|
THOUGHTS on CLIMATE CHANGE - Click below for
the articles
Global Warming is destroying the Planet.
Mankind is to blame by emitting Carbon Dioxide into the atmosphere. It's never
been hotter than today. We have only a year to Save the Planet. The Green
Movement must be our Saviour.
The BBC, the Press and Government promote
messages like these every day.
The only, small problem is that IT'S ALL
RUBBISH!
The four articles below will show why and how
lies became an accepted truth.
1 Divide The Great Divide
2 Cold From Too Cold to Too Hot
3 Truth and Lies
4 What do they know?
Sources
1.
THE GREAT DIVIDE -
WEDNESDAY
6 JAN 2021
Today, there are two main
groups concerned with weather and climate: Alarmist and Deniers. Both recognise
that the climate is changing:
Alarmists see catastrophe
ahead while Deniers aren't worried.
See if you can guess who
said this and what they were worried about:
"Changing weather is
perhaps the the greatest single challenge that America will face in coming
years." The authors concluded that: "the world is entering a difficult period
during which major climatic change is apt to occur ... the coming weather may
signify massive migration and equally massive starvation."
Do you know who said this?
The answer is the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in the early 1970s after
they conducted several studies of the world's climate, the likely changes to
come and their probable effect on America and the rest of the world
1.
Did you work out what they
were worried about? No, it wasn't global warming, instead it was the imminent
arrival of a New Ice Age. They based this conclusion on 'overwhelming evidence'
from the past two decades based on measurements from satellites, computers, ice
cores, carbon dating and other advanced techniques. This conclusion was shared
by a consensus of leading climatologists including the world-renowned Professor
Reid A, Bryson of the the University of Wisconsin and Hubert H. Lamb director of
the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.
In particular, the scientific results showing the
growth of ice cover were disturbing. Ice cover in the Northern Hemisphere
increased by 12 percent in 1971 - an increase equal to the combined area of
England, Italy and France. The great ice mass of Antarctica grew by 10% in one
year 1966-67. Satellite pictures captured another equally disturbing picture.
From 1967-1973, winters in the Northern Hemisphere grew longer by almost one
month. averaging 84 days in 1967 and 104 days in 1973.
Based on what seemed to be solid evidence,
Professor Bryson and most other scientists felt that the climate was about to
change to that which was dominant from the 17th century to the mid 19th. During
that time, northern Europe lived in the twilight of permanent winter.
Malnutrition caused great plagues in Europe, Russia, India and Africa while
dancing and feasting on the winter Thames ice became a regular routine for
Londoners.
The coming Ice Age was predicted to be far worse
with much of the world under some degree of permanent glaciation - as shown in
this BBC image:
Many scenarios to tackle the coming disaster were
proposed. Many were predicated on international cooperation to solve the
imminent collapse of food supplies and the need for developing countries to
become self-sufficient in agriculture. Science began to give way to Politics.
The next article will examine how climate predictions changed as the weather
changed and how this led to the rise of Global Warming theory.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2.
FROM TOO COLD TO TOO HOT -
WEDNESDAY
13 JAN 2021
During the 1970s,
scientists were convinced that the world was about to enter a New Ice Age. But
it didn't happen - or hasn't happened yet. How could so many scientists be led
astray? They had, after all, used the latest satellite data, computers, ice
cores, carbon dating and other advanced techniques to determine global
temperature trends. They were convinced that they were right.
But they had made a basic
mistake; they were misled by the definitions:
Weather
describes the condition of the atmosphere. It might be sunny, hot, windy or
cloudy, raining or snowing. Climate means the average weather conditions in a
particular location based on the average weather experienced there over 30 years
or more 2.
They took this to mean
that 30 years of weather measurements could be used to determine the climate and
any changes to it. In fact, the weather changes very gradually and at least 150
years or more are needed for any long-term changes to become established. Look
at this graph to see if we can repeat their mistakes:
Look carefully at the black line (temperature
averages) between 1945 and 1975.3 The downward trend is clearly
visible and, with no other evidence, is a clear indication that the climate is
cooling.
Now consider the upward trend from around 1980 to
about 1998. What fooled honest scientists in the 1970s, taking only a 30-year
average, fooled scientists in the 1980s and 90s. From then on, data has been
largely in the hands of politicians and it is now difficult to find raw data
which has not been 'adjusted' to match the theory.
But the sudden change to warming after 1980
was a disaster for the environmental lobby which had grown rich touting
the end of the world as earth was plunged into a new Ice Age. Unless
something was done, they were likely to lose their profitable businesses and
government funding for combating global cooling.
That 'something' was soon provided by Maurice
Strong (1929 – November 2015)4, a Canadian business man
who had made his fortune with companies in the utilities and environmental
sectors. In 1947 he secured a job as a junior security officer at the UN
headquarters in New York. After some years, he returned to Canada, and founded
the Canadian International Development Agency in 1968.
Strong was a self-confessed Marxist 5,
and the man who put the United Nations into the environmental business, being
the shadowy-figure behind the UN Secretaries General from U Thant to Kofi Annan.
His reign of influence in world affairs lasted from 1962 to 2005. Strong has
been variously called “the international man of mystery”, the “new guy in your
future” and “a very dangerous ideologue”. Maurice Strong described himself as “a
socialist in ideology, a capitalist in methodology".
In 1971, Strong
commissioned a report on the state of the planet, Only One Earth: The Care
and Maintenance of a Small Planet,
co-authored by
Barbara Ward and
Rene Dubos. The report
summarized the findings of 152 leading experts from 58 countries in preparation
for the first UN meeting on the environment, held in Stockholm in 1972. This was
the world's first "state of the environment" report.
The Stockholm Conference
established the environment as part of an international development agenda. It
led to the establishment by the UN General Assembly in December 1972 of the
United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP), with headquarters in
Nairobi,
Kenya, and the election
of Strong to head it. As head of UNEP, Strong convened the first international
expert group meeting on climate change.
Strong was the driving force behind the idea of
One World Governance where the world would be governed by the 'elite' without
the inconvenience of democracy requiring leaders to be elected. He dreamt
up a plan for a world tax of 0.5% to finance the United Nations, giving this
unelected body an annual income of $1.5 trillion which was about equal to the
income of the USA. The stumbling block was the Security Council, and their power
of veto. He devised a plan to get rid of the Security Council but failed to get
it implemented. Then came along the idea that global warming might just be the
device to get his One World Governance6 agenda up and running.
Government by the 'elite' appealed equally to
Marxists and Capitalist alike, That Strong was so successful in promoting his
“global governance” agenda for so many decades is a testament not to his own
visionary leadership, as so many globalists profess, but to the incredible
resources of the Rockefellers and Rothschilds and others who are funding this
agenda into existence and pushing it along at every step.6
Strong's most significant success
was as a prime mover in setting up the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC). This was established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization
(WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and was later
endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly. It was charged
with
terms of reference such as:
•assessing
the available evidence on climate change and its impacts
•assessing
the options for adapting to or mitigating climate change
•providing
advice, both scientific and socio-economic, to the UN
The UN
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). defines "climate change" as
that due to human activity.
It thus requires the IPCC to focus on anthropogenic change (human-driven) rather
than to comment on or prepare for natural variations in the climate system.
The long-term goal of these 'environmental'
organisations is to unite the world under a single, socialistic government in
which there is no capitalism, no democracy, no individual enterprise and no
freedom. In this spirit, the IPCC is a political organisation charged with
'proving' that global warming is happening and is man-driven. As it is global,
they claim, it can only be solved by global action under global government. This
has led to some of the greatest distortions of science we have ever seen. How
this is done will be discussed in the next article.
PS
In 2005, Strong, the most powerful man in the
push to 'save humanity' — by steady promotion of the theory of human-induced
greenhouse gases — was caught with his hand in the till. Investigations into the
UN’s Oil-for-Food-Program found that Strong had endorsed a cheque for $988,885
made out to M. Strong — issued by a Jordanian bank. The man who gave the cheque,
South Korean business man Tongsun Park was convicted in 2006 in a US Federal
court of conspiring to bribe UN officials. Strong resigned and fled to China. He
died in 2015.
His epitaph included6: "Disgraced
kleptocrat Maurice Strong died late last year at the age of 86. He was shunned
from polite society and forced into a life of exile in Beijing after his decades
of business intrigues, crimes against humanity, and environmental destruction
unravelled. His savagery culminated with an attempt to profit off of the death
of starving Iraqi children."
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3.
CLIMATE TRUTH AND LIES -
MONDAY 18 JAN 2021
It is said that
history repeats itself. I was reminded of this recently when watching a
documentary on the Mocha civilisation. The Mocha dominated Peru from about 100
to 700AD. They practised human sacrifices in the belief that these would appease
the gods and secure stable weather.
But then,
climate change brought 30 years of flooding followed by 30 years of drought.
Faith in the practice collapsed, along with their civilisation.
Will our
civilisation equally collapse when it becomes clear that we do not, and cannot,
affect the weather? And, if we can't affect the weather, how on earth can
we affect the climate? Will future generations regard changing our ‘carbon
footprint’ in the hope of changing the climate as a primitive practice
comparable to that of the Mocha sacrifices?
It’s always
interesting to discover how these deceptive practices started. We don't know how
the Mocha beliefs originated but suspect it was started by leaders aiming to
exercise power and control their population. In the modern global warming
scam, as we saw in Article 2 (above), the main culprit was Maurice
Strong, a Marxist Canadian businessman and politician. Strong manipulated the
U.N. into accepting a global environment crisis based on false science.
At the 1992 Rio
Summit, he said: “Isn’t the only
hope for the planet that the industrialized civilisations collapse? Isn’t it our
responsibility to bring that about?”
This remains the goal of the environmental movement and the far-left in general.
Under
Strong's influence, the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)
was established in 1988 jointly by the World Meteorological Organization (WPO)
and the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), with terms of reference
such as:
•assessing
the available evidence on climate change and its impacts
•assessing
the options for adapting to or mitigating climate change
•providing
advice, both scientific and socio-economic, to the UN
The UN
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). defines "climate change" as
that due to human activity. It thus requires the IPCC to focus on anthropogenic
change (human-driven) rather than to comment on or prepare for natural
variations in the climate system.
NB The IPCC does no research itself. It simply comments on
research done by others – most of which is funded by state grants.
In Science, you
produce a theory for other scientist to observe, measure, challenge and disagree
with. When observations and measurements disagree with a theory, it is modified
or rejected and alternative theories proposed, From the start, the IPCC existed
to prove the theory rather than test or challenge it with alternatives. This is
the opposite of the scientific method.
In
its first Report, the IPCC showed this correct graph illustrating how
temperatures had changed in the past.
As you can see, the Medieval
Optimum, or Warm Period, was much hotter than today and enabled the Vikings to
settle in Greenland and establish successful farms. Strong support for this warm
period worldwide can be found on the CO2
Science7 site. Conditions for life in this period were very
favourable. As Professor Brian Fagan8 has remarked: "For five
centuries, Europe basked in warm, settled weather, with only the occasional
bitter winters, cool summers and memorable storms. Summer after summer passed
with long, dreamy days, golden sunlight and bountiful harvests. Compared with
what was to follow, these centuries were a climatic golden age."
Then came the Little Ice Age during which the
Vikings had to
abandon Greenland. Global temperatures plunged,
plant growth plummeted and millions of people died from starvation.
The Little Ice Age is best known for its
effects in Europe and the North Atlantic region. Alpine glaciers advanced far
below their previous (and present) limits, obliterating farms, churches, and
villages in Switzerland, France, and elsewhere. Frequent cold winters and cool,
wet summers led to
crop failures and
famines over much of
northern and central Europe. In addition, the North Atlantic
cod fisheries declined as
ocean temperatures fell in the 17th century.
IPCC stalwarts
were unhappy with this graph as it contradicted their claims that temperatures
in the present were higher than they had ever been and there was no clear
indication that they were rising. But
relief was soon to come.
The
famous ‘hockey stick’ (below) by Dr Michael Mann (Department
of Geosciences, University of Massachusetts),
used by the IPCC in its third Report (2000), contradicted their former (correct)
graph and eliminated the Medieval Warm Period. Mann relied heavily on proxy data
from tree rings in ancient bristlecone pine trees in California’s Sierra Nevada
mountains to which he
added false temperature data from
computer models to indicate runaway global warming.
As a piece of science and
statistics it was seriously flawed as two data series representing such
different variables as temperature and tree ring growth cannot be credibly
grafted together into a single series.
Many scientists were
outraged by this manipulation of the truth and did their own investigations.
A tree ring study (below) by F. Biondi et al, used an 858-year proxy
record of summer temperature for east-central Idaho. Although, as stated before,
tree rings are not a reliable measure of annual temperature, this particular set
was not included in Mann's study. Biondi found periods of `extreme cooling'
around AD 1300, 1340, 1460 and after AD 1600. This confirms the findings of
other studies in previous exhibits where there appears to have been two little
ice ages, one minor one during the Sporer Minimum on the sun, and the second,
the main Little Ice Age, during the sun's Maunder Minimum during the 1600s AD.
The
authors also state - "Neither instrumental nor proxy data in Idaho northeast
valleys show unusual warming during the twentieth century." This also challenges
the `toe' of the `Hockey Stick' that presents the 20th century as being both
unprecedented and warming rapidly. But the statement is confirmed from this
long-term rural temperature record from Ashton in eastern Idaho. This graph is
accepted as true by scientists who have studied the data on which it is based.
They cannot, however, study Mann's hockey stick data as he refuses to
disclose it.
Again,
this is a most unscientific approach for which Mann is rightly criticised.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4. WHAT DO THEY KNOW? - SATURDAY
6 MAR 2021
The National Trust says on its web site
10 that:
"We’re adapting to unpredictable weather patterns, working hard to restore the
damage caused by wild fires, heavy rain, increased humidity, high winds,
droughts, and shifting shores." As usual, they claim that these natural
occurrences are the fault of 'man-made climate change' driven by human emissions
of carbon dioxide. They do not bother to refer to the science behind their
claims, calculating instead that it's all so well-known and 'settled' that they
will not be challenged. They are wrong; they need to be challenged for spreading
false information.
I often discuss this issue with climate change
enthusiasts and usually find they know little or nothing about the subject.
They seem to work on the principle: Don't confuse me with facts: my mind is
made up. Next time you meet one of these characters, try asking them some
simple questions e.g.:
Q1 How much carbon dioxide CO2
is in the atmosphere 20%,10%, 1% or Less?.
Most think the answer lies between 10 and 20%.
The correct answer is 0.039% (usually expressed as 400 parts per million (ppm)
as that sounds bigger). Then ask:
Q2 How much of
CO2
in the atmosphere is generated by humans 50%, 10%, 1% or
Less?
As with the first question, most answers are way
out. The actual figure is 0.0016% which is almost too small to measure.
If they respond that computer weather models can
do this and make accurate predictions, ask them which computer models have a
prediction accuracy of 99.9984%. The answer is none!
For the killer blow, ask them:
Q3 Does history bear out the claim that the
atmospheric level of CO2
is higher than ever and so
is the earth's temperature?
They may respond that measurements going back to
1851(the accepted date for the start of the industrial revolution) confirm this.
Then show them this graph by an independent
expert:
You will notice that there is little or no
link between CO2 levels and the average global temperature. If anything,
there is less CO2 than in the past and global temperatures are generally lower
than they have been in the past 250 million years!
However, there have been Warm Periods and Ice
Ages which are too small to appear on the graph above but can be seen here:
As you can see, the past was much warmer than
today. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool or a liar (you choose).
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SOURCES
1 The
Weather Conspiracy; The coming of the New Ice Age by The Impact Team
copyright © 1977 Heron House Publishing International Ltd.
2 BBC
Bitesize website.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/zyj9v4j/revision/1
3 The
Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science © 2014 Tim Ball PhD, Stairway Press
4 Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Strong
5 Quadrant:
https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2015/12/discovering-maurice-strong/
6 The
Corbett Report:
https://www.corbettreport.com/meet-maurice-strong-globalist-oiligarch-environmentalist/
7
CO2
Science site
at
http://www.co2science.org/
8
“The
Little Ice Age”
by Brian Fagan, Professor of Archaeology/
9
http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm
10
https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/features/how-were-tackling-climate-change
·
|
