is difficult to confirm empirically by
the scientific method (of making observations on actual data
and making theoretical models to explain that empirical data which
are subsequently used for making predictions which, if they come true
then, as the outcome of the scientific method, are deemed to
represent reality to the first order, but only to the extent that the
models stay “falsifiable” by future discoveries and do
not become “religion”), despite pseudo science making
every effort in creating convoluted computer models to fabricate
“credibility” from bogus data to synthesize an alarmist
religion around their models, and given the evidence from the
aforementioned Senate Minority Report which documents over 1000
scientists worldwide dissenting with the so called official IPCC
“Consensus” on Global Warming, then, credibility can also
be “tickled” into existence by covert technetronic
helpers creating the necessary illusions.
The
skeptical reader must also see how the propaganda machinery has now
switched its pitch from the “Global Warming” menace which
could not be confirmed empirically despite the alarmist attitude on
CO2 levels, to extremes in weather fluctuations and relabeled that as
the “Climate Change” menace.
The
skeptical reader also cannot have failed to observe how the original
first-cause prime-mover is cleverly retained for this new
menace as well: due to man-made CO2 emissions – the core belief
to be implanted among the global public as that is also the
first-cause axiomatic theme for enabling United Nations Agenda
21. This core belief is not permitted to be challenged without being
labeled a heretic, kook, and incurring the risk of losing or
tarnishing one's respectable career.
And lastly, the
skeptical reader, who is now surely wide awake, has witnessed that
the corruption of science begins at its very foundation when the
presupposition of its axioms, and making these axioms unfalsifiable
and/or unscrutable, is driven by political agendas rather than
by the epistemological
method of science
(see: Epistemological Method of Science: Science vs. Religion,
in sidebar) that rationally mandates making all its axioms
falsifiable and scrutable in order to prevent science
from becoming “religion”.
This
is why Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever, quoted above,
stated: “I am a skeptic…Global
warming has become a new religion.”
It bears looking
a bit more closely at this one Physics Nobel Laureate scientist's
views who, in his 80s, appears quite unafraid of losing “academic
respectability”. In his statement in response to the policy
declaration of APS (American Physical Society): “Emissions
of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere
in ways that affect the Earth's climate. They are emitted from fossil
fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.
The evidence is incontrovertible: global warming is occurring. If no
mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's
physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human
health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse
gases beginning now.”,
Giaever told The
Sunday Telegraph
in 2011: “Incontrovertible is
not a scientific word. Nothing is incontrovertible in science.”
The newspaper reported that Giaever had testified before the US
Senate about his doubts on Global Warming: “Global
warming has become a new religion. We frequently hear about the
number of scientists who support it. But the number is not important:
only whether they are correct is important.”
Ivar Giaever revisited his reasons and analysis for resigning from
APS in The Lindau Nobel laureate Meetings in 2015. In his
presentation titled Global
Warming Revisited
(video), Giaever stated:
Begin
Quote Giaever
“I
resigned from the society in 2011. First: nothing in science is
incontrovertible. Second: the “measured” average
temperature increase in 100 years or so, is 0.8 Kelvin. Third: since
the Physical Society claim it has become warmer, why is everything
better than before? Forth: the maximum average temperature ever
measured was in 1998, 17 years ago. When will we stop wasting money
on alternative energy?”
“From
~1880 to 2015 temperature has increased from ~288 K to 288.8 K
(0.3%), i.e., amazingly stable.”
“In
Albany, New York, where I live, there is ~80 K between max and min
temperature. Do you believe 0.8 K degree makes a big difference?”
“To my
surprise both 'alarmist' and 'deniers' accept the fact that you can
measure the average temperature of the whole
earth for a whole year to a
fraction of a degree and that the
result is significant. Of course it's not. How can you possibly
measure the average temperature for the whole earth and for the whole
year and come up with a fraction of a degree?”
“I
think the average temperature of the earth is equal to the emperor's
new clothes. Was a boy who cried out that the emperor has no clothes
on. And I would cry out and say you can't measure the temperature for
the whole earth with such accuracy. ... It is ridiculous.”
“Now
this is what they have come up with however, and this is for the last
19 years, roughly speaking. The temperature has not gone up. It's
been constant for 19 years. There was a big peak in 1998, that's very
recognizable. (Graph-1 RSS global mean temperature change: 219 months
October 1996 to December 2014 – No Global Warming for 18 years
3 months). So what do the people who measure temperature do with
that?”
Well,
here is the latest temperature they have measured now (Graph-2 Global
Land–Ocean Temperature Index). And you look at the curve here
and the temperature goes up.
How
can that be when I just showed you the other curve (Graph-1) where
the temperature has been constant? Well the reason for that is that
they include now the Ocean. But for a
hundred years the ocean has not been included.
Why
do you think they include the ocean? Because it's more accurate? Or
because they can fiddle with the data. That's what NASA does.
So
Obama said last year that 2014 was the hottest year ever. But it's
not true. It's not the hottest year.
Here
is some satellite data (Graph-3 UAH Satellite-Based Temperature of
the Global Lower Atmosphere). This is the peak in 1998, and basically
the satellite data shows the same thing. The temperature has not
increased.”
“From
1898 – 1998 (the hottest year) temperature has increased ~0.8
degrees and the CO2 concentration increased from 295 ppm to 367 ppm
i.e. 72 ppm in a hundred years. That's a fact.”
“Now
from 1998, which is basically the hottest year, CO2 has increased
from 367 ppm to 403 ppm, i.e., 36 ppm or half
of the previous 100 years while temperature has been stable. So why
hasn't the temperature increased 0.4 degrees then?”
“I
mean if you are a physicist for heaven's sake, and here is the
experiment, and you have a theory, and the theory doesn't agree with
the experiment, then you have to cut out the theory. You were wrong
with the theory. So you can't believe then the people who are the
alarmist that CO2 is a terrible thing. And therefore you can't drive
and use solar cells and stuff because otherwise the world will go to
pot. But it's not true. It's absolutely not true.”
“Global
warming has really become a new religion. Because you can't discuss
it. It's not proper. If you look at Lindau here today, then all the
notable people they have said Climate Change in their talks. All of
them have said it. I don't know whether they know what they mean, but
they have said it anyway. Everybody talks about climate change. The
American Physical Society of which I was a member, said the evidence
is incontrovertible that Global Warming
exists. Now think about that. It is s a physical society. And they
say you cannot discuss global warming because we believe it's
happening. It's like the Catholic Church. There are lots of
incontrovertible truths in the Catholic Church I am sure. And here
there is a incontrovertible truth in a physical society. ”
End
Quote Giaever
There is a
clearly visible pattern of narrative control here by the powers that
be. We already observed that the principal axiom of Global Warming
was most cunningly transformed into a religious belief which cannot
be scrutinized without incurring the wrath of scientific priestdom.
Now we also observe narrative control that is cunningly built upon
that axiom of faith. Why control the narrative? Because narrative
control is a principal first axiom of psychological
warfare.
No propaganda system can be successful without control of the
narrative. When important people and authority figures continually
repeat the same Big lie over and over again, it not only
becomes a Big truth for the contemporary public, but also a
Big fact for subsequent generations once institutional pied
pipers, namely scholars, historians, journalists, scientists and
academics start exercising their pens in “respectability”.
Within no time a Big lie is turned into a Big fact with
the control of the narrative.
The world
witnessed something similar on 9-11 when shocking Terror was
“tickled” into existence with full spectrum propaganda
cover
to make the Global
War on Terror credible to the public mind
against that external enemy over there, the “Islamist
terrorists”
– the new religion of empire. Sophisticated computer models
were constructed not just by scientists, but also respectable
scientific institutions like NIST, to show how the WTC buildings,
terrorized by those “Islamist terrorists” flying over to
the sacred land of the free from the Hindu Kush mountains on
America's finest jet liners, could collapse so catastrophically due
to jet-fuel induced fire which supposedly weakened the building
structures which subsequently initiated their so called gravity
collapse. While the observable
truth
was (and still is) right before everyone's eyes –
steel-concrete tall buildings have never imploded into its own
footsteps (WTC-7) / and exploded into fine dust (WTC-1 WTC-2) that
way, especially not due to any fire in the history of fires in tall
buildings, except under the deliberate force of some kind of
controlled demolition that brings them down at free-fall speed as was
observed on 9-11. Great propaganda cover was lent to these so called
“scientific studies” for the benefit of the skeptics.
Fortunately for those with eyes to see, that also helped “out”
all the great “moral” public intellectuals who
cunningly shepherded the disbelieving flock
to the same
core beliefs
as the wolves wanted; same applies to foisting
“sustainable” agenda upon the disbelieving mind.
The
core belief has to be universally implanted in the public mind that
it is principally mankind that is responsible for planetary level
Climate Changes. It can only escape the notice of a
complete dunce head (and there is no shortage of useful idiots in the
world) that how earlier the religious dogma was “Global
Warming”, then it became weather extremes because honest
scientists demonstrated the former to be outright bunk, and it is
soon to become “Global Cooling” (if it hasn't already) as
the global temperatures are actually measured to be slightly
declining (as some argue) and snow cover on the mountains and
glaciers increasing.
Regardless
of the pattern of climactic changes, the political agenda is to blame
it on man-made CO2 levels using whatever scientific justifications
that the imaginative minds plaguing climate science can conjure up.
The Reality Versus Alarm graph is in the sidebar at the very
beginning of this report. Here is MIT climate scientist Richard S.
Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences,
explaining the empirical reality of CO2 to American President
Donald Trump in a followup letter to the White House dated March
9, 2017:
Begin
Quote Richard Lindzen
Let
me explain in somewhat greater detail why we call for withdrawal from
the UNFCCC.
The
UNFCCC was established twenty five years ago to find scientific
support for dangers from increasing carbon dioxide. While this has
led to generous and rapidly increased support for the field, the
purported dangers remain hypothetical, model-based projections. By
contrast, the benefits of increasing CO2 and modest warming are
clearer than ever, and they are supported by dramatic satellite
images of a greening Earth.
We
note that:
• The
UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) no longer
claims a greater likelihood of significant as opposed to negligible
future warming,
• It
has long been acknowledged by the IPCC that climate change prior to
the 1960’s could not have been due to anthropogenic greenhouse
gases. Yet, pre-1960 instrumentally observed temperatures show many
warming episodes, similar to the one since 1960, for example, from
1915 to 1950, and from 1850 to 1890. None of these could have been
caused by an increase in atmospheric CO2,
• Model
projections of warming during recent decades have greatly exceeded
what has been observed,
• The
modelling community has openly acknowledged that the ability of
existing models to simulate past climates is due to numerous
arbitrary tuning adjustments,
• Observations
show no statistically valid trends in flooding or drought, and no
meaningful acceleration whatsoever of pre-existing long term sea
level rise (about 6 inches per century) worldwide,
• Current
carbon dioxide levels, around 400 parts per million are still very
small compared to the averages over geological history, when
thousands of parts per million prevailed, and when life flourished on
land and in the oceans.
Calls
to limit carbon dioxide emissions are even less persuasive today than
25 years ago. Future research should focus on dispassionate,
high-quality climate science, not on efforts to prop up an
increasingly frayed narrative of “carbon pollution.”
Until scientific research is unfettered from the constraints of the
policy-driven UNFCCC, the research community will fail in its
obligation to the public that pays the bills.
End
Quote Richard Lindzen
The
United Nations Agenda 21 offering “sustainable development”
as the solution, continues on the same principal axis as the alarmist
CO2 global warming scam. It posits man's very existence on the face
of the earth to be a dire threat to “Gaia's” natural
processes even beyond his natural carbon emissions. The principle is
directly taken from the aforementioned handbook of social control in
which the Club of Rome authors hath stated (repeating for emphasis):
“All these dangers are caused by
human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through
changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real
enemy then is humanity itself.” The solution to
the crisis of this real enemy destroying the earth is the United
Nations Agenda 21 for Sustainable Development!
This Hegelian
Dialectic is far more sophisticated (and convoluted) than others that
have come before it within our own lifetimes and requires
considerable acuity of mind to comprehend. An acuity which is
enfeebled by dumbing down the public mind and occupying it between
bread and circuses. See the Report
on Mighty Wurlitzer
to understand how that is most cunningly accomplished through
perception control. See Hegelian
Dialectic for Dummies
to understand the diabolical mechanism of social engineering for
orchestrating an unpalatable outcome in small baby-steps, through
deliberate crises creation, and then offering their antitheses as the
solutions, which ultimately lead to the desired outcome in stages.
The gestalt
transformation
to one-world governance cannot be taken voluntarily, or in one giant
step, as it goes against the tribal and national instincts. It must
be done in stages. And to take each baby-step towards the next stage
needs a reason, a pretext, that would force that transformation. The
irrational push for the acceptance of the alarmist dogma of man-made
Global Warming despite the science not supporting it, can be
perceptively understood in that context of pretext creation. Then, it
no longer appears so irrational, as the planned enabler of Agenda 21.
The noble concern for the environment is motivated by the same
reason, as enabler of Agenda 21.
The
core propaganda spiel of Agenda 21 is premised upon the necessity of
preserving earth's natural processes from man's incessant
encroachment, unbridled harvesting, and unbridled despoiling, through
his attitude and behavior change under “sustainable”
living. The “Gaia”, or mother earth, is deemed supreme,
and Man, the common man that is, is deemed not just one among its
many inhabitants, but also the worst one, and therefore, he must be
treated like game in a reservation; he must be guided, shepherded,
profiled, controlled, and culled. All this sounds grotesque and
far-fetched, but that is indeed the underlying premise of the tiny
elite who want to own and rule the earth in a one-world government.
This government is by governance. The local / regional / national
administrations may well be elected and form their government and fly
their own flag. But their laws and constitution and its policing are
formulated by the unelected elites as in the EU, which may be
rubber-stamped for electoral legitimacy in order to maintain the
requisite illusions.
It
is shocking to see etched in 18 feet tall granite stone monument in
Elbert County, Georgia, USA, called the Georgia Guidestones, these
new Ten Commandments for a new world order, written in English,
Spanish, Swahili, Hindi, Hebrew, Arabic, Chinese, and Russian, that
world population should be maintained at half a billion (today it is
seven billion --- where are the other 6.5 billion and rising to go?
Who lives and who dies who decides? UN Agenda 21!)
- Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
- Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
- Unite humanity with a living new language.
- Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
- Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
- Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
- Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
- Balance personal rights with social duties.
- Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
- Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.
Under
the propaganda cover of “Sustainable Development”, vast
public spaces on earth are to be legally declared off-limits to man.
The habitable as well as previously inhabited lands, water sources,
and open spaces, are to be legally classified as public parks,
natural preserves. Right alongside the drive for the outright
abolition of private property ownership by individuals. All space is
only to be leased for limited time and designated use from state
authority and their proxies, the so called NGOs and non-profit
tax-exempt foundations that are to take charge of the new world's
public commons. Only corporations and non-profit foundations will be
able to own land as the supposed custodians of public property as
producers. Most of the world's open spaces is already being put under
these umbrella organizations ostensibly in public interest. One of
them is the famous international organization World Wildlife Fund or
Federation (WWF).
In
the developed West, beginning with the United States, the number and
size of no-go, no-grow, no-farm, no-cultivate, and no-live spaces for
individuals and communities is rising rapidly, right alongside
geographically marked urbanized hi-rise clustering where most of
humanity is eventually to be made to live in controlled spaces with
strict control over their movements. That is already possible with
electronic credit and electronic identity cards – which can be
programmed to only work (when the person is behaving acceptably that
is) in certain geographic areas or at certain times of the day. Thus
human cloistering in regulated areas or “reservations”
becomes the natural outcome of rapid technologization of human
life in the Technetronic Era. Hollywood has been continually
priming us psychologically with various dystopic outcomes for decades
now. Few are surprised today let alone resist that millions of people
go through x-ray body scanners daily as the new normal. More dystopia
is introduced vicariously through movies, television, novels, fables,
easier it becomes to accept it. The fact that a Hunger Games
like society may well emerge as the peak of Technetronic Era,
it is being banked, will just as easily be accepted by the public as
body scanners.
Combined
with carbon-credit and its repercussions of what man may legally eat,
grow, produce, and if and how many he may procreate, under the
overarching United Nations Agenda 21, where man may legally live, how
much space he may legally occupy, and where and when he may legally
travel, all under full surveillance, is intended to make a global
prison state for hoi polloi. Fable and reality are merging
rapidly.
The
Real Green – The Real Sustainable Development
In
Letter
to Climate@MIT : Is Climate Science Religion or Science?,
dated October 30, 2018:
Begin
Quote Letter Climate @ MIT
Dear
respected 22 MIT Professors and Scientists of Climate @ MIT
You
collectively signed a most carefully worded letter to President
Donald Trump over a year and half ago (dated March 2, 2017) in which
you stated that you did not share the views of your colleague Dr.
Lindzen who had previously written a letter (dated February 23, 2017)
to the President asking him to withdraw from the UN climate
convention, and that in your, and other overwhelming majority of
scientists' who have devoted their professional lives to the careful
study of climate science, collective view, the risks to the Earth
systems associated with increasing levels of carbon dioxide are
almost universally agreed by climate scientists to be real ones.
I
found your short letter particularly careful in its omissions. You
carefully chose not to make any observation on your beliefs on the
actual cause of this increase in CO2 levels, nor advocate any
solutions. In your letter you made it clear that your collective view
disagreed with your colleague's call to withdraw from United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Whilst you
explicitly raised the alarm on the potential dangers of high levels
of CO2, your omissions make it un obvious to me just from reading
your letter whether you also believe that the CO2 levels are
man-made, and must be regulated down by international programs such
as the Carbon Credit scheme, and the UN Agenda 21. In this letter I
presume that you do. I invite correction on any misimpressions of
which I am sure there may be a few. None are all knowing, including
yourselves.
Of
course, no sensible person, let alone a science professor at MIT,
will think not to first massively plant new trees and replenish
Rainforests and jungles on urgent war footings; not to first stop
cutting down trees for housing for the Western world that principally
uses timber for structures, and not to first stop clearing forests
for cattle-feed farming and agriculture, especially in the Amazon
basin and the Americas, that has pretty much drained the primary
cleansing sink of human generated CO2 in the delicately balanced
human-plant natural eco-system of earth.
Also,
no sensible person will think not to first cut down on the pollutants
created by heavy industries and multinational corporations; and not
to first stop discharging pollutants into rivers and streams in the
developing nations where regulations are not as strong as in the
developed nations, whereby profit-optimizing multinational
corporations headquartered in the West, easily get away with cost
cutting short cuts of simply dumping many pollutants outside their
factories untreated that they can't do in developed nations due to
stricter laws and their stricter oversight.
If
China is filling the air with industrial pollutants more than the
United States today, the bulk of the end products of that pollution
are still exported to the United States and Western countries. All
the iphones are made in China but the biggest market and beneficiary
is in America. The stock of the most valued company on earth, now
surpassing one trillion dollars, and headquartered in California,
USA, is traded on Wall Street USA. It goes up or down depending on
how many iphones will be sold.
So,
what sensible person will not think of first enforcing regulations at
the parent source commissioning that pollution in China, before the
pollution even gets manufactured downstream and is discharged into
the environment 7,000 miles away?
What
sensible person will not think that first all multinational
corporations manufacturing or harvesting in developing nations for
their lower labor costs and resource-richness, bear the cost of
discharging their environmental pollutants and waste byproducts as if
they were manufacturing in the advanced developed nations of the West
where they are headquartered, and pay for the cleanup cost for their
past sins?
After
all, it is the same earth's atmosphere whether it is over China,
Bangladesh, or the United States of America.
MIT
in its LEES Lab under the directorship of the late Professor James R.
Melcher, who was also my 6.013 teacher, had focused on research and
development of advanced technological devices that clean up
industrial effluents and air pollutants before these are discharged
into the oceans and atmospheres, like the electrostatic precipitator,
etc.
These
high technologies take investment on the part of multinational
corporations to develop and deploy even after these have left the
research labs years ago, and why should they do that when they are
not forced to, due to the weak regulations and special concessions
under which they usually operate in poor nations?
The
burden then has to be carried by the common man in these impoverished
nations who must suffer that cost in all its human and national
dimensions, while the stock prices of the multinational corporations
go up when their profit margins are higher, and the developed nations
rejoice in their economic success. That success, of greed and
primacy, creates a self-fulfilling prophecy for creating more
environmental pollution – why alter the recipe for higher
profit margins, and economic hegemony which comes with it, when one
is not forced to?
Therefore,
which sensible and moral human being concerned about the environment
would not address that most significant bit of the matter
first, by creating regulations for responsible manufacturing and
subjecting all multinational corporations to these standards
regardless of where they operate their industries, manufacturing
bases, and agricultural farms for global food production,
irrespective of whether manufacturing and work is subcontracted to
other local corporations or not, and irrespective of what local
incentives they might get from tin-pot governments and banana
republics who help in the rape and exploitation of their own
resource-rich and yet continually impoverished nations as surrogates
of the Economic Hit Men who craft these mega deals?
Which
sensible intellect will not first institute accountability for this
mega corruption and exploitation upon the multinational corporations
by the fiat of new regulatory laws that define standards for how
multinational corporations must operate anywhere in the world,
despite these corporations also being the backbone of the advanced
military-industrial complex of the West that lends the Global North
its supremacy and primacy over the Global South?
All
commonsense and goodness first principles for having a cleaner global
environment for all its peoples and future generations regardless of
any existential crisis today including global warming, global
cooling, climate change, or aliens landing.
But,
just as no sensible person would think of living in a police state
just because it makes the most stable system of governance and offers
the most safety from common criminals, no sensible person will also
think to put human beings in growth chains and to enslave mankind to
the agendas of the elites in a global police state just to get rid of
the high levels of CO2.
End
Quote Letter Climate @ MIT
Notice
that none of the above commonsense is ever brought to the
international negotiating tables for environmental policy-planning,
climate change mitigation, and sustainable development by the experts
in the United Nations, the United States, the European Union, or the
BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China). That collusion by
cunning omission is telling. Because it is the first logical step
that even ordinary commonsense dictates for forging a comprehensive
international treaty on environment, whether or not mankind,
greenhouse gases, CO2 levels, Ozone layer depletion, etc. are the
first-cause of global climate change. All environmental protocols to
date, including UN's Kyoto Protocol, have focused on reducing
greenhouse gases based on the specious CO2 mantra dismantled here.
Why not take the above mentioned measures in a big way regardless?
Duh!
It
all started with the bogus alarm of man-made global warming, moved to
the nice sounding idea of sustainable development, and is intended to
end up in dystopic one-world police-state with no unalienable
human / civil / political rights. The only public and individual
rights, if any, are those accorded by the global state, or its
functionaries, at their discretion, to meet the state's needs, and to
maintain necessary illusions of self-empowerment as needed for ease
of governance of mothership earth. The EU constitution is
already a practicable and real Orwellian template for this much
sought after global outcome. Its Doublespeak is the agreeable
template to make giving up one's rights and freedoms to arbitrary
definitions determined by the state, amenable to the simpleton public
mind.
Conclusion
This
agenda for the elitist control of all humanity on earth is the real
alarm. The real elitist-made menace which needs the global public's
interdiction. Not Global Warming / Climate Change which, if indeed
real and a significant threat to mankind, is a natural phenomenon and
man's contribution to it is a lower order bit in relation to
solar activity. Man can do little about the impact of sun's activity
on earth except to move to another planet or out of the solar system.
It is very easy to adjudicate --- at least in theory --- what's the
change of climate on mars? Is its surface temperatures also going up,
or going down, or erratic?
Planetary
scientists need to study this phenomenon of Climate as such, without
special interests dominating their funding, or their own narrow
self-interests co-opting both their science and their moral acumen.
The fact that this truism, a cliché of the objectivity of
science that is believed by the public mind from pre-kindergarten to
post-graduate and beyond, even needs stating, speaks to the evergreen
corruption of science at the hands of its own priestly class in
obedience to the ruling class. How different is that from the
corruption of the priestly class in every religion in obedience to
the ruling class? They both serve identical masters in service of
empire.
The
priestly classes concerned about their pristine professions serving
masters of politics rather than masters of truth, must publicly
reckon with this inconvenient fact that theirs is worse than the
world's oldest profession; theirs deceives their customers! If
Dante's hell is to be believed, deceivers and hypocrites occupy the
lowest recesses of hell, the Ninth Circle, that he labeled
malebolge. Interestingly, the same principle is true of both
Christianity and Islam. The ubermensch of course see no use
for such religions except when needed as control systems for
organizing the beliefs and habits of the masses. Whereas, Divine
religions, when followed as per their own respective Scripture rather
than by what's written by scholars in commentaries of these
Scriptures, lead the way forward for all humanity, such as by their
common standard which gives precedence to the primacy of all mankind
over the ubermensch for equitable co-existence, the Golden
Rule: “Do unto others as you have
others do unto you; and don't do to others what you don't want others
to do to you”!
Political
leaders and representatives of governments authorized to sign away
their nation's sovereignty to Noble Lies, before putting down
their signatures to specious treaties must clearly reckon that they
are doing so as petty mercenaries wittingly pushing Global Governance
upon their naïve public, and not as unwitting Useful Idiots
fooled by sacred truths from authority figures.
The
common man, whether too lazy to comprehend the multifaceted devils
running the world today, or too apathetic to do anything about it,
will only get what's coming to the sheep; the butchers will never
protest the habit of mutton eaters!
All
ex post facto laments and excuses for having been innocent of
knowledge, for everyone, have herewith been cleaved asunder.
To
learn more about UN Agenda 21, below are links to some archived
documents and video presentations. An informed and awakened citizenry
putting pressure upon their government at all levels, is the only
effective antidote to hectoring hegemons. That's obviously a
wonderful theory! In some cases, in the United States of America
(mainly), it has even been put into practice (occasionally, but all
too infrequently). As the video talks betray, the United States is
rapidly being urbanized, and its vast lands are being reserved
against man. The resistance by local communities is not sufficient to
overturn the thrust for local implementations of Agenda 21, unless
this thrust is resisted at the national and federal levels. Federal
and state funding of local communities ensures it.
“AGENDA
21 ON HOW IT WILL AFFECT YOU”
“Agenda
21 For Dummies”
“Sustainable
Destruction - Exposing Agenda 21 in Rural America”
“Rosa
Koire: Agenda 21. Open Mind Conference Denmark, 2013”
References
[1] Summarized and Adapted from Detailed Report (2008-2017):
On
Global Warming Mind-Fck,
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/12/nb-on-global-warming.html
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/12/nb-on-global-warming.html
[2] More Dismantling Climate Science:
Reflections on Modernity, Climategate, Pandemic, Peer Review, and Science in the Service of Empire
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/11/let-co-conspiracy-theorist-climategate.html
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/11/let-co-conspiracy-theorist-climategate.html
[3] More Dismantling Agenda 21:
Agenda
21 For Dummies,
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2013/03/agenda-21-for-dummies.html
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2013/03/agenda-21-for-dummies.html
[4] More Dismantling Hegelian Dialectic:
Hegelian Dialectic for Dummies,
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2013/11/hegelian-dialectic-what-is-it.html
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2013/11/hegelian-dialectic-what-is-it.html
[5] More Dismantling Crippled Epistemology:
Some
Problems in Epistemology,
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/p/some-problems-in-epistemology.html
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/p/some-problems-in-epistemology.html
[6] Shorter version of the above:
Introduction to Epistemology,
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2018/10/intro-to-epistemology-by-zahir-ebrahim.html
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2018/10/intro-to-epistemology-by-zahir-ebrahim.html
[7] More Dismantling Propaganda Systems:
Report on the Mighty Wurlitzer - Architecture of Modern Propaganda for
Psychological Warfare,
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/05/note-on-mighty-wurlitzer.html
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/05/note-on-mighty-wurlitzer.html
[8] Agenda 21: Earth Summit: The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio, United Nations,
URL: http://www.amazon.com/Agenda-21-Summit-Nations-Programme/dp/1482672774/
URL: http://www.amazon.com/Agenda-21-Summit-Nations-Programme/dp/1482672774/
[9] Behind the Green Mask: U.N. Agenda 21, by Rosa Koire, 2011 (deconstructs the UN play book),
URL: http://www.amazon.com/BEHIND-THE-GREEN-MASK-Agenda/dp/0615494544/
URL: http://www.amazon.com/BEHIND-THE-GREEN-MASK-Agenda/dp/0615494544/
[10] Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate, S. Fred Singer, ed., March 2, 2008, Summary for Policymakers of the Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, Chicago, IL: The Heartland Institute, 2008,
URL: http://www.heartland.org/publications-resources/publications/nature-not-human-activity-rules-the-climate-pdf
URL: http://www.heartland.org/publications-resources/publications/nature-not-human-activity-rules-the-climate-pdf
[11] The Sun, Not Man, Still Rules Our Climate, by Zbigniew Jaworowski, Spring 2009, 21st Century Science & Technology, dissects the false “fingerprint” of man-made warming and the Malthusian hand promoting it,
URL: http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles_2009/Sun_Climate_sp09_01.pdf
URL: http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles_2009/Sun_Climate_sp09_01.pdf
[12] Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming, The NIPCC Report on Scientific Consensus, by Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, S. Fred Singer, Second edition 2016, The Heartland Institute,
URL: http://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/Books/Why%20Scientists%20Disagree%20Second%20Edition%20with%20covers.pdf
URL: http://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/Books/Why%20Scientists%20Disagree%20Second%20Edition%20with%20covers.pdf
[13] Other References for Further Study,
compiled by Peter Meyer, serendipity.li,
The
Global Warming Scare Hoax,
URL: http://www.serendipity.li/climate/global_warming_scare.htm
URL: http://www.serendipity.li/climate/global_warming_scare.htm
[14] Letter to President Donald Trump, The White House, from Richard Lindzen, MIT, March 09, 2017,
6-Personal PAOC Explanation,
URL: http://sites.google.com/site/humanbeingsfirst/misc/Cacheof-6-Personal-PAOC-Explanation-March-09-2017-Richard-Lindzen-MIT-courtesy-of-Lindzen.pdf
URL: http://sites.google.com/site/humanbeingsfirst/misc/Cacheof-6-Personal-PAOC-Explanation-March-09-2017-Richard-Lindzen-MIT-courtesy-of-Lindzen.pdf
[15] Letter to John Cook, skepticalscience.com, George Mason University, from Zahir Ebrahim, October 26, 2018,
Global
Warming: Religion or Science?,
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2018/10/lette-global-warming-religion-or-science.html
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2018/10/lette-global-warming-religion-or-science.html
[16] Letter to Climate@MIT, from Zahir Ebrahim, October 30, 2018,
Is
Climate Science Religion or Science?,
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2018/10/letter-climate-mit-religion-or-science.html
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2018/10/letter-climate-mit-religion-or-science.html
[17] Letter to Tariq Banuri, Chairman HEC, from Zahir Ebrahim, December 12, 2018,
On
Global Warming,
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2018/12/letter-to-tariq-banuri-on-global-warming.html
URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2018/12/letter-to-tariq-banuri-on-global-warming.html
Table
of Contents
|
Preface
|
Open
Letter Primer on Global Warming For Intelligent People
|
5 |
|
Chapter
1
|
Global
Warming / Climate Change has Become a New Religion - What's it
all About?
|
9 |
|
|
1.0
Summary
|
14 |
|
|
2.0
Backdrop
|
23 |
|
|
2.1
The Council on Foreign Relations
|
24 |
|
|
2.2
Report from Iron Mountain 1967
|
24 |
|
|
2.3
Report by the Council of the Club of Rome - The First Global
Revolution 1991
|
31 |
|
|
2.4
The United Nations Agenda 21 and Social Engineering Play Book
1992
|
32 |
|
|
2.5
The Real Green – The Real Sustainable Development
|
49 |
|
|
3.0
Conclusion
|
53 |
|
Chapter
2
|
NB:
On Global Warming Between Global Warming and Global Governance –
Concern for Environment is a ‘Hegelian Mind Fck’!
|
59 |
|
Chapter
3
|
Reflections
on Modernity, Climategate, Pandemic, Peer Review, and Science in
the Service of Empire - Letter to a 'co-conspiracy theorist'
|
102 |
|
Chapter
4
|
Response
to Financial Times Gideon Rachman's 'And now for a world
government'
|
129 |
|
Chapter
5
|
Letter
to Climate@MIT : Is Climate Science Religion or Science?
|
134 |
|
|
Reprint
License
|
153 |
Source
URL:
http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/p/global-warming-has-become-new-religion.html
Print
URL:
http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2016/11/global-warming-climate-change-whats-it.html
Faith-Politico
URL:
http://faith-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2018/10/global-warming-religion-or-science.html
First
Published as Summary of [1] on November 30, 2016 | Last updated on Wednesday, March 6, 2019
11:00 pm
19306
Global
Warming / Climate Change – A New Religion? By Zahir Ebrahim |
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org 50/50