The Great Global Warming Swindle

[BroMikey]

Hey Duncan what-it's-slike?

Let me start by saying I enjoy all of the material presented in
doc-form but so many who quote George Carlin sicked me. Can I say that?
Su**ing k**k is a very vulgar expression that reveals only the dog nature
of many men. This is spiritual darkness. Quoting men like this as some
form of validation is pure blindness and ruins your entire offering.

Best of wishes using another approach

[Duncan]

sorry bro - didn't mean to offend

Hi Bromikey - of course you can say and observe just what you like , Its an open platform . I'm sorry you take offense at George C but please do keep in mind he was really 'an entertainer' (and I think a pretty good one) . He may appeal to, and use the base instincts and language of the gutter but so what ? A lot of decent folks understand that language and yet would bend over backwards to help anyone. (ergo an asset) the truth is all important not the language.
compared to the diplomatic slimy political niceties of lets say Nixon (which I link to) I know which language and person I prefer. That I quoted GC too perhaps wasn't such a good idea if off colour language offends but as I say I quite like the hard hitting slap stick humor, which of course isn't going to be to everyones taste.

[aljhoa]

United nations ? and who put that together and why pray ? let me put a few documentaries here for you to consider , Not that I'm saying you understand that each is 100% correct in its conclusions but I do observe that each substantially supports and meshes with the the next in order to substantiate 'a whole collective picture. This is an energy platform and it behooves I follow the subject as best I may to consider what ,who and why . you will find the same names recurring, even so its some hours of viewing and a lot to digest, still I invite you to watch the documentaries and short video's that have impacted me on the subjects you are discussing. I have tried as far as possible to use historical footage ergo you can then see what has come to pass. Also that which was theory may now in a lot of cases be seen as fact. lets start with 'Big oil'
How Big Oil Conquered the World - Top Documentary Films
Now just a little sniff at the Nazi's, and the probable origins of the 'Bilderburg group ' at the end of WW2 both allies and axis powers had formed a 'plan B' The British plan was pretty brutal and direct, involving half a ton of Anthrax dropped on Germany and followed by covert assassinations carried out by prepared groups in the UK in the event of Nazi invasion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Mykjxkwwe0
The Nazi plan which has been put into effect was formulated on a financial basis by minister of finance Martin Boremann and hammered into post war operation during 'The red house agreement'
Revealed: The secret report that shows how the Nazis planned a Fourth Reich ...in the EU | Daily Mail Online
This powerful and clandestine group morphed and grew into what is now known (to a small, but increasing number of people) as 'The Bilderburg group'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-CrNlilZho
George Carling seems to sum it up rather well in this short clip .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q
Well it all seems just awful, don't it ? Seems very biased and anti American, but consider this folks - whats the alternative? also consider like any empire the mass of the people have no idea of the terrible manipulation being en acted on them , They are the de-facto 'cannon fodder' for the elite.
At the height of the British empire history records the common British population had a terrible existence
The elite however are already on their virtual bikes. - and they seem to have the front wheel pointed east.- Ah but did I call America an empire ? In all but name surly ?. For the record let me make that connection , Here is turn coat American 'economic Hit man' John Perkins explaining how and why the American empire was formed and by who
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDPoZJNT1eM
I would hate the reader to get the impression I am a hater of 'capitalism ' I am not , It brings oh so many benefits and freedoms still its a broad brush and like the curates egg 'good in parts' . but so are all the 'systems' (in theory at least ) however it isn't capitalism we are looking at here is it ? its 'Fascism' (remember its roots)

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”
Benito Mussolini

You will have immediately latched onto the switch to energy as the Empires new currency . used by the elite in the shape of 'the petro dollar' (which they can easily manipulate ). It is here being introduced by angelic sweetheart Tricky Dicky who forced the issue by reneging on Americas international debts.
here's that bucket of slime (minus the bucket) doing it -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRzr1QU6K1o
So now what if an inventor comes up with a new energy system ? or oh dear oh dear, oops ! finds huge oil and gas reserves ? I think most on this forum know what happens to the inventors and researchers , and this is what happens to huge oil finds -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZFO1tq5OeI
Do you really think the elite could possibly leave such a bonanza find alone ? here is what (could well) have been done with it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQMdvlznPK8
Of course this also nicely explains the very odd weather patterns that seem to be occurring world wide and fits hand in glove with the tax plan for a 'new world order'.
What then of the bombings, terror , assassinations , generated wars ? could it all really be a grandiose plan organized by these lunatic rich bone idle men who have never so much as washed a pot in their bone idle greedy life's ? This documentary seems to tie it all together which is why I'm afraid its quite long.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Qt6a-vaNM
An in depth study of any one industry quickly demonstrates which particular 'Baron' rules the cartel and the disaster it brings to the general public . At random I pick the medical 'Industry' or rather drugs under the rule of 'The Rockefeller' foundation. watch for Rockefeller and his lackeys particularly Fishbein in each documentary and clip
http://dnp.s3.amazonaws.com/b/b2/BH1.mp3
a cure for all cancer's ? Thats an outrageous claim,I suggest you check it out, you'll find alas its true- watch the Royal Rife story, you'll find it 'free to watch' half way down this page. http://rifevideos.com/
what a microscope ! could it be matched ? Of course but as you clearly now see - the technology wont be allowed or the methods investigated.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGJW94ciq4c
and what of Morris Fishbein ? His exposure as a medical fraud who had failed basic human anatomy was exposed and the AMA taken to task in an open court of law by Harry Hoxey
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/hoxse...comes-a-crime/
Its a side swipe complement to the USA that these documentaries are available . after all your not likely to see the Tiananmen Square documentary coming out of china any time soon . My own land is also tight lipped, regardless - It still doesn't answer the question, how does the human race regain control of its own destiny ? As George Carling tells us 'voting for these rich cock suckers isn't going to do it. Ah but what is?-

Ans.@11:50


or @ 1:53

Al

[Duncan]

The French had a pretty good go at that cure a mere few hundred years ago Al, it seems the powers that be haven't got the gist of the outcome yet

[BroMikey]

It does seem that the human thought process has suffered greatly
over that past 40 years. Maybe God will heal our minds. The global
climate maybe affected by the FUKUSHIMA reactors where 4 nuclear
chain reactions are underway and warming the pacific.

Mankind is manipulating our weather with one hand and spreading
propaganda with the other hand like a magic trick

Ans.@11:50


or @ 1:53

Al

Hey Duncan
Su**ing k**k is a very vulgar expression that reveals...........

Hi Bromikey............. which of course isn't going to be to everyones taste.

[aljhoa]

It does seem that the human thought process has suffered greatly
over that past 40 years. Maybe God will heal our minds.

God crates sociopaths (e.g. Marine Corps Boot Camp),
but who inbred 60 generations of psychopaths?

Su**ing k**k is a very vulgar expression that reveals only the dog nature
of many men.

Al

[quantumfanatic]

Beating Trump deadline, EU approves Paris climate deal



By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times - Tuesday, October 4, 2016

The U.N.-sponsored climate pact to limit greenhouse gases crossed a critical threshold far ahead of schedule Tuesday with the approval of the European Union, as world leaders raced to cement the deal amid fears that Donald Trump would make good on his vow to end U.S. participation if elected president.
With the addition of the 28 European Union nations, the agreement cleared the hurdle of 55 countries representing 55 percent of global emissions required for the accord to enter into effect — less than a year after being negotiated by the Obama administration and more than 190 countries in December.
With the approval by the EU parliament needing a month to officially take effect, the accord could start to come into force on Nov. 7 — one day before
the presidential election in the U.S.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest praised the speed at which the deal was ratified even as critics attributed the flurry of approvals to the possibility of a November victory by Mr. Trump, who vowed in May to “cancel” the accord.
Mr. Earnest said that multilateral, U.N.-backed agreements “typically take multiple years, if not decades, to enter into force.”
“And the fact that this agreement will take effect in less than a year is not just a historic accomplishment, it’s a historic commitment to fulfilling the terms of the deal in a way that will have enormous positive benefits for the planet,” he said.The entry into force of the Paris agreement less than one year after its signature is a massive achievement, given that it took eight years for the [Kyoto climate agreement],” European Parliament President Martin Schulz noted in a statement.
Given that Mr. Obama entered into the agreement by executive action, critics have argued a future president could take the U.S. out of the agreement with the stroke of a pen. Even so, supporters have pushed for quick approval on the theory that withdrawing from the pact would become trickier once ratification is in place.
Negotiated at the 21st Conference of the Parties in Paris, the nonbinding accord appeared to stall until U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon urged countries in July to accelerate their ratification process.
President Obama heeded the call by entering into the accord a month ago at a joint ceremony with Chinese President Xi Jinping, despite objections from congressional Republicans, who have insisted that the agreement is a treaty and therefore must be ratified by the Senate. China and the U.S. are the world’s two biggest producers of greenhouse gases.
Climate Depot’s Marc Morano compared the push to the sudden release of U.S. hostages by Iran in 1981 shortly after Republican Ronald Reagan was elected president.
“The international climate community is terrified of the prospect of a Trump presidency, and with good reason,” said Mr. Morano. “Trump has pledged to do a full ‘Clexit’ and pull out of the U.N.Paris Agreement, overturn the EPA executive orders on climate and defund” the U.N. expert panel that has strongly pressed the case for man-made global warming.
The European Parliament vote on ratification, which passed overwhelmingly with 610 in favor, 38 against and 31 abstaining, came two days after India, one of the world’s leading carbon emitters, submitted its ratification document to the U.N.
That still left the accord about 3 percentage points shy of the 55 percent emissions goal until the EU weighed in with its Tuesday vote. The Canadian House of Commons is expected to ratify the agreement Wednesday, adding another 2 percent to the emissions percentage.
The accord is scheduled to enter into force 30 days after the EU ratification is delivered Friday to the U.N., coinciding with the next major international climate change meeting in Marrakech, Morocco.
The debate goes on
But the rush of national endorsements is hardly expected to end the debate over the accord, which calls for a cooperative global effort to hold global temperature increases to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial levels by limiting greenhouse gas emissions.
Congressional Republicans have challenged President Obama’s decision to enter into the agreement without Senate ratification, while the White House has said that the nonbinding pact is not a treaty and may be ratified by executive action.
“The Paris climate deal is a legally non-binding deal that the president forced on taxpayers,” said the GOP majority of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology in a Monday post on Twitter. “It is all pain & no gain.”
Critics have also blasted the agreement as political theater that will place Western nations at a competitive disadvantage with countries such as China and India, both of which are expected to increase their carbon dioxide emissions in the short term.
“The Paris agreement is a grand theater designed to convince Western taxpayers to cough up more money,” said Australian climate skeptic Joanne Nova. “China and India are part of the show, putting on their best environmental faces while they do nothing green — or even less.”
Meanwhile, climate change activists wasted no time cheering the EU’s milestone vote.
“Today is a historic day, and we applaud the international community for setting the foundation for global action to avoid the worst impacts of climate change,” said BlueGreen Alliance executive director Kim Glas.
Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said that although the vote is “certainly a cause for celebration — perhaps with a glass or two of French wine — much hard work lies ahead.”
“Countries must now move aggressively to implement and strengthen their emissions reduction commitments under the agreement if we are to have any chance of avoiding the worst impacts of climate change,” Mr. Meyer said.
Mixed reception
Even within the climate change movement, however, opinions on the Paris accord are mixed. Climatologist James Hansen, a former NASA director and a leading critic of global warming, described the agreement as too little too late.
“There’s a misconception that we’ve begun to address the climate problem,” Mr. Hansen told reporters Monday. “The misapprehension is based on the Paris climate summit, where all the government leaders clapped each other on the back as if some great progress has been made, but you look at the science and it doesn’t compute. We are not doing what is needed.”
After the vote, the European Commission announced that it had already brought forward legislative proposals “to deliver on the EU’s commitment to reduce emissions in the European Union by at least 40 percent by 2030.”
“Today the European Union turned climate ambition into climate action,” European Parliament President Jean-Claude Juncker told reporters in Brussels. “The Paris Agreement is the first of its kind, and it would not have been possible were it not for the European Union.”
Mr. Morano described the EU’s action as lip service, saying that “the climate campaigners can now declare victory and herald this climatically meaningless U.N. agreement as some kind of milestone.”

“But the reality is, this treaty is about forcing the U.S. and Europe to redistribute wealth, and it’s about enriching the U.N.,” he said. “You may as well believe in witchcraft if you actually believe that the U.N. can control the Earth’s temperature and manage storminess.”

[iflewmyown]

Dire predictions that the Arctic would be devoid of sea ice by September this year have proven to be unfounded after latest satellite images showed there is far more now than in 2012.

Scientists such as Prof Peter Wadhams, of Cambridge University, and Prof Wieslaw Maslowski, of the Naval Postgraduate School in Moderey, California, have regularly forecast the loss of ice by 2016, which has been widely reported by the BBC and other media outlets.

Prof Wadhams, a leading expert on Arctic sea ice loss, has recently published a book entitled A Farewell To Ice in which he repeats the assertion that the polar region would free of ice in the middle of this decade.

As late as this summer, he was still predicting an ice-free September.

Yet, when figures were released for the yearly minimum on September 10, they showed that there was still 1.6 million square miles of sea ice (4.14 square kilometres), which was 21 per cent more than the lowest point in 2012.

[wayne.ct]

The bigotry of the young and foolish

I am posting with a mean intent because I want to push back against a certain young person that posted earlier in this thread. Contrary to what was said, age is not the determining factor in whether you support the idea of global warming or think human action is insignificant in causing climate change. The important factor is your willingness to accept what other people have said or told you in the past. It all boils down to a flavor of brain washing where you hear certain ideas repeated and you put aside your natural tendency to ask questions and be to some degree skeptical of ideas thrown your way. The accepted notion in many circles is that "I am right" and if you disagree with "me" you are wrong. This is the essence of bigotry. Don't talk about reasons and logic, just agree (with me) and get along seems to be the prevailing attitude.

Even scientists are susceptible to this sort of bigotry, so get over it and give the reasons for your position. You have your reasons and I have mine. Agree to disagree and try to be agreeable through the process.

I know it is a lot to ask but I have seen this many times in this forum.

[Allcanadian]

@wayne

I am posting with a mean intent because I want to push back against a certain young person that posted earlier in this thread. Contrary to what was said, age is not the determining factor in whether you support the idea of global warming or think human action is insignificant in causing climate change. The important factor is your willingness to accept what other people have said or told you in the past.

For the record I am 50 years young and I believe my data shows something we already know. On average older people are far less likely to embrace any real change versus younger people. As well you do not directly apply because obviously you are not an average you are an individual.

It all boils down to a flavor of brain washing where you hear certain ideas repeated and you put aside your natural tendency to ask questions and be to some degree skeptical of ideas thrown your way.

I found this website interesting, Is Global Warming a Hoax/Fraud/Scam?
I would point out there is no disagreement that the climate is changing it is simply a matter of why the climate is changing.

The accepted notion in many circles is that "I am right" and if you disagree with "me" you are wrong. This is the essence of bigotry. Don't talk about reasons and logic, just agree (with me) and get along seems to be the prevailing attitude.

Your talking semantics.

Even scientists are susceptible to this sort of bigotry, so get over it and give the reasons for your position. You have your reasons and I have mine. Agree to disagree and try to be agreeable through the process.

First I would simply point out the obvious, to assume all our actions have no reaction is stupid. It is stupid because it violates the basic premise of all science and we know better. Thus we know our cumulative action regarding all forms of pollution must in fact do harm to us and our environment. For instance we know as a fact pollution related illness is now the leading cause of death on this planet. Pollution is killing millions of people thus we must reduce it...period.

Point two, we know the climate is in fact changing right now however we are not sure exactly why it is changing. However climate change is not the real problem which relates to the fact most all anti-climate change people are against any real change to the status quo. They say we do not need climate change action, we do not need carbon taxes to punish polluters and reward renewable energy companies. Thus a vote against climate change is effectively a vote against renewable energy and reducing pollution. A vote against climate change action is a vote to continue polluting knowing that this is in fact killing millions of people including our children.

Point three, this is a renewable energy forum where we are looking for clean sustainable energy solutions. Clean and sustainable means all fossil fuel schemes must be rejected because they are neither. So why are you here implying climate change isn't a problem in effect arguing pollution and non-sustainability isn't a problem. Should we just sit on our hands and do nothing, that is what you are proposing isn't it?... doing nothing?.

AC

[BroMikey]

Quote:
The accepted notion in many circles is that "I am right" and if you disagree with "me" you are wrong. This is the essence of bigotry. Don't talk about reasons and logic, just agree (with me) and get along seems to be the prevailing attitude.


Ac wrong again response"Your talking semantics."

No we are talking irrationality coming from the "adepts" just another
war on words and then we are all suppose to bow. Hail the carbon piggy bank

[Allcanadian]

@BroMikey

Don't worry Bro, common sense will prevail. The world has a mandate for change and everyone is on board. Fossil fuels will be history as will the people who worship it. I find comfort in the fact that everyone dies and they no longer have a say about anything. Everything you think you have done will be undone by our children and there is not a damn thing you can do about it, lmao.

So have your fun but if you think you can stop progress you are mistaken. Progress waits for no man.

AC

[BroMikey]

@BroMikey

Don't worry Bro, common sense will prevail. The world has a mandate
for change and everyone is on board. Fossil fuels will be history as will
the people who worship it. I find comfort in the fact that everyone dies
and they no longer have a say about anything. Everything you think you
have done will be undone by our children and there is not a damn thing
you can do about it, lmao.

So have your fun but if you think you can stop progress you are
mistaken. Progress waits for no man.

AC

There you go again WRONG!!! Growing long hair like your university
professor does not make you better than all of the sub-species. Vaccines
are also the religion of the day. Shot in the arm and kill our children, take
away the guns so the nettle can be forced and let's not forget the
chemicals sprayed for weather control.

It's no wonder people are having a hard time thinking clear.

Your little toy rattle "Carbon Emissions" will never bring in carbon free
technology. That is not the goal in this religious fundraiser. Being a
PHD or 4-8 years of some sort of school does not make people smart.
All it does is make them conform.

Better remember this, the rational thinkers who love God an country
have the upper hand yet will not use their advantage to damage the
lesser. Remember that the next time you make a half wit statement.

Anyone disregarding the data and proceeds to bow to establishment
media wkores are in serious need of rescue. Never fear because when the
old dogs buy the farm the young blood will find their way as humanity
has always done.

The same people who think carbon tax are the same ones in favor of
a forced everything lifestyle for the future. All free people will fight that.
Being held down and made to be bound with heavy burdens will only
develop a group of supermen to destroy that paradigm.

The same people forcing carbon slavery could have done away with
coal 60 years ago. THEY don't want free energy as we say, THEY want
people licking THEIR boots because THEY are psychopaths. You falling
in line with this form of slavery only makes me wonder what stakes are in
this for you. Are you a corporate WKORE? Free money lunch wagon?

In others words I am asking you where do you work, where is the money
coming from and are you being paid to propagate this agenda.

Now there I said it. I do feel a lot better, taking a breath of new freedom.

[quantumfanatic]

@BroMikey

Don't worry Bro, common sense will prevail. The world has a mandate for change and everyone is on board. Fossil fuels will be history as will the people who worship it. I find comfort in the fact that everyone dies and they no longer have a say about anything. Everything you think you have done will be undone by our children and there is not a damn thing you can do about it, lmao.

So have your fun but if you think you can stop progress you are mistaken. Progress waits for no man.

AC

All

I think you have it wrong to think anybody wants polution,what is being discussed here is whether the climate is changing so drastically as the SCIENTISTS,(paid to say so, by the globalists) wants US the people to believe.It has been proven by most real scientists that there is nothing we as humans can do to change the climate even by 2 degrees.
I think I speak for most of us when I say I am against pollution and carbon emissions ,and yes we must do away with it,but "climate change"as they want us to believe is not caused by it alone.

Peter Lindeman showed nice graphs explaining the cycles of temperature change the earth experienced so far,so it should be a fairly good indication for us to consider.
The thing to remember or see here is that the UN and world leaders wants us to believe this, in order for them to have more money and control over us(the average joe) because who will eventually pay these taxes in the end?
you and me


There are many natural cycles that affect our climate and throughout history the climate has always been changing. Sometimes the average global temperature has been as much as 20°C warmer than it currently is and at other times it’s been 11°C colder.

The difference is that these large scale temperature swings happen over periods of thousands and millions of years. What we’re seeing at present are temperatures rising many times faster than anything that can be ascribed to natural variations.

Because these natural variations are cyclical they’re also predictable. We’re all familiar with the concept of days and years because we witness them many times over. The cycles that cause large scale warming or cooling are no less predictable than the days and years but because they happen over long periods of time we’re not as familiar with them.

Currently there are some natural cycles that are warming the planet, others are cooling it. The net effect of all such cycles is one of very slight cooling. In fact, since the 1970’s we should have been cooling, albeit by just a small amount.
Change might be a good thing but at what cost?

[Aaron]

interglacial cycle transition

Of all the people I know that dispute man-made "global warming" due to co2, none of them deny that there are changes to our climate.

The primary cause appears to be that we are simply getting to the end of the current interglacial cycle and we're about to start a new one. When in an interglacial cycle, it is cold, there are a lot of icebergs, etc... and towards the end, icebergs are supposed to melt - no surprise, and then, we start moving toward another long cold period. This is natural climate change that has been happening for many hundreds of thousands of years.

Right now, we are at this transition point, but if we look at the temperature data of what we can determine was happening over the last 4-5 intergalcial cycles, we are currently in one of the coolest and our temperature right now is about 7 degrees F COOLER than most interglacial cycles of the past.

With that said, I'm all for reducing pollution and we are certainly polluting this planet but so far, our pollution is not changing the temperature of our planet, but it is making it dirtier.