Unraveling the Climate Change debate… Hoax or War?

Unraveling the Climate Change debate… Hoax or War?

Is there really a need to be concerned? Self evident facts. Is science really on top of the problem and WHO controls the narrative about global warming… 

This post is an effort to unravel a subject, that is more tangled than a kittens ball of wool. I have been following this subject closely for nearly twenty years. Some time ago I began to become aware that there is more at play in the message than just science. I had to ask myself what is it, why… and how on Earth did we get to this stage where we could no longer trust some or perhaps, ANY of the climate science being pushed through the media. By media, I mean ALL the media… both mainstream and it’s internet alternatives.It is fast becoming apparent that much of mainstream media seem to be reading off a script that is woefully familiar whichever channel you are viewing or newspaper you are reading. Or… by virtue of its alternative viewpoint and subject to a financial or political ideology that attacks that mainstream viewpoint. Its one thing to challenge the man-made climate warming message but where is the sensible and rational theory that covers all the evidence we can can clearly see around us. Generally speaking there is move towards heavily polarized viewpoints, Very little attempt is made to consider either sides arguments or concerns. Its a worrying trend. There is enough division and disagreement in the world without constantly emphasizing it throughout all we see, hear and read.

Panel More to this storyIt is this observation of what amounts to propaganda style repetition in the media, that allowed me to notice a similar narrative existing in what should be a purely scientific analysis of the issues surrounding global warming. My interest led me to study a broad range of information. Time and again I encountered the same repetitive narrative across every branch of science. Its as though no one wanted challenge the two polarized points of view. Very unscientific I mused. As the subject of mankind’s survival seemed a good enough reason to dig deep, I endeavored to do just that and crushed my investigative hat even more firmly onto my head.

I will point out that I am not a scientist by profession… I have always been fascinated by science and love the principles of logic. I am also well aware of historical perspectives. A history of the last 10 – 30 000 years that is fundamentally flawed. Philosophy is an aspect of history that can offer unique perspectives; like the much under-estimated factor that pollutes all argument; called Group-Think. I am what might be called a generalist. Generalists like to join the dots – all of them – so as to understand the full picture. Having been a practicing artist for much of my life I recognize the composition of a picture often reveals much about what the artist has been taught and even the symbolic motivation in the creation of his work (symbolism).

First let me say – the global warming message was what inspired me to create the Harmony Community concept. So from that point of view perhaps it’s not a bad thing. As time passed, I realized that the independent sustainable lifestyle is far more important than just trying to combat climate change. Communities of this nature can, in fact, create a building block, one of many required around the world, which will offer a very real alternative to a society plagued by predatory government. I mention the issue of predatory government now – because it is key to fully understanding the global warming debate..A debate which is fast taking on the nature of a conspiracy theory.

First, lets ask ourselves is EVERYONE in government, the scientific community, the media and all commentators lying through their back teeth?

Three monkey syndromeI doubt it. Many are simply victims of a the narrow focus of Group-Think. In fact MOST are… what is Group-Think?

Group-think is a phenomenon developed in ‘groups’ marked by the consensus of opinion. It often characterizes issues without critical reasoning or evaluation of consequences or alternatives. Group-think evolves around a common desire to not upset the balance of it’s ‘group’ of people. This can lead that group to stifle alternative thought, seek or avoid conflict, suppress creativity and individuality, and engage in potentially harmful traits.

Please note – I said most, not all!
There are a few, who are well aware of the WAR they have created on this subject and it is my summation that this WAR of viewpoints is both deliberate and of enormous concern. We will get to that statement – who, why and how… later. Suffice to say a vast amount of fear and anger is being generated  as the holders of polarized views fling accusations back and forth. How do you tell a person, scientist or otherwise, he/she is a liar and a paid shill… when the victim of the accusation genuinely believes their’s is a message for humanity that MUST acknowledged!? A message of great concern because the whole future of our species is at stake! I would point out accusations are the fastest way to get a closed minded and potentially abusive response. Its why I am calling this issue a WAR! Panel Deliberate and concernIt is a war, a war for minds and its a lot more complex than meets the eye. So lets unravel this ball of Wool. To do so we need to determine if global warming is actually happening… are we contributing to the effect or is it caused purely by the sun’s activity?

Are there some self-evident facts we can all agree on that will create a basis for rational discussion?

FIRST – IS THE EARTH GETTING WARMER?

If you are already convinced there is a warming going on, please don’t skip this part because there are some statements herein you may not be aware of…

Some of you will hate this… 2013 sea ice analysis NSIDCbut facts are facts. The northern polar ice cap is reducing it’s ice coverage quite dramatically. Easily proven.

FACT 1: A NORTHWEST PASSAGE FOR SHIPPING

Not so many years ago you could not sail a ship north of Canada to pass from the Atlantic to the Pacific. People died trying to find what they called the Northwest Passage. Now it has become (during the Summer period ) a commercial trade route. Northern Ports in Russia are experiencing a similar effect. Ports are open longer and access is easier. Something HAS changed…

FACT 2: POLAR ICE EXTENT & THICKNESS

There are many nations studying the thickness and extent of the Arctic ice AND WHATEVER YOU BELIEVE ABOUT GLOBAL AGENDAS THMS-terror-drawing- expedition led by Captain Sir John FranklinHEY ARE NOT ALL GOING TO BE RELEASING INFORMATIONAL LIES – IN LOCKSTEP – no conspiracy is that good! The scientists studying the ice actually do agree that the Arctic ice that forms in winter is less and THINNER on average each year. I follow 7 nations reports and (unlike 97% of scientists) they
actually do confirm this FACT! There are also polar fly-over satellites confirming the changing arctic environment. Which I contend is very hard to continuously fake. I know some of you will not believe a word NASA says – but it gets a bit flat-earth-ridiculous to argue that Russia’s evidence is exactly the same as NASA’s considering the wonderful relationship between the US and Russia at this time – IF it wasn’t actually the truth! So lets not get too lost in conspiracy’s here – it becomes pointless and silly. Last but far from least, on this point – The information provided by those satellites is used for navigation – the consequences of all that information being fake would be obvious to shipping – and you would have heard about it. The impact is only for the moment threatening Polar mammals and a few Inuit hunters… arguably not a big issue. Providing of course you are not worried about the Albedo issue? (Albedo: Sunlight reflected back from the ice surface and back into space.) Or methane escaping from Arctic tundra.

FACT 3: GLACIERS

There are numerous studies using time lapse photography that shows the sort of evidence you can confirm with your own eyes. Glaciers on Greenland, Scandinavia, North America, the Himalayas and many other places around the world are melting back into the gorges they have created over very long periods in time. Not only are they retreating – those same glaciers are getting thinner by as much as 40%. Its worth noting these glaciers supply many of our biggest river systems. This fact is threatening vital future water supplies for farming and cities and will soon affect as much as 50% of the world’s population.

FACT 4: ANTARCTICA – SEA LEVEL RISE – AND SIMPLE PHYSICS WE CAN ALL UNDERSTAND

Antarctica has its own glaciers because it sits on a land mass unlike the northern ice cap. Again various nations have been measuring ice flow for at least 60 years. The rate at which those glaciers have been sliding into and renewing the ice shelves surrounding the land mass has been increasing. i.e. moving towards the sea faster. The ice shelves ARE melting (calving) a little faster on average… but they are being renewed quicker due to the increased glacial slip off the landmass.When the media discusses issues of this nature they rarely ever place these two facts in context and it is important.

Larson C Ice shelfUntil now, Antarctica has NOT been contributing to sea level rise… but that might be about to change. Historically the southern continent has been adding to its ice mass… But latest reliable research suggests the opposite may now be happening, especially if a large section of any of the 3 main shelves breaks off. Larson C has a very nice crack developing rapidly in it right now. If it fails, a berg the size of a small US state would be created. If the the Ice-shelves in general break up the result will be like taking the handbrake off the land based glacial ice flow. Ice will start to flow faster. There’s a lot of ice on Antarctica – in some places a mile thick! IF… and when a meaningful percentage of Antarctica melts it WILL make an enormous difference to sea level rise and it could do it surprisingly quickly. Funny enough all the ice in the polar north can melt and it would not make the slightest difference to sea level – because it floats on the ocean anyway. It’s weight already displaces the same amount of seawater it would create if it was not ice. Therefore Arctic ice melt does NOT contribute to sea level rise at all. Nor does Antarctica…yet.

SEA LEVEL some simple and self-evident logic…

The only rise in sea level we can possibly be experiencing at this time is from ice melting OFF THE LAND and into the sea. I will argue it has not been that much… The short term effects of melting land ice is far more likely to be felt in a lack of potable fresh water for us to use on land. We’ll come back to that issue later. Water sloshes. Even the oceans slosh slowly around the planet like your bath water. This FACT makes it difficult to measure variables in sea level. And that issue gets even worse when you consider the following:

THERE IS SOME SIMPLE PHYSICS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT… Water is heavy. Our crust floats on a semi-liquid mantle. The changing weight of the water overall can surely affect the position of the crust relative to depth. This is true of Antarctic ice also – less ice, less weight and the continent may well rise. People like Edward Griffin suggest that islands in the Pacific could just as easily be sinking in relation to the ocean. Its an argument that makes perfectly good sense. IT DOES NOT HOWEVER SUPPORT THE THEORY THAT MAN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX! It just shows how difficult it is to determine a yard stick to measure what in fact is happening. One thing is for sure – those pacific islanders don’t need anyone’s confirmation that their islands are disappearing – they are knee deep in evidence.

FACT 5: WORLD OCEAN TEMPERATURE AVERAGES;

Oh boy (or should I say… oh BUOY) …is this a touchy subject! NOAA like NASA is often considered purely a mouthpiece of government/s, which we know continuously lie to us on a broad range of subjects. Especially the America government.

BUT once again – the information this organisation provides goes directly into climate models which continuously provide weather forecasts that are vital to shipping and the rest of us. The information I refer to comes from thousands of BUOYS spread around the globe measuring temperature in the ocean. This temperature data is extremely important to accurately predict weather and storms. sea-surface-temp-figure1-2016Without these ACCURATE measurements the general weather forecast (provided by the sum of analysis of numerous nations) would be absolute nonsense. In fact these predictions are pretty good considering the complexity of the subject.

The world of climatology gathers all these read-outs and uses them to create statistical evidence. THIS EVIDENCE CAN BE MANIPULATED – you can really play games with stats if you are so inclined – and it seems, some are. But facts are facts – ocean temperatures are rising around the world. Its not an even rise however – most affected, are the colder regions of the planet. Whereas the press are talking about 1.2 degree rise in global averages… the colder regions make up MOST of that statistic! In some cases the increase in arctic circle and southern ocean latitudes is as much as 2 to 4.5 degrees. Its is the ocean temperature that is the most important factor. This rise is really quite meaningful and worrying because a) it is the cold ocean that absorbs the most CO2 and… b) it regulates the temperature of land masses with the most ice. Being Greenland – Canada – Russia – Scandinavia etcetera. So surprise surprise – that ice IS melting in the northern hemisphere. In the Southern hemisphere the evidence is noted more by the massive impact on coral reefs… The Great Barrier Reef being undeniably impacted. Ignoring these major indicators that the world IS changing… is akin to walking down the middle of freeway blind to the traffic coming up behind you.

SUMMATION TO PART 1: GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT A HOAX.

 

Is CO2 the cause? Is it the sole cause… or is there more at work?

Now before ya’ll revert to your personal version of Group-Think and start shouting… hear me out. I am about to question if the cause of climate change is CO2. I am not going to agree with the mainstream OR the alternative denial media propaganda that so many have fallen foul of. There is some evidence that is suggestive that CO2 as the root cause of climate change is possibly exaggerated.

I choose the following words very carefully – why exactly will become apparent deeper into this rationale. Please be patient.

CO2 is less than 1% of the atmospheric mix. While it is true CO2 traps infrared long wave radiation – or heat – better than than the Oxygen and Nitrogen (making up 99% of the atmosphere) the argument against it being a realistic global warming gas suggests we are going to need a lot more of it to be present… for it to have such a meaningful effect. 

I have after many years failed to find an experiment that shows EMPIRICALLY  the fractional increase of CO2 in the atmosphere will have a meaningful effect on global temperature averages. The link provided, while convincing, shows a simplistic school level experiment.  While the atmospheric warming hypothesis being promoted seems to make sense – you would expect a more realistic experiment to exist proving the theory empirically using the scientific method. Confirmation SPECIFIC to the total parts parts per million in our atmosphere as of today! If it’s so important to mankind’s very survival… Why is it that an experiment bringing the argument beyond reasonable doubt hasn’t been done and shared to the world at large?

It is true – A lack of evidence cannot be considered a good argument for establishing a FACT one way or another. Under the circumstances however and given our ability to conduct all nature of experiments with gases… SURELY by now an experiment would exist providing confirmation?

Is this an oversight? Or… is it deliberate? I would suggest any facility with the means to undertake such an experiment… do so on an urgent basis and share the RESULTS with the world at large! But lets not take ANYTHING FOR GRANTED – we are producing prodigious amounts of CO2!

ghg-concentrations-figure1-2016Green house gases having risen from just over 300ppm to over 400ppm in just 70 years  It should be noted that CO2 is a heavier than air gas. Pre-industrial revolution concentrations are estimated at around 280 ppm – in 250 years humanities activity has added half again to the atmospheric mix! That is a lot!  It is always assumed that CO2 mixes thoroughly into the lower atmosphere (the first 20 km) as a whole – It makes some sense however that prior to achieving a thorough mix with the surrounding atmosphere it will accumulate closer to the ground. I have yet to see a scientific argument that factors that possibility into account. Perhaps it is the concentration near the ground that is most meaningful in terms of the effect we are seeing on temperature gauges. I am personally FAR FROM PREPARED to throw the CO2 theory out the window. Just not sure some of assumptions made by science are helping the debate. For example…

Methane on the other hand is trapped in enormous quantities on the ocean floor and in the arctic tundra that surrounds much of the northern polar region.
Where's the scienceThere is plenty of methane captured in the environment to radically alter the Earths atmospheric mix. Enough to poison the air we breath completely. It is also considered a global warming gas… estimated to be 30 x worse than CO2. You have little reason to breath a sigh of relief whatever you presently believe about CO2. Methane IS presently escaping from the ocean floor and the tundra… and we have yet to establish what if any impact is being made! Methane is a lighter than air gas… Does it accumulate in the upper atmosphere? As it is so much more effective at trapping heat than CO2, I would like to know what, if any, meaningful accumulation is happening and does its atmospheric distribution make a difference?

The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) will assure all who are prepared to listen, that there exists a general agreement from specifically the 2500 scientists from across the world who form the task force that has concluded: The last 50 years of warming is predominantly man made. Despite this “international scientific community’s consensus” on climate change, a small number of critics continue to deny that climate change exists or that humans are causing it. Those same critics challenge this consensus being very careful to avoid referring specifically to the IPCC task group. Its a devious maneuver by omission . These critics widely known as climate change “skeptics” or “deniers”, are generally NOT climate scientists and do not debate the science with the climate scientists directly. They do not publish in peer-reviewed scientific journals, or participate in international conferences on climate science. Instead, they focus their attention on the media, the general public and policy-makers with the goal of delaying action on climate change.

They do it loudly and frequently, made possible by enormous financial backing of the vested interests seeking to moderate the impact on their corporate profits. Not surprisingly, the deniers have received significant funding from coal and oil companies specifically, including ExxonMobil and the Kock Brothers. They also have well-documented connections with public relations firms that have set up industry-funded lobby groups to, in the words of one leaked memo, “to reposition global warming as theory (not fact).”

I have chosen Edward Griffin and Guy McPherson as prime examples of the polarized group-think that dominates the alternative media narrative. It will help unravel the issue. If you are not familiar with their respective positions I have linked videos to their names which you can check out later. Griffon used to be a believer and has become a “skeptic”. He comes across as a rational and sincere person trying his level best to warn people they are being taken for a ride. Having proven to himself that CO2 is not the cause of global warming he has determined the whole subject matter is a lie. Guy McPherson on the other hand is an outspoken and major promoter of the Man-made CO2 global warming argument. I believe he too, is sincere and genuinely concerned that mankind is ignoring a very real disaster. I also believe both are victims of at least one of the inherent dangers of Group-think… in that neither, Griffin or McPherson are considering all the evidence IN CONTEXT!

CONTEXT: and more self-evident facts… that are generally not factored into the overall equation by ANY of the media or the United Nations message producers?

Mankind’s impact on the environment overall is far more complex and destructive than just the horrible amounts of pollution we are irrationally discharging into the atmosphere today. I’m going to bring up a number of points – and once they are joined up like a dot picture perhaps the real danger we have brought upon ourselves will become self-evident.

FACT 1: DESERTIFICATION AND DEFORESTATION

Desertification and deforestation are hardly being discussed these days and rarely in conjunction with climate change. If they are it’s usually to state forests are the lungs of the earth required to absorb CO2 and filter pollution. Obviously true. Few realize however just how much we have in fact changed our green surface coverage.

DID YOU KNOW? The whole of ancient Persia from the Caucuses to Southern Egypt, Southern Spain to Saudi Arabia used to be a lot greener… Iraq, Syria, Iran were mostly covered in forest about 5000 years ago – a veritable garden of Eden. I addition the Sahara was a great grassy plain with an extensive river system very much like the Kenyan plains today. Go back far enough in history and there is evidence of forests. The last of the navigable rivers only failed only about 150 years ago. North Africa’s Sahara is a very large area indeed! Today much of the Middle East is mostly arid desert of one kind or another – its fertility reduced to riverine valleys or farming that requires access to aquafirs (underground water) or canal systems. Some Arab states are resorting to desalination of sea water. The difference this desertification and deforestation makes on the Macro climate of the area, both ancient and now, must be equally large.

Europe… whilst still relatively green, used to be covered in deep dark forest right up until Roman times and beyond… we really only lost most of that forest cover between 1 200 – 500 years ago. Trees stabilize land, store enormous amounts of fresh water into the environment. Forests release water in a controlled manner while also filtering the atmosphere. This activity has an enormous impact of the local climate – I argue in areas as large as these mentioned it would have a notable effect on the macro climate of the world. If you take the sum of the ancient Persian empire and today’s modern European equivalent as now being either desertified or deforested, the impact on climate must be very large indeed. So is THIS the cause of global warming? By itself – probably not. DeforestationBut you must admit… if we look at the world’s natural history in context with mans overall footprint, the same deforestation and desertification has been going on all over the place. North America is said to have less than 8% of it’s original forest cover left – since the pilgrims arrived just 250 years ago! Arborists are crying out that trees are struggling. In Northern California some blame climate change saying the trees and soil is drying out. Massive redwoods that have survived upwards of 1 200 years are now in their death throws. Others, biologists like Paul Stamets argue that mycelium (soil fungus) vital to old growth forest is being poisoned by heavy metals. Perhaps both are right.

It’s also worth noting the fresh water stored in these enormous forests is no longer available to us – a little has disappeared into the aquifers – most into the ocean. Long before our love affair with coal started, we used wood in a highly unsustainable manner – and still do. Yes there are green spaces and beautiful parts of the Earth left – but NO WHERE NEAR WHAT THERE USED TO BE! We have replaced huge areas with concrete and domestic grass, industrialized cereal farming, general agriculture, livestock and savannah grasses and deserts. I’m not going to get into an argument about the inevitability of this due to population growth – it is obviously a factor – and dissecting it would require a book. BUT FACTS ARE FACTS. We have deforested and desertified huge ares of our planet! I argue it OBVIOUSLY has a contributory affect on the big picture.

Life's a beach

FACT 2: THE OCEANS ARE BECOMING TOXIC

Our rapacious growth achieved by virtue of industrialization has had an enormous impact on the coastal areas of every ocean on this planet – which is really one large fully interconnected watery whole. The ocean is our single greatest oxygen producing and carbon absorbing factory. The first few centimeters of the ocean with its phytoplankton photosynthesis produces at least half, if not more of the oxygen (vital for life). Just like the forests we no longer have, the ocean absorbs the carbon aspect of CO2 – converting carbon into life which ultimately dies and falls towards the ocean floor. One day all life that ends up at the bottom will, under the right circumstances, produce oil. NOT DINOSAURS – LIKE I HEARD ONE ILL INFORMED AMERICAN COMMENTATOR STATE THE OTHER DAY! I only mention the statement because she went onto deduce that dinosaurs didn’t exist… therefore fossil fuels are not in fact the result fossilized ‘dinosaurs’. Worse she then continued to make the wonderful assumption that OIL is a completely renewable resource provided by the planet in unending quantities. Phew… With THAT level of scientific knowledge in charge of any public message it’s no wonder there is confusion out there!!! Lets get back to common sense grounded in real discovery.

ALL that we have done to the ocean has happened in the last 150 years. Industrialization has created a toxic cocktail that has been washed into the oceans from every river on the planet. There are some major contributors – Farming’s agri-chemicals, Mining’s processing methods and its extremely toxic companion industrial Big-chemical. Add to that – the chronic pollution of OIL, especially the synthetic fibers used in so many products and plastics that are formed from Oil …and finally… Big- Pharma – being flushed down the toilet at a chronic rate – WE ARE TURNING OUR SEAS INTO A SOUP OF VERY NASTY CHEMISTRY AND DRUGS. Oh and lets not forget Nuclear Atomic Energy waste… its radioactivity will kill all life it comes into contact with.

So why is everyone is still talking about CO2? Could it be there is a very pernicious drive through all the media to make this the sole culprit?

Nova Scotia dead fishFACT 3: THE EFFECT ON THE WORLDS OCEANS

THE OCEANS ARE DYING. Easily confirmed and recently evidenced by the fish and mammals turning up dead on the seashores across the world. Dying by their thousands and even millions! It’s not just the larger species being affected – on Nova Scotia the other day millions of dead bottom-dwellers, crustaceans, starfish and molluscs, covered  miles of the beach. Marine Biologists are screaming for the world to sit up and take notice – whole areas of the ocean are becoming deserts.They are not climatologists and many are likely to use the Climate change CO2 theory to justify their valid concerns… They are after all scientists and would presume that the broad message about CO2 being the sole source of climate change has been verified beyond a reasonable doubt. More scientists are however beginning to question the specifics of the narrative today. I don’t blame them – so am I. Not because I don’t believe CO2 is having a marked effect but because it can be proven it is not the only factor.

While we have slowed down the cutting of trees compared with say 300 years ago, we are STILL in a net loss and therefore unsustainable situation. The toxic nightmare we are pumping into the ocean however is ACCELERATING EXPONENTIALLY!  If those that are financing and directing the media narrative are making the fossil fuel Industry virtually the sole culprit, what is that industry doing in its defense. Obviously big-oil and Coal is fighting back with their own narrative. Amazingly the best they have come up with is CO2 is plant food . Between the two highly blinkered messages lies much of the confusion. Not all of it – I argued recently that behind the maniacal policies of centralized government lies a predatory deep state agenda. I am far from alone in this theory… if all the factors of who and what controls everything from Banking to Geo-political maneuvering, are taken into account; it can be easily argued a deeply corrupt and predatory force lies at the heart of humanities societal problems. Its criminal that the real big picture is not getting much airtime. The big picture – can it get any bigger? Yes it can and it must if we are truly going to unravel the confusion.

So it turns out – Mankind is very good at creating deserts! Deserts don’t create oxygen, they don’t filter carbon emissions and they don’t support much life. So what’s that got to do with Climate Change? Phytoplanktons are NOT immune to the toxic cocktail be pumped into the oceans.  It so happens that Phytoplanktons and the next step up the ladder of life zoo plankton, are the KEY species to ALL life on Earth. That includes plant life on land. Marine biologists will quickly confirm this fact – if the oceans become stagnant deserts, all life meaningful to our survival on this planet will die. The gradual and ongoing systemic failure of Phytoplankton has a knock on effect that is grossly under publicized and therefore unacknowledged by the public. We need phytoplankton.

Life – Nature – its green and growing ‘abundance’ has always been a handbrake, a mitigating factor offsetting past globally warm periods. It absorbs the imbalances of both heat and fluctuating atmospheric chemistry. The kind of imbalances produced by Volcanoes. Sometimes in the past; volcanic activity has been so pronounced nature couldn’t keep up – often becoming the victim of the event itself and burning for many years only adding to the problem. The geologic evidence suggests that the combined effect of volcanic ash, sulpher etcetera and burning forest smoke has tipped the Earth into an ice age, not once but many times. The amount of particulate in the atmosphere being so heavy, sunlight could not penetrate and  the equatorial ocean heat pump stopped… Ocean currents changed and bam – A deep freeze develops and covered most if not all, of the world. Much of the Earth’s history over the last few million years is… as an ice world.

SUMMATION: Some logic – the perpetrators of this toxic soup are VERY HAPPY every one is talking about CO2 and not them. I will go as far as stating: It is logical that the big money is… (Big-Pharma & Big-Chem who are… together far and away the biggest money in the world today) have a major hand in directing the narrative.  These corporations with their highly trained clever Oligarchs are very diligently keeping everyone focused on only a small part of the problem. It would be easy to conclude they are doing it to simply protect their profits. Big oil and coal are fighting back with an equally limited narrative. If humanity was fully aware of their combined industrialized contribution to a very real looming problem… we may decide to stop buying their toxic products and start seeking alternatives. What about the Sun factor?

THE SUN & ASTRO-PHYSICS: Let’s keep it simple…

Aphelion: Every year in July the Earth is at its furthest point from the sun in its slightly elliptical orbit. Every few hundred years, that distance is exaggerated slightly by orbital eccentricity as the Earth moves through a gradually fluctuating orbital track around the Sun. Every hundred thousand years this orbital track keeps us on average a little further out. We are presently going through one of those periods in our 21st century. It’s very slight and you have to look at average distances from the Sun over a period to note the change. (How on earth flat-earthers attempt to understand this science, heaven alone knows). Now in all reasonableness that should mean we should be getting colder not warmer – logical? But as my earlier evidence suggests this is not the case. Anyone arguing these facts is simply ignoring the facts. So something else is happening… it has to be the case… right?

SOME LOGICAL CONCLUSIONS:

IN SUMMATION: Over and above greenhouse gas emissions… It is what we have done as a species world wide to the land mass over 000’s of years and recently to the oceans that is contributing further… The web of life and its supportive foundation the Biosphere is a finely balanced entity. If a few volcanoes and some burning forest can tip that balance over into an ice-age, it seems perfectly reasonable to me that ALL OUR EFFORTS these past few hundred years – plus our activity these past THOUSANDS OF years can add a few degrees average to our planet. Add to that – our modern toxic effluent in the oceans is resulting in its inevitable stagnation and generally threatens the bio-diversity we depend on to survive on this planet. I am suggesting mans devastation of natural environment is the primary cause and restoring it, as far as is humanly possible, may still offset the effects of this global warming crisis?

Yes – crisis! Our civilization cannot survive this continued warming. No matter how determinedly the alternative media message suggestion we are entering a cooling period – THERE IS NO ASTRO-PHYSICAL (SUN ACTIVITY) EVIDENCE THAT THIS IS CORRECT. NONE THAT WILL MAKE A MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER! We are already deeply in the furthest aphelion stage in Earths relationship to the Sun and any renewed sun-spot activity is likely to make the situation worse – not better. So why then are measuring much higher UV radiation entering our atmosphere and reaching the ground? Are you aware that the Ozone Layer Issue… far from being resolved, is actually much worse today than it was when we decided to ban CFC’s? In a later post, I will tackle how and why atmospheric aerosol is the culprit.

Can we test my statements about green coverage against historical assumptions to further improve the theory I have put forward? I believe we can...

and I will use exactly the same evidence of the past 10 000 years that warming denialists have been arguing supports their case. I will do so by applying it in an… as yet, UN-examined context.

Those who deny man made climate change use the fact that the world has been warming for the last 10 000 years or so, arguing it is all perfectly natural. It is an old ASSUMPTION!. Something that is generally agreed upon by the scientific community as a whole. Having said that; we can only really guess if the warming process has been a gradual straight line or perhaps a slow curve. We do know there was at least one pretty abrupt cooling fluctuation for a period roughly 2000 BC affecting Mesopotamia (the Mediterranean area). It was probably caused by the volcanic Island of Santorini blowing it’s top rather dramatically. The Island now looks more like an archipelago than a single land mass such was the devastation. We know it because the geologic evidence is abruptly obvious and there is a little historical record providing supportive confirmation. Also during the period 1783 – 84 just before the French revolution we note a two year cool period caused by a volcanic eruption on Iceland. It was quite the ash event, in that, up to 25% of the populations from Europe to India died of starvation. It was probably the last straw on the camels back as far the french were concerned – they rose up and took out the bourgeoisie Elites in the French Revolution. Apart from a few volcanic events the steady rise in average global temperature has ALWAYS BEEN ASSUMED to be the root cause of the desertification that has spread across northern Africa and the Middle East.

WHAT IF… that assumption is wrong!

What if mankind caused the desertification? What IFS …are the life blood of science! Can we support a theory that the opposite is true and… what impact would that then have on our theories of climate change pertaining to the human footprint?

To attack an assumption so entrenched in history we are going to have to attack the generally accepted teachings of mankind’s history itself. Fortunately my next argument is supported by many scholars and alternative investigators… who have been saying for quite some time now, that ancient history as taught in school is blithering nonsense. Science admits Homo sapiens has definitively been around for at least 100 000 years… and we were NOT all cave dwelling idiots up until 10 000 years ago. The evidence mounts continuously that we have been creating civilizations from well before 8000 BC. The easiest undeniable example is Globeki Tepi in Turkey (this evidence is merely the tip of a very large ice-berg). Globeki tepiA dig there has confirmed, much to the dismay of establishment archaeology, that an extensive highly civilized group lived in the Black Sea region nearly 13 000 years ago. Around 11 000 BC. Even worse news for establishment academia – satellite examination of the Black Sea itself is offering tell-tale signs there are many suspiciously structural mounds beneath the waves – highly suggestive of human origin. Ancient SaharaNow, even if you take Zahi Hawass’s rather silly assumptions that a civilization like the Egyptians went from crude stone circles to the heights of pyramid construction in roughly 500 years… Globeki Tepi pushes our history back a further 3500 years – from 8000 to 11 500 BC. Personally, I believe, along with many others, even this date is a gross underestimate. Myths, legends and Egyptian records have dated history back a further 25 000 years at least! The Sumerian account, if it is to be believed, goes back well over 100 000 years. These “myths”, recorded in stone, are being proven more and more accurate as time passes. Academia may not like it and… is trying to actively suppress this new knowledge but they are fighting a losing battle. Truth will out as they say. In fact it is only the western culture that teaches this highly edited version of history. Speak to any Arab or Indian cultural historian (who has not been mind numbed by the westernized account) and they will laugh at the christianized idea that civilized man has only been around since 4000 years BC.

Throughout history Mankind has proven to be quite capable of changing his surrounding landscape in surprisingly short order.

As far as the ancient Egyptians are concerned their records are adamant they and their forerunners came from the west. If Occam’s razor applies here – ‘”the simplest explanation is usually the correct one…” that would suggest North Africa or the Sahara. I would offer it is likely the forerunners or forebears of the Egyptian civilization realized that the land they presently occupied would no longer sustain them, due to their own rapacious activity – and they migrated East. Perhaps on finding (or knowing of) a wonderful river unlikely to be affected by change they settled down with a renewed respect for the life giving waters of the Nile and re-established their highly advanced culture. Perhaps even improved it somewhat with their creations on the great Giza plateau. Zahi Hawass is not in favour of this theory. There are a lot of theories about Egypt, Hawass doesn’t like. The Sphinx being far older than the pyramid complex for example. Personally, I think he is the wrong man for the job – so do many other alternative investigators. Academic group-think, especially in the area of history or archaeology is particularly vindictive. For an establishment scholar to contradict Hawass, is almost certainly to commit professional suicide. Hancock and West have some interesting views on why that situation exists.

Evidence abounds, mankind has been around long enough and is rapacious and short-sighted enough, to destroy the environment in which he resides. Therefore I conclude history supports my suggestion that mankind is in fact responsible for the desertification that heretofore has been assigned to natural causes. In so doing he has been impacting the environment and therefore climate for a very long time indeed …and could well be responsible for or contributed to the warming we have experienced these past 10 000 years!

What about the hockey stick graph you ask? Both those that promote global warming and those against, often refer to the “hockey stick” temperature graph which is supposed to represent a defining and sudden rise in temperature starting in the late 20th century. It has been discussed at length. So much has been said on this subject about the validity of the research and the figures emanating from it – it is difficult to determine if the figures are real or false.This issue of recent temperature rise as supposedly indicated by the Hockey stick graph, may well become academic as they say. One thing for sure is becoming very apparent: There exist factions, all with an axe to grind and they have the influence and money to ensure their version of the facts gets the most attention. If science is to truly determine what in fact is going on – it had better start asking the right questions and we the people had better start demanding the right answers. 

An evaluation of this nature would in my view not be complete unless we also consider any new science which might make a meaningful contribution to the issue. Science that may even be contributing to the effects of global warming. 

GEO-ENGINEERING: This post would not be complete without reference to geo-engineering. It is a complex subject, layered with the aims of those who plague us. I will simply refer you to Dane Wigingtons website http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/ I strongly recommend anyone who is not aware of how advanced and pervasive this technology has become, visit the site and apprise themselves urgently. Mankind seems hell-bent on self destruction. Dane exposes much of the hidden activity being undertaken by the deep state which has been muddying the waters of the climate change debate and keeping the people focused on only one aspect. The why’s of which amounts to a conspiracy designed to hide an awful truth.

Lets shine a light on ALL the factors which are contributing to global warming debate. It is important we summarize the evidence this post reveals: I promised to join the dots and reveal the big picture Here it is.. its not pretty

  1. There is ample evidence to suggest global warming exists and the threat to mankind is not fully appreciated due to the confused debate. CO2 is a meaningful modern day contributor but NOT the only one.

  2. It is becoming very clear that the whole debate on climate change is dominated by factions and vested interests with an axe to grind.

  3. These interests are extremely wealthy and have sufficient influence to ensure their version of the narrative is repeatedly published allowing little room for rational debate or alternative thinking.

  4. At least one of the factions quite literally owns the corporate media and has installed personnel who are carefully crafting a scripted message to be disseminated throughout the media.

  5. These same factions are also highly invested in many think-tanks and control the group-think without necessarily having to reveal their agenda to those partaking in the debate.

  6. The controlled narratives on both sides are designed to deliberately hide the truth – because it would probably destroy the profitability of both warring factions. It is deliberately aimed at the CO2 issue for reasons other than any concern for the environment.

  7. It is even possible… the two factions are in fact working in lock-step deliberately disseminating an argument for the sole purpose of creating a veil of misinformation designed to mislead the public and stop fingers pointing at the all the perpetrators. A historical problem that has only been emphasized by modern excesses that bring benefits to the very wealthy and worst perpetrators.

  8. It is likely that were… a broad mass of people to understand the lengths these corporations and banking institutions are prepared to go to hide the truth, it could start a revolution in thoughtful understanding throughout mankind.

  9. The totality of a mitigating solution that is required to offset it’s impact is not being rationally discussed or even acknowledged because the argument has been reduced to one factor CO2 emissions… Which even if it could be resolved, by itself, may not provide a meaningful total solution.

  10. That best solution being – we urgently need to recognize the impact our overall footprint has had throughout the last 10 000 years of history is a major contributing factor to climate warming. The solution is to undertake a massive re-greening of the planet and clean up the toxic damage caused by those who are the worst perpetrators of environmental destruction and the climate debate confusion.

  11. Full disclosure would result in a massive backlash on the worst perpetrators probably destroying the power base, profit and influence they presently enjoy.

  12. It should be noted; it is very easy for them to convince all government, public and financial institutions that any attempt to dig deeper into their narrative is neither wise or in their best interests. Individuals whose position in government/institutions is highly dependent on the support they get directly or indirectly from those extremely powerful corporations and those that own or control them.

  13. It is likely the small group in charge of the worlds banking institutions are either, fully complicit or even the main perpetrators of the disinformation campaign surrounding the global warming or climate crisis debate. This protectionism is entirely due to their extended vested interests in all the major corporations and government policies which they are well known to have manipulated to their advantage across history. Full disclosure could and probably would decimate industrial stocks as the greater impact became grass roots knowledge.I see no reason why they would not perpetrate a massive cover up so with great determination on this subject – considering its broad ramifications for their personal power and business survival.

  14. I suggest these vested interests are intrinsically linked with the deep state intelligence communities and the broad Military industrial complex by the very nature of the corporations they control.

  15. The science of climate warming has been deliberately and opaquely distorted to the people and they have in fact been fully aware of the truth for quite some time. Far from attempting to combat the effects – they have deviously built upon those effects because it suits their purpose to create a form of chaos that will provide them with an even greater opportunity to control the worlds marketplace and its population as a whole…

  16. Having recognized the implications of the true potential of the human footprint for many years already  – I propose they already have created their own version of a sustainable solution for mankind! A solution wherein any opposition… far from being able to challenge their profitable authority will create an World Order Agenda in which the vast percentage of humanity will be thoroughly subjugated into a master slave relationship.

  17. This ‘solution’ already exists – it is called Agenda 21 – it is real – and it is already signed into by 178 UN signatory nations. Its flowery language is little more than a cleverly veiled confirmation of the all the above. A veil that is only revealed once the true nature of who and what is behind predatory government and much of the ills modern society presently experiences… right across the geo-political spectrum.

  18. This agenda has… as the basis of it aims – is expected to achieve the following;

  • To create enormous green spaces wherein the general population’s access is severely limited perhaps recognizing nature unhindered will regenerate itself.

  • It is a specified aim in the Agenda 21 document to reduce the world’s population to 500 000 million – in an unspecified manner!

  • To concentrate the vastly reduced population into group housing in areas set aside for that purpose. (See map North American Region – Agenda 21)

  • Create and maintain a global world government (referred to as: The New World Order) that will dominate the geo-political map and no longer requires localized or national government of a democratic nature. Moving rather towards appointing a technocratic bureaucracy which will determine what is good for the people and ensures the hierarchy is safe from challenge.

  • Remove the sovereign rights of surviving individuals to own land or choose where they will live

  • Massively empower corporations rights over personal rights to the extent these corporate controllers will act as governing institutions

  • The narrative and thoughts of the people will be monitored and guided in a manner similar to that outlined in Orwell’s book 1984 and further examined in Aldus Huxley’s “Brave New world.”

  • This will achieved in part by forcing multi-culturism, fear and confusion on the people. Possibly utilizing the friction of pushing un-homogeneous populations together to create prolonged wars – to the extent the people will gladly endorse and accept any form of solution, that promises a new safer order.

  • The present war on the climate debate is outlined in documents such as The Iron Mountain Report and a leaked NASA military training document entitled “Future strategic issues/Future Warfare(Circa 2025)” also boldly subtitled THE FUTURE IS NOW… describing a war to be waged on humanity and the environment itself. The weapons to be used are clearly outlined in the document – and they include: Toxic geo-engineering, micro-wave broadcast throughout the Wi-fi infrastructure, ELF and EHF activated invasive smart dust swarms, nanobots capable of integrating into and monitoring human biology and behaviour, DNA altering nanotech, medical trans-humanization and more…

Like I said – its not pretty. The following documents referred to above are for the most part readily available on the internet.

Agenda 21 is a valid UN document and has been recently updated by a progress target report called agenda 2030. It is readily available as are many breakdowns of those shocked by its thinly veiled content.

The Iron Mountain report has been consistently denied by the American government but various exposes seem to confirm its existence and the nature of the material within is in lock-step with that of Agenda 21 and the last document… it illuminates the reasons and thinking behind Agenda 21. It is an extremely worrying document.

“Future weapons for silent wars – THE FUTURE IS NOW”. This document was downloaded from the NASA website where it appeared for a few days on open forum seemingly by mistake. Again its technology and strategies outlined in the power-point style presentation, fit hand in glove into the  aims and agenda’s outlined in the previous two documents.

Together they make for frightening reading and are positively psychopathic and sociopathic in intent… Each of the documents is well written and edited, very deeply thought out and smacks of careful production and consideration. they have none of the typical faults of falsely prepared misinformation. there are extremely credible. But few, it seems can bring themselves to believe the intentions described within could ever be considered or discussed, never mind realized, in even the minds of maniacal few seeking to control the many. Until such time as one understands the mindset of the few… perhaps the easiest way to illustrate that mindset is to point to revelations of massive corruption being manipulated through pedophilia networks as exposed by the Clinton and Podesta Wiki-leaks. An expose that hopefully will reveal and incriminate large portions of elected and bureaucratic governance. While many Americans are struggling to acknowledge the veracity of these revelations… in the past year numerous nations and American states are uncovering and charging perpetrators of child trafficking, abuse and porn and even satanic ritual involving children. the arrests world-wide are going into the 000’s – but are probably only the tip of the iceberg! The authorities concerned are not as yet getting to the ringleaders. It suspected the ringleaders are so wealthy, so powerful, so well connected it will difficult, if not impossible to ever reach them. It is precisely this influence that makes them the perpetrators of all I have described above and the evidence is strongly supported by all we see happening around us and as described within these documents. It is only our own ethical and rational beliefs in core values that makes it so very hard to imagine there exist a few capable of releasing any and all attachment to anything we may consider human. Those coming to this information from a religious perspective argue that these few are literally the devils minions. I myself find it hard to disagree even though I understand evil or extreme negative energy in an entirely different way. 

 

This rationale and expose is for me all the more reason to to urgently undertake a rebuilding of society. I argue that the corruption that presently drives the systems of predatory centralized government is so pervasive and so locked-in expecting it to change from the inside is futile. People will, the world over, need to come to terms with this fact and endeavor to undermine the system, recognizing we can can become independent of it in self sustainable communities built on the very core values we should be aspiring to as a species. We are the labour and the marketplace on which this system depends. Disengagement is our weapon. Activism and resistance needs to be diligent, rational, peaceful and determined. Ultimately we can become the undercurrent that will undermine the very foundations of the greedy and corrupt edifice, those who plague us, have built over time. It must be accepted by a broad majority that what now drives society is insane – literally – psychopathic and sociopathic in intent and can only lead mankind in the wrong direction. The Harmony community is one of many attempts to create harmonious building blocks to redefine society as a whole – your support will be welcomed.

Leave a Reply