The Great Global Warming Swindle

[TanTric]

...

The 13year old girl that silent the world for 5 minutes, no words to describe it...

YouTube - A menina que calou o mundo em 5 minutos

[Peter Lindemann]

Climate change talks 'backslide' at Bonn

Hi folks,

Here is the latest news from the UN Climate Change negotiations.

BBC News - Climate change talks 'backslide' at Bonn

Peter

[ashtweth]

Thanks for that Peter. looks like we are not the only ones looking for real climate science.

Global Warming - What The Government Isn't Telling You [2009] DVDRip
English | AVI | 640x480 | 29.97 fps | XVID 713 kbps | MP3 128 kbps | 700MB
Genre: Documentary

Global Warming: a very clever cover story

Global Warming as addressed in Al Gore's documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" and NASA is a cover story. In the early 1980's the Powers That Be ( PTB) knew that 20 years into the future the weather would be going bonkers. They decided to create a cover story that the bizarre weather changes were a result of global warming from human activty ( and cow flatulence!) creating C02 greenhouse gases.

All the while, NASA has been monitoring the "real" Tenth Planet (Planet X, or PX) as it worked it's way toward our solar system. Here's the deal, every 3,600 years this planetary size object comes thru our solar system. Because of what Professor McCanney calls "action at a distance", it wreaks havoc on Earth.

Along the way, I learned of a group of men who had both received classified briefings on these matters and were willing to talk. These men are veterans of the U.S. Navy Submarine Corps (and quite a few regular Navy veterans as well).

I am a criminal defense investigator. I am very good at what I do, namely finding witnesses and taking statements. I applied these skills to this matter. I have located the witnesses and taken their statements. Another investigative technique is to interview witnesses that don't know each other at different times and places.

I found that all these witnesses told essentially the same story:

1.) The Navy showed them all a map of what North America will look like after the oceans reach their new levels. The map on my DVD Global Warming , What The Government Isn't Telling You is my work product. I took a map to each veteran and had each man help me with revisions until I had the finished map that is in my DVD.

2.) That all coastal areas will suffer damage. That the Great Lakes will merge to become an inland sea stretching to Hudson Bay. All agree that both Wisconsin and Florida will be virtually wiped out.

3.) That one of the known safe areas is the Arkansas/Missouri Ozarks.

Back to Al Gore's film a moment: I encourage people to watch "An Inconvenient Truth" for the following reason. There is science in the film as well as the science fiction. The science fiction is two fold: That human activity is causing this and the time line for abrupt climate change and rising ocean levels. One should be aware that the time line given in the film is the same time line put out by the U.S. Government thru NASA. Here it is: In 2016 things will start to get bad and in the middle of the century, around 2050, things will really get bad.

The science, the real science in the film, is what will be happening in the future: Rising Ocean Levels and Abrupt Climate Change.

Hotfile.com: One click file hosting: Haiz2_Global Warming.part1.rar
Hotfile.com: One click file hosting: Haiz2_Global Warming.part2.rar
Hotfile.com: One click file hosting: Haiz2_Global Warming.part3.rar
Hotfile.com: One click file hosting: Haiz2_Global Warming.part5.rar
Hotfile.com: One click file hosting: Haiz2_Global Warming.part6.rar
Hotfile.com: One click file hosting: Haiz2_Global Warming.part7.rar
Hotfile.com: One click file hosting: Haiz2_Global Warming.part8.rar

[Peter Lindemann]

SatelliteGate - Faulty Data from NOAA Satellites Exposed!

Hi folks,

Here is a new story just breaking in the last few days, published in the Canada Free Press.

Top Climate Scientists Speak out on the Satellitegate Scandal

Peter

[Farmhand]

Carbon emission tax = more carbon emitted

I'ts a swindle thats for sure.

In my opinion a carbon tax will only lead to an increase in carbon emissions by human activity, my reasoning is that if a company is charged only a tax for their carbon emissions they will either pass the cost on to the consumer or make more profits to cover the tax, more profits = more carbon output, consumers will still buy from these companies. consumerism will not stop, other more serious pollution problems will be overlooked because of it.

My question is if they are going to take a tax for carbon emissions what are they going to use the money for ? To line the pockets of the likes of rothschild's or rockefella's or to clean up the carbon emissions ? I think I already know the answer.

I think this global warming from carbon emissions bandwagon was jumped on by the central banking cartels as a way to introduce a new commodity to try to hide the squillions of missing dollars from the words economies. While at the same time making people think they want to help the environment, as well as another form of control over people.

I can remember when I was younger they were saying global cooling was real.

I can't see an end to the lies and corruption until the U.N the I.M.F and the world bank are gone, the IPCC is just a patsy set up for the others.

I think they are a gang of thugs saying " you must give us more money or pay the price".

Regards

P.S. is anyone from BP or associates in jail yet ? I think there should be environmental justice here, people should be punished not just charged money for these disasters. Australia Arrests Chinese Ship Captain, Senior Officer, Who Smashed Great Barrier Reef .Not sure if he was sentenced to a jail term but he should have been. As should others who ruin the environment for profit, accidental or not.

[Peter Lindemann]

IAC report says IPCC needs "reform"

Hi Folks,

Here is the latest article from the BBC on the Inter-Academy Council's (just released) report on the IPCC. This is the UN sponsored "review" of the IPCC after the media debacle of 2009, which included the release of the "climate-gate" emails and the prediction that Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035.

BBC News - UN climate body 'needs reforms', review recommends

No surprises, no substance, and no argument with "human caused" climate change.

Here is another article about the IAC report that is a little more interesting.

UN climate change panel to be warned over reports - Telegraph

Peter

[ashtweth]

Thanks Peter. Looks like we have been duped since 2007

35 Inconvenient Truths: The errors in Al Gore?s movie
Helping to put the kabosh on the global warming scam!
Hotfile.com: One click file hosting: 35_Inconvenient_Truths.rar

[jibbguy]

OK, i am really trying to understand this point of view here (despite not agreeing with it on premise): Please explain at what point does the "real" Science "kick in" then?

In other words, how much of the published science behind this "valid", and how much was "faked".

I really am interested in hearing the answer to this: You see, there is not only a big push, but an IMPERATIVE, imo, to throw out the baby with the bathwater going on here. Some kind of "anti-science" movement or something akin to that even if not openly stated (i don't mean here specifically from anyone's posts, but from what i hear in the Climategate sites in general).

So the point of the question being, where is the line drawn, to what the "climategate" people accept as "legitimate climate science", and what is not "acceptable"....?

Is it only the claims of "mini ice age" and "mini heating periods" in Western Europe that are accepted as "fact"?

Is the data behind the commonly made extrapolations, or the "hockey stick" data itself WITHOUT ANY MASSAGING, considered "valid".... Or is all considered faked and invalid?

You see, when these claims are made, it is quite apparent that they must be "framed"... That specific "borders" to where the fraud starts and stops must be stipulated... If they are to be taken seriously, anyway

Otherwise; quite frankly, the claims of fraud are completely absurd... Because they are way too broad and there is NO DATA or events at all that can possibly sustain such claims. Because these studies have TERABYTES of data behind them that are to the power of 20 greater than the very narrow subject of some emails between scientists.

This is what i am getting at: What are you guys suggesting then... that all the climate data we see is faked and a fraud? If not "how much of it" then?

OK, before answering, please look at the first half of this where Dr. Nocera gives his take on Climate and CO2.. You may not agree with his conclusions on CO2 but you may find the way it is generally presented refreshing none the less.... as i assure you all, this is no "kool aid drinker" here... He would not be bucking the system like he is otherwise:

YouTube - Dr. Daniel G. Nocera

[Shamus]

I guess it all depends on how trustworthy the data is, now, isn't it? I mean, how much of it is actual measurement and how much of it is computer generated? How is the data (the real measurement, that is) interpreted and how do you know that the interpretation is trustworthy? How do you know whether the data gathering methods are valid, that the data itself is trustworthy?

It's one thing to say that there's mountains of evidence, but how do you know that without perusing those mountains yourself? I'm sure you're acquainted with the principle of garbage in, garbage out?

Speaking for myself, I'm not against science if really is science. Most of what's paraded out for the general public is anything but. That stuff is the new religion we were all given back in the 60s and 70s, where people in white lab coats make their pronouncements from on high and we're all just supposed to believe it. In other words, Science with a capital "s". Perhaps what's being touted as "anti-science" is just backlash against this new(ish) Science religion we're all supposed to bow down to?

[Farmhand]

Most of what's paraded out for the general public is anything but. That stuff is the new religion we were all given back in the 60s and 70s, where people in white lab coats make their pronouncements from on high and we're all just supposed to believe it. In other words, Science with a capital "s". Perhaps what's being touted as "anti-science" is just backlash against this new(ish) Science religion we're all supposed to bow down to?

I agree.

Eisenhower warned of this problem- Eisenhower’s Dual Warnings: “Military-Industrial Complex” and “Scientific-Technological Elite” « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)

Regards

[ashtweth]

“The criticisms focused on two different sets of records which recorded temperatures for more than 100 years. That those records had been "adjusted in an unethical and inaccurate way" was also the basis for the court action. Niwa (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research) chief climate scientist David Wratt has previously rejected the allegations, saying the need to make adjustments was internationally accepted. The original data was freely available on the internet, he said.

(Are we to believe it’s “internationally acceptable” to commit fraud????? By “original data” we gather you mean correct data??)

So the Chief scientist has two contradicting sets of figures! This is Orwellian stuff – “the ability to hold two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.”

Nineteen Eighty-Four - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Court challenge to Niwa climate records

Court challenge to Niwa climate records | Stuff.co.nz

[ashtweth]

About 2 years ago the big gun world traders formed the first ever Carbon Exchange in Chicago, hoping to make billions in trading carbon credits.
Now it seems the whole thing is collapsing. The price of carbon has fallen from $5 per ton to 10 cents.
The Great Collapse of the Chicago Climate Exchange « 21st Century Wire

Public pressure through EDUCATION is needed to wake up politicians to the futility of an ETS which is a tax on us all.

[rickoff]

Hi Folks,

Here's the good news, US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid just announced that the Senate will not be able to pass a comprehensive Climate Bill this session. They just don't have the votes!

Peter

Unfortunately, it's too soon to celebrate, Peter. In a pure Chicago-style politics move, a stealth climate bill has been passed and voters didn't even have a chance to say "NO!" A staggering $65 billion dollars has been transferred from the private sector to fund the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI.) RGGI is the nation's first mandatory greenhouse gas cap and trade regulating entity. RGGI is a big government Ponzi scheme created under the guise of combating global warming. Behind closed doors, RGGI is hiking up energy prices and giving Beltway bureaucrats huge kickbacks. Soon RGGI will expand to every state and stick all of us with astronomical energy prices, unless we can convince Congress to kill Cap and Tax. Slim chance of that, though, considering their performance in 2009 and 2010.

Rick

[Peter Lindemann]

2010 Artic Ice Melt Data - No Record

Hi Folks,

Here is a preliminary report on this years Arctic Ice Melt data.

BBC News - 'Rapid' 2010 melt for Arctic ice - but no record

Peter

[Peter Lindemann]

Interesting New Report on Ocean Temperatures

Hi Folks,

Here is a new article from the BBC about a new report that re-looks at some ocean temperature data from the 1970's. Very interesting. There is clearly, no consensus as to WHY some of these things have happened.

BBC News - Oceans divide over 1970s warming

Here is a link to the Original Article in the journal Nature:

When the North Atlantic caught a chill : Nature News

Peter