A Global Warming Deception

The Nature Of Climate Change

“We simply must do everything we can in our power to slow down global warming before it is too late. The science is clear. The global warming debate is over.”

Arnold Schwarzenegger

Is man made global warming real or is it a fiction? If it was fiction would many people have the time to investigate it for themselves and determine reality? Is the media giving both sides of the argument fair play? The answer to these last two questions is an affirmative NO. This chapter will answer the first question. What could motivate so many qualified scientists to say that it is all bunk when in fact the extinction of humanity could result if global warming is left unchecked ? This chapter is a proof that man made global warming has been a hoax and explain why this hoax has being carried out.

The climate change and environmentalism propaganda that has been on the media over the past forty years has been a pre-propaganda operation to overly sensitize man for environmental concern. The environment for one reason or another is always in the news. In the seventies, eighties and nineties, global cooling, acid rain, the ozone layer, and global warming, have all served to propagandize the public into believing in an eminent man made global catastrophe unless action was to be taken.

Global warming has now become climate change since the earth has begun to cool. GMO crops, mercury in natural fish supplies, fluoridated drinking water containing pharmaceuticals and many other real permanent problems such as depleted uranium used in all our wars receive little attention. We simply must save the earth from man made climate change.

Climate change is based on lies, damned lies and tricky statistics. Every piece of evidence brought forward by the climate change salespeople turns out to be a misinterpretation of scientific and mathematical fact. There was never a scientific reason to believe that man’s output of carbon dioxide would harm the environment.

Al Gore says that the current situation is urgent: “Two thousand scientists, in a hundred countries, engaged in the most elaborate, well organized scientific collaboration in the history of humankind, have produced long-since a consensus that we will face a string of terrible catastrophes unless we act to prepare ourselves and deal with the underlying causes of global warming.”

Gore won a Nobel prize for a movie named ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ which the British Supreme Court said contained eleven errors, but the court stated that the basic premise of the movie was true, while labeling almost all of the basic premises that made the case for the movie based on fraud. Courts are highly political and cannot speak directly against an establishment agenda.

One truth is contained in the movie according to Michael Coffman PhD (environmental climatology), author of the on line free movie “Global Warming or Global Governance”, That is that carbon dioxide is technically a greenhouse gas, although one that is nearly irrelevant when other greenhouse gases are considered such as water vapor and clouds.

The very beginning of Gore's movie[1] shows him presenting the main piece of evidence that supports the central hypothesis of the movie. This hypothesis states that atmospheric carbon dioxide content is one of the main controlling factors of temperature. Gore shows this by placing a carbon dioxide content graph and a temperature graph on the same grid and remarks on the similarity of the two graphs.

 

 

In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. These two graphs are spaced apart in his presentation for a very good reason. If they are placed together, the data shows that in fact carbon dioxide content is determined by solar input and not the other way around. If the graphs look similar there are two possibilities. Gores argument is that grey hair causes age, rather than age causing grey hair. It is one of the biggest frauds in the entire man made climate change argument.

The statement of support for the central thesis in the movie is shown to be bogus and the movie is shown to be misleading the viewer in a manner that exactly contradicts the truth. This could not be the result of error. This alone says a lot about the nature of the environmental movement.

If the environmental threat due to man’s carbon dioxide output was real then this movie discredited the environmental movement. It wouldn't seem logical to take this risk in discrediting a movement that may be needed to actually save the planet from certain destruction. It makes perfect sense that this was attempted because there is no real evidence or science from which to base the global warming or climate change agenda upon.

The “hockey stick” curve model that predicts eminent catastrophic global warming shown in Al Gores movie is shown to be incorrect.. Data since the hockey stick graph was shown in Gores movie prove the model to be incorrect, the earth has been cooling since 1998[2]. It has been pointed out that this model gives the same result irrespective of the data that is applied. Man’s carbon output will be responsible for both temperature increases and temperature decreases, although carbon dioxide is a gas that supposedly causes the earth to heat up.

David Suzuki has expressed a similar need for urgency in acting on the matter. They are saying there is no time to think and that we must act while the debate is ongoing: “We are playing Russian roulette with features of the planet's atmosphere that will profoundly impact generations to come. How long are we willing to gamble?”. Suzuki now does advertisements in Canada to encourage children to nag their parents to reduce energy consumption for the sake of future generations.

[1] An Inconvenient Truth (video) Narrated By Al Gore

[2]

The David Suzuki foundation shows a deceptive graph that illustrates a nearly exponential rise in atmospheric carbon content that starts at approximately the year 1800. This graph supposedly illustrates the affect of industrialization on atmospheric carbon content, but in reality shows that the carbon increase is likely caused by something other than industrialization. The exponential trend continues through the 1800's and 1900's[3]. Industrialization started in the 1900's, long after this exponential rise in atmospheric carbon began.

It is a bold and perhaps arrogant statement to say that the evidence brought forward to support the man made global climate change hypothesis actually supports the opposite hypothesis that man is NOT actually responsible for global climate but the evidence is clear.

A knowledge of advanced statistics is not required to see and understand this point. It is well illustrated in the movie “Global Warming or Global Governance” by Michael Coffman and the shorter documentary done by the BBC called “The Great Global Warming Swindle”. Both of these have been posted on Google Video for free viewing on the Internet to raise awareness.

Suzuki, Gore and many others have stated that the debate is over. In reality, the climate change debate has been practically non-existent. The existence of a global warming debate has largely been only in the imagination of climate change alarmists. Environmentalists have been openly challenged with a call for debate, yet decline. John Coleman, the founder of the Weather Channel, wants to sue Al Gore because the courts may be the only place to get a hearing.

University professors, scientists associated with the Fabian society and others such as grant dependent university professors profess the importance of the man made carbon influence of global weather[6]. The people who speak against the hypothesis that mans activity is causing the earth to change climate largely exist outside the establishment. Some United Nations IPCC (United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) scientists speak against anthropogenic climate change but they are ignored by the corporate mainstream media[7].


The Science Of Climate Change

“Global warming is a total crock of shit”

GM's product czar Bob Lutz

Anthropogenic climate change deniers deserve careful consideration because of the veracity of the statements made and the fact that no one in his/her right mind has had a scorched earth policy. One must be insane to state that man was not having an effect on global temperature when in fact, man was having a dangerous effect on the atmosphere.

Global warming deniers have 31,000 penned signatures of people who have the equivalent of a bachelors degree in science or better. Many signatories are climatology experts and 9,000 have Ph D's. A detailed breakdown of qualifications can be found at www.petitionproject.org

Signatories include luminaries such as theoretical physicist Freeman Dyson, MIT’s atmospheric physicist Richard Lindzen and first National Academy of Sciences president Frederick Seitz. More than 40 signatories are members of the national Academy of Sciences. The site contains many presentations and letters.

Climate change supporters claim that there is an ongoing debate but the signed statement is quite clear (shown below). This petition is not just saying that there has been a doubt, the petition states that climate change is a fraud and that there has been no evidence from which to base a debate. Furthermore, these persons named above are necessarily only US citizens, Gore's list of 20,000 “expert” supporters have been from anywhere in the world, this author could find Gores list nowhere on the internet.

Mans effect on total carbon output of the planet has been negligible and the effect of all the carbon in the atmosphere has negligible affect on earth temperature. Man has contributed a small fraction of 1 % to the earths temperature due to carbon output. The amount of heat the earth has received has been primarily controlled by clouds and cloud formation. Cloud formation has been largely determined by solar activity from the sun as well as from other places in the solar system. 

 

 

Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has an affect that can be compared to painting a window. The first few coats of paint on a window are highly affective, subsequent coats make little difference. The affect of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere on temperature has a greatly reduced affect once the concentrations exceed 400 – 600 ppm.

If man stopped all carbon generation related activity tomorrow, no scientist could measure the difference of carbon content or temperature change in the atmosphere. The oceans and biosphere generate approximately 100 times the amount of carbon that is produced by mankind’s breathing and industrial output. The affect of man on climate would be immeasurable and the data would be lost in the changing carbon content due to natural sources, solar sun spots and other activity in the solar system.

There is nothing in the global temperature data that enables one to identify wars or the start of other industrial activities that cause increases in the rate of carbon output into the atmosphere. The evidence presented by climate change alarmists has shown that man made climate change is unlikely. A scientifically illiterate general population has been propagandized to believe the data proves the man made climate change hypothesis although it shows the opposite. This phenomenon has been surprisingly evident throughout the man made climate change pitch.

Increased carbon dioxide is good for crops. Plants require less water and become more robust, world crop yields increase. More carbon dioxide is good, carbon dioxide, oxygen, water and sunlight are the four requirements for life on earth. Air is mainly comprised of nitrogen, when carbon dioxide increases, plants get bigger and exhale more oxygen. Thus there is a greater oxygen content in the atmosphere.

The success of the man made global warming or climate change agenda proves how powerful propaganda can be made to work against the general public interest as well as the incredible power of propaganda itself.

If the man made climate change hypothesis is entirely fraudulent, one must wonder about the purpose. Reducing man made carbon dioxide output has been an international agenda being lead by the United Nations. The policies behind man made carbon dioxide reduction steer society closer to corporate global fascism and total oppression of mankind.


Propaganda Of Climate Change

“In March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding and powder interest, and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers in the United States and a sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press....They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers....

..An agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers.”

U.S. Congressman Oscar Callaway, 1917

The working definition of propaganda for the purpose of this booklet is “a concerted effort to implant a false belief into the minds of a people in society with a specific purpose in mind”. There are many definitions of propaganda.

Climate change alarmism exposes the level of deception that has been exercised on the busy and tired public by the mainstream media. The average person has had neither time nor the technical expertise to look into ideas presented by mainstream corporate media in any detail. Most people continue to trust the news and genuinely believe the networks to be in competition with each other in bringing truth to the public, although this trust is starting to erode.

Propaganda has evolved into a science and is far more potent than only being useful for sugar-coating the ugly truth. Propaganda has become a well developed science since Bernays's experiments and successes such as getting women to smoke cigarettes. Propaganda is a science that is exercised collectively on a group far more effectively than on individuals. Pre-propaganda is required to sow certain seeds of belief . Pre-propaganda campaigns must be based on truth.

The wide spectrum propaganda – that is seen on radio, TV, billboards, etc reaches the collective mindset because it reaches as many people at one time. Propaganda messages are often repeated and inferred through other related stories.

The environmentalist movement was born out of concern of pollution of the planet. There is no doubt about pollution and anyone can see the truth in this statement in everyday experience. This truth made us more environmentally conscious and people that wanted to work for the benefit of all took up the cause to spread awareness. From this a certain collectivism evolved and that collective mindset was propagandized into believing that (1)carbon dioxide is a main cause of global warming and harmful to the environment, (2) man’s carbon output is significant when overall carbon output is considered, and (3) carbon dioxide must be reduced to slow global warming.

None of these claims even approximates truth, the first one being outright nonsense - carbon dioxide is a fertilizer. The Green movement is a perfect example of a successful pre propaganda and propaganda campaign lasting over 40 years.

An example of the depth at which environmentalists are willing to sink to spread their propaganda is an example of a polar bear on a supposed melting ice cap in the arctic that reached the media. The viewer saw a polar bear that was trapped and certain to die because of the perilous affect of man made global warming on the arctic ice caps. In reality polar bears have been known to swim 100 km continuously and regularly swim between icebergs to hunt seal. Their populations have also been growing.

The TV creates interest in current events but lacks critical or penetrating insight to the various issues brought forward. TV also controls which events receive attention. The mindset focused on current events is ripe for the application of propaganda. Mao Tse Tung had remarked on the effectiveness of TV on the mindset of Americans when he visited North America in the '80's. TV has since become an important part of Chinese culture.

Any propaganda that precedes an election by a few weeks has little benefit because it is short term. Elections are won and lost through corporate media propaganda long before the candidates stand for election and take questions from the public. The mainstream corporate media directs policies and ideas around elections through censorship. In this author's recent experience, many important issues such as Codex Alimentarius was not an election topic because it wasn't on TV.

Average people are no more susceptible to propaganda than those who consider themselves the elite. Consider another example, a modern art show where an in-vogue artist is to show his latest masterpiece. A crowd gathers as the masterpiece is unveiled. The piece turns out to be something like a black square painted onto a simple background. The room erupts in applause as the piece is unveiled and an obscene amount of money is raised at auction or by commission. Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder but many paintings like this have been sold for obscene amounts of money. Anyone with functioning eyes in their head can plainly see that these works have been worthless and meaningless.

Many works of modern abstract art consist of works that could easily be reproduced by any young student in an introductory art class[own experience]. A painting such as this does not illuminate any known truth or invoke any feelings with the possible exception of a demonstration of the power of propaganda. The purpose of the abstract modern art movement is shown in Communist Goals (1963) Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963. See item 23: Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."


Beneficiaries of Climate Change

“What pleases me most is that sustainable developmentis on almost everybody's agenda now.”

Maurice Strong

Fifty billion dollars has been spent on promoting climate change while only a few million dollars have been spent on promotion of the denier hypothesis- the hypothesis that essentially all of this global warming science is bunk. Al Gore has just announced that he will be spending three hundred million dollars on promoting awareness with his own money. Al Gore has become very rich by flogging climate change[4]. Oil companies also have benefited because they too spend money on promoting it[5].

Maurice Strong, the self described “Mr Environment” chaired the 1992 Earth Summit and has participated or directed many UN environmental initiatives. Maurice Strong was under secretary general of the United Nations and has spearheaded and chaired many environmental initiatives. Benjamin Strong was one of the founding directors of the Federal Reserve Bank in the USA. (There is no known link between Maurice and Benjamin Strong but a pattern is clear. Bloodlines for the power elite are not often clear)

Another famous banking family, the Rothschild's, are also pushing global warming. David Mayer de Rothschild is advocating Global Warming, in his booklet, The Live Earth Global Warming Survival Handbook: 77 Essential Skills To Stop Climate Change (Paperback). He does not deny his family bloodlines in an interview with Alex Jones. Edmund de Rothschild also spoke at the 1992 Earth Summit.

The climate change agenda is anything but a grass roots awakening to what man has been doing to the planet. It is an elitist agenda to help implement a world government under the United Nations plan of Sustainable Development, the practical implementation of Agenda 21.

The U.N. sponsored IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is a political organization rather than a scientific one, and its mandate is to find and disseminate papers that support the hypothesis of man made global climate change rather than investigate it. Climate change is built on politics rather than science because there is no science to back it up.

The purpose of the climate change agenda is to create a new UN tax, to create another control grid of bureaucracy and more laws to remove freedoms to implement world government. The people that run the world through the financial establishment will collect this tax through interest on loans made to governments from the private banks. In some carbon trading schemes wealthy people with money to gamble in climate change stock will make money while it will cost the poor and middle class to finance the tax as well as pay for the waste of expenditures to pay the carbon speculators. (Trading increases demand, and with an increase in demand comes an increase in price.)

 

[1]How exactly do 'fossils' make 'fuel'? Jerome R. Corsi WorldNet Daily
[2]OPEC web site: (http://www.opec.org/home/PowerPoint/Reserves/Conventional.htm)
[3]OPEC http://www.opec.org/home/Monthly%20Oil%20Market%20Reports/2005/pdf/MR082005.pdf
[5]Hubberts Peak is failed theory Jerome R. Corsi WorldNet Daily
[6] Hubberts Peak is failed Jerome Corsi, WorldNet Daily
[7]Alaska's Gull Island Oil Fields Could Power U.S. for 200 Years, Mark Anderson American Free Press